So playing around with the guide I keep coming back to the sizable difference between costs for Large and Small creatures.(pun absolutely intended).
A Large creature gets few bonuses and some serious penalties, +2 str, -2 dex, -1AC, -1 attack, -4 stealth, +1CMB/CMD, 5-foot reach(normal reach).
This costs 7 RP
A Small creature gains +1AC, +1 attack, -1 CMB/CMD, +4 stealth but maintain the normal reach and even take up the same space as medium creatures.
This costs 0 RP
Since "standard space" is normal for both sizes, we can ignore it.
Large then gains:
+2 str, -2dex; a loss when compared to standard modifiers of +2X, +2Y, -2Z
+1CMB/+1CMB
-1AC
-1 attack
-4 Stealth.
Some analysis: +2 str provides +1 to damage, attack rolls, and both CMB and CMD. Advanced Str costs you 4RP, presumably 1 point for each of the things STR affects(not including skills). Since we a penalized by -1 for the large size, the cost IMO, is reduced by 1. Making the value of Large's +2 str effectively 3RP.
Secondly Large gets a hit to dex, if we treat a -2 dex penalty as a inverse of the Advanced Dexterity(so -4 RP), it completely cancels out any gains we bought with +2str. However it gets worse. A dex penalty contributes to our AC, and CMD. Large's AC is already at -1, -2 dex makes that -2. Large's CMD is +1, but this is negated by a -2 dex, though STR still contributes(str's point value remains at 3)
For all intents and purposes, Large has only gained 3/4ths of the normal Advanced Strength benefits. 3/4 gains, should be 3RP instead of 4RP. If we treat -2 dex as an inverse of Advanced Dexterity, we get a -4RP. Combined, these two leave us with -1RP.
Since a +1CMB/+1CMD provides us with two things, we can be generous and say 2RP(there's no comparative trait such as "Well trained, XRP, gives you +1CMB/+1CMD"), so we treat it like I did dex/str.
That still leaves us with a -1AC, -4 Stealth and 10x10 size
-1AC and -4 stealth are increased by one due to our -2dex.
So effectively for 7RP, we have purches -2AC, -5stealth and 10x10 size.
Now, I don't know about you, but that's a little much for some pretty hefty penalties and Large size.
---
Small Gains
+1AC
+1 attack
-1CMB/CMD
+4 stealth.
+4 Stealth ALONE costs 4RP under the "Sneaky" category. Camouflage attempts to balance +4 by limiting it to marshes and forests, but it still costs at least 1. If we average this we get +2.5RP, rounded down to be nice) for +2RP
Natural armor for that +1AC bonus will cost you 1RP.
We are left here with -1CMB/CMD, which as above I value at -2RP. We still have a +1 to attack. If we treat +1 attack as 1/4th of the bonus of a +2 str as above, we can value this in at 1RP
This effectively means it costs -1 to gain +4 sneak and +1 to attacks.
----
Compare this to the "large" template above. For 0 points "small" strictly gains, for 7 points, "large" strictly loses.
Their actual costs for what these gains are?
Small costs roughly 3-4RP for it's bonuses, and that's being generous considering that +4 sneak is 4RP all on it's own.
If we treat penalties as valued equal to their comparative bonuses, large ends up costing -7RP.
If we don't want people to abuse these things too much, lets value penalties at half their comparative bonus value. This will increase Small to +4-5(we're still dealing with a 0.5 in there, round up or down as is your whim), while Large will move up to -3. We're STILL in the hole for a large creature no matter which way you slice it. Even if you want to be REALLY mean and make that 10x10 cost you 3RP, we're still sitting at ZERO.
---
Alright, so I've pointed out that such high costs for a naturally balancing system are silly, so how do we fix it? Well, this is the tricky part. If you remove the +2str/-2dex, all you're left with in bonuses is LITERALLY the inverse of "Small": +1CMB/+1CMD. Valued at 2 points, this is partially canceled out by -1AC. Large is at 0 and we're still looking down the barrel of penalties. -4 stealth, -1 attack. With these two, we're still way below at -4.(3.5 if we use the same average as Small for the middle-ground between stealth bonuses) If we treat the penalties as only half their bonus counterpart's RP value, we still don't gain much.
-2AC becomes -1RP, combined with +1CMB/+1CMD at +2, we're at +1 now. Okay, we're in the green, that's good...until we stick that -1AC on for -1RP, we'll we're at zero and we've still got -4 stealth to go. That'll get us down into the red for a final total of -2RP.
Even without the bonuses, Large still costs you more while giving you less. If we want to charge for that 10x10 size, which is really going to be a penalty in most situations, we can be generous and put the build back at 0RP, maybe even +1(though IMO, large size is more a penalty in most cases than not).
Okay, that's good an all, but how do we fix this rather Large issue? To be honest, I'm not really sure. I would say, don't give it +X/-Y ability bonuses. Small works out just fine without it. My suggestions?
10x10 isn't a bonus it's a penalty, at best it's a fluff bonus. Setting a value on it is going to be our first step in solving this puzzle. Given other fluff bonuses, I'd say a +2RP is an acceptable cost.
But large still has -1 attacks, -1ac, -4 stealth to contend with.
First of all, I don't know why on earth large gets -1 to attacks. Attacks are a str-based check, large creatures tend to have more muscle mass and therefore are stronger. Drop the penalty to attacks. That gets rid of -1RP(when we're being harsh, -2 if we're generous). No bonus, no penalty, no cost.
Next, -1AC but no natural armor bonus? What is this madness? Now, I've always found +1NA/-1AC was a silly concept, but it is very traditional in large creatures, they're easier to hit, but naturally tougher. Since +1NA costs 1RP and -1AC(essentially NA) would cost -1RP (or -2RP but I'm playing it harshly), we've now got a gain of +0RP
Large now posesses
10x10 for 2RP
+1NA/-1AC for 0RP
-4 Stealth for -2RP
For a total of +0RP. HEY! We got Large into the black, that's good, but we're still falling behind Small by an average of 3RP.(to refresh, small gets +1RP for +1AC, +1RP for +1 attacks, and +2.5(rounded to 3 to be harsh) for +4 stealth for a total of: +5RP)
Okay, we're still way behind, maybe Small needs some nerfing?
Lets balance out their AC bonus like large but reversed. -1NA(if NA=zero, NA= -1)/+1AC, now costs us nothing.
How about that attack bonus? Well, it's reasonable they get one, so lets be fair to Large too, give it a +1 on attacks representing the same style of bonus. Large moves up to +2RP, small is down to 4....still a big gap.
BUT: what's left is what's pretty much expected from these creatures.
Large:
+1 to attacks
+1NA/-1AC
+1CMB/+1CMD
10x10 size
-4 stealth.
Total: +3RP
Larger creatures are well, larger and therefore easier to see. They are tougher, but bigger targets. They get a fun fluff bonus of 10x10, which will readily be accepted for 2points by anyone who wants to make a Large race.
Small:
+1 to attacks
+1AC/-1NA
-1CMB/-1CMD
+4 Stealth.
Total: +3
Small creatures are well, small and harder to see. They can dodge well, hence the AC bonus, but they're frail creatures and their flesh is weaker than usual.
Using this version, Large and Small, holding the same but opposite positions on the scale spectrum benefit in similar but uniquely different ways, both respecting their natural fluff but without horrendously punishing the prospective race-builder or player with huge penalties or incredible bonuses for really nonsense costs.
Thoughts? If my math is wrong if you've got your own math, please show your numbers. :)
EDIT: fixed my math on that +1NA or +1AC costing 2 instead of 1RP.
