|
Previous posts were not visible so I'm trying with a different alias:
It bugs me that there is no mechanical difference for characters based on their size. Large characters can get reach, but that is all.
I understand that there are game balance issues here and that things like damage output can't be changed too much. But there definitely ought to be some kind of mechanical effect.
Here are some things I suggest:
Large Creatures
Pro:
* May carry 1 extra point of Bulk Rating.
* May reroll ones on all melee damage rolls (using the new result even if it is a one).
Con:
* The AC bonus they receive for their DEX score is reduced by 1.
* Any object which can provide cover for a medium creature provides only partial cover, while objects that could provide partial cover for a medium creature provide no cover.
Small Creatures
Pro:
* The AC bonus they receive for their DEX score is increased by 1.
* Any object which can provide cover for a medium creature provides improved cover, while objects that could provide partial cover for a medium creature provide normal cover. Objects that are too small to provide any cover for a medium creature could still provide partial cover at GM discretion.
Con:
* May carry 1 less point of Bulk Rating.
* Must reroll any melee damage dice that have their maximum value (using the new result even if it is the same).
-----------------------
Thoughts?
For a non-melee character, being small seems pretty advantageous. Maybe they should have reduced HP or something.
The cover thing sounds pretty redundant. The GM is already deciding which cover counts as cover, partial cover, etc. As a GM, I already give small creatures better cover than medium creatures, who have better cover than large creatures. The cover rules say things like, "If more than half of you is visible," and "...a wall half your height...". A rule that makes cover into improved cover can be exploited.
Matthew: Small races already generally have less HP than medium races