What's your take on size increases?


Rules Discussion


We now have a few different things that interact with increasing one's size, both temporarily and now permanently.

We have giant barbarian that gets reach increase for clumsy 1.
We have the spell enlarge that gives the same as well as a +2 or +4 damage bonus.
We have beastkin that get enlarge as the spell but permanently for their hybrid form.
We have lizardfolk who get the same but also +level to hp, except it's permanent to their one form.
We will be getting both a temp and permanent size increase with summoner Eidolons that looks like it will just undo a penalty and not give a reach increase until they are huge, they don't get clumsy however. This is also subject to change.

What is everyone's opinion on how these things work for characters? Do you think any of these rules gives the feeling of a large and dangerous threat? Do they fulfill your fantasy of what a larger character would be able to do? Do you think the permanent versions are balanced with the temporary increases? How would you handle the downsides of permanent size increase at your table?

I understand paizo didn't want size differences to be a huge influence do to the issues in previous itterations, but I don't think most of these give the feel of being large or huge on their own, the bonuses really don't fit for all the downsides as a permanent effect.
The barbarian I think is the best, it's temporary and you get more damage and can pick up athletics boost in class. The rest of them feel like they come up short to me. The downsides might be niche or specific situations, but they can be crippling.

My AoA's group has learned to abuse wall of stone, it shuts down most things above medium size rather easily as they will have 4 panels to break before having any chance to get free. You also lose the ability to easily enter most structures and many dungeons will have tight spaces for you. Without some generous GM fiat to let you smash through things or hand wave a LOT of squeezing, your life as a large creature could be terrible.

Most of these being temporary in one way or another make these issues less severe but for lizardfolk and certain summoners who don't like dismissing their companion, these could be game breaking problems. This will become more of an issue as we get more options like this, so what are others thoughts on it?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Taking advantage of a larger creature's size is fairly normal in fantasy battles, so I don't see much issue there. I disagree that they have to break 4 panels to get through a Wall of Stone:
"This action (Squeeze) is for exceptionally small spaces; many tight spaces are difficult terrain that you can move through more quickly and without a check."
So two 5'x 5' panels and then the creature can move through as if it's difficult terrain. Maybe even one if squishy though all four if blocky & rigid.

---
As a frequent abuser of size alteration in PF1, I appreciate Paizo noticing the issue and balancing size changes. The reach alone has solid value both in requiring less movement/fewer Steps to change opponents, but there are also AoOs and the ability to defend more space. That reach costs a standard Fighter two feats and their Stance in order to replicate.

Does it feel large?!
Not sure what that even means. When I put a large mini on the table I feel pretty large. Seriously, it's cool to play a large mini.
But do I expect some sort of mechanical/numerical dominance? No. Of course not. Any notable gain would have to be replicated elsewhere for balance which would defeat the purpose. I'd dislike it if every Str-based martial felt compelled to increase their size or fall behind the curve.
One does get a major boost in Bulk allowance, so there's that, but I wouldn't expect or want any more combat advantages than what Paizo's already given us.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Let's see

OrochiFuror wrote:


We have giant barbarian that gets reach increase for clumsy 1.

It has also to be considered that it will increases it's damage from rage

Increase the damage from Rage when using a larger weapon from 6 to 10; if you have greater weapon specialization, increase it from 10 to 18.

that it can be up every fight starting from lvl 6, and that the barbarian could get the lvl 12 feat "Titan's Stature" which will increase its size to huge ( 10 foot increase reach and the same clumsy 1 condition ).

OrochiFuror wrote:


We have the spell enlarge that gives the same as well as a +2 or +4 damage bonus.

Good spell ( nice duration too )

OrochiFuror wrote:


We have beastkin that get enlarge as the spell but permanently for their hybrid form.

Really good, but it has to be considered that it's a lvl 13 ancestry feat from a Rare Ancestry. Not talking about balance now, but just wanted to point out its requirements.

OrochiFuror wrote:


We have lizardfolk who get the same but also +level to hp, except it's permanent to their one form.

Really cool and thematic.

Lvl 17 means you will be able to play it not for so long, but even so it would be imo definitely worth it.

OrochiFuror wrote:


We will be getting both a temp and permanent size increase with summoner Eidolons that looks like it will just undo a penalty and not give a reach increase until they are huge, they don't get clumsy however. This is also subject to change.

Note that all creatures don't get the clumsy 1 condition ( and many of them also don't get extra reach too ).

I can thing about the horse for example, which simply work like a mature companion. It simply grow up. Neither reach nor clumsy 1.

as for this part

Quote:
My AoA's group has learned to abuse wall of stone, it shuts down most things above medium size rather easily as they will have 4 panels to break before having any chance to get free. You also lose the ability to easily enter most structures and many dungeons will have tight spaces for you. Without some generous GM fiat to let you smash through things or hand wave a LOT of squeezing, your life as a large creature could be terrible.

I have to say it made me smile, since I remembered when we were 16 and tried different ways to exploit fights ( on the other hand, from a practical point of view, it would be only obvious for a party to increase its chances to win/survive ).

Personally, I am fine with large players stuff, as long as it's just one or two.

Given the large number of indoor maps, it would be difficult for either the DM and the players to deal with small spaces while relying on large stuff.

I mean, I'd be glad not to see a setup like:

-1 giant barbarian
-1 Ranger + Pet
-1 Druid + pet
-1 rogue + pet
-1 supporter which casts enlarge on different creatures.

and so on.

Currently, on AoA, we have 2/3 pets ( a large crocodile, a wolf which will become large soon and a pinacosaur, which is large ), so I can definitely feel you.

I think that I'd probably ask 2 of them to swap out their character for some "no pet" other class. I might approve a mounted character though ( I'd have no issue with small one on a medium mount, for example ).


HumbleGamer, you reminded me of a PFS game in PF1 where the player had invested nearly everything into his PC's huge dinosaur. So when the adventure took place in a city, he had that dino in only a few spots (the wharf and outside the walls). And when fighting took place in an inn's upper rooms (w/ 5' corridors and a room that couldn't fit the party), he was royally underequipped (sub-par armor) to take the beating when he was the one who fell into the ambush.
Which is to say, you can't depend on either Animal Companions or having room for large+ size, much less large ACs.

OT: There was an Oracle in the party that cast a Breath of Life and rolled nearly maximum to revive the guy's Cleric. On the Cleric's first turn he cast Heal to my surprise. He responded that he'd still been in single digits at that point. :O


Squeeze is exploration but even the difficult terrain part seems up to your GM.
For feel it means can you do what creatures in related media can do, smashing objects and walls is often associated with larger sizes, grabbing and carrying smaller creatures and such.
Had a GM that let our champion bust through a door, and thus the surrounding wall, when enlarged because it was thematic.

The rage stuff doesn't really matter, you get that while not large anyhow. The summoner stuff you just restated what I did so not sure what the point was. The lizardfolk feat is by far the worst offender so far. I'm 17 in AoA right now and if our druid took this they would be crippled by all the small corridors we go through.

I don't think we'll ever get to a "need this to be competative" place, large already lowers your AC, that's a big deal, there could be more baked into these feats, both bonuses and negatives, or feats that flesh it out more. Even just adding ignore X amount of hardness or putting in a special attack that just does structural damage would go a long way to making that big bulldozer type feel.

I haven't played early AoA, I joined a game in progress, but seeing those aren't all dex based pets, I would expect them to be dead most of the time. That's a lot of feats worth of liability.

Overall, I just think the permanent size changes should get more then the temporary ones, because without a lenient GM, a sizable portion of adventuring areas will be off limits too you. Also because Hulk smash.


-Yes, the difficult terrain part is up to your GM, but the CRB is explicit that Squeeze is only for "exceptionally small spaces". Paizo has raised expectations for GMs...to a level it should've remained at decades ago.

-Yes, growing large is tied to strength in media, yet so is having the smaller hero/badass be just as strong or stronger. That's where we're at.
Does PC X get stronger than PC X when larger? In terms of damage it sure seems so, and definitely in terms of Bulk which includes being able to lift other creatures.
That's great your GM went for "rule of cool", but irrelevant to the balance the game requires to remain sound.
Also, it's not always a strong PC growing.

-Large does not lower your AC.
Some abilities which make one large also give Clumsy which lowers your AC, some do not. And the penalty from Clumsy doesn't stack with other status penalties to AC so it's operating differently than an AC penalty.
If you're talking about Barbarians, they get well-compensated for the AC loss with having the highest Rage damage of all.

-Yes, there could be feats to flesh out having extra abilities when large. That'd be pretty cool IMO. A Dedication (likely in the same book as any Shifter/self-Transmuter class) could make this work.

-I agree Animal Companions are liabilities. :) They need too much in-combat care IMO for their feat cost as well as space, but others love them so the system seems to be working.

-Trouble is, one feat can't say "you get to be large AND (other cool ability)" because large alone is worth that feat. And feat chains based around size don't really suit a class, skills, or general feats.
So yeah, maybe petition for a Dedication based around this though it'd have to be balanced around a Giant Barbarian perhaps taking it so couldn't up the power levels for them, only their options. (Of course, very little other than class abilities increase power anyway).


Dotting for interest. One of my players really wants me to homebrew a Half-Giant versatile heritage, so I'm trying to consider what would be a balanced/fun to help give them Large size so they can play a "big boy".

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / What's your take on size increases? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.