Quote:
Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ
Except the sword and sorcery character gets the worst disadvantage: double clothing and armor weight.
|
That is a disadvantage but its a specific one to do with resources rather than say a combat one, and IME resources are either a problem for everything (PC's are skint) or it no problem at all (PC's are flush)*. However S&S to me infers less resource management and more loin clothes (but S&S varies, yours may not)
*although having to go without armour can quickly become a combat disadvantage!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ
I agree that the value of the disadvantage varies wildly between games. In a horror game set in the 1920s, it's little more than flavor ("The detective you're looking for is the tallest man I ever seen!"). But in a low-tech game where characters are constantly in combat and need to wear armor? It's a huge disadvantage. I've been offering SM+1 as a -20 disad in my fantasy game and still no one has taken it.
|
Fair enough, for me someone with the typical advantages that tend to go with being very big have little difficulty it meeting the extra upkeep cost, but different campaign types differ.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ErhnamDJ
And I hate trying to balance through workarounds like adjusting the price of ST. Not all large characters are going to have a high ST. Is the weak giant disadvantaged less than the strong one? I don't think so.
|
True but unless that Giant has ST10 they are still going to see some benefit. The thing is SM+ makes big strong builds easier that is one of it's advantages*. If however you don't want to take advantage of that that's your decision rather than a failing of the SM+ costing (IMO).
*especially when you factor in the Grappling advantages, (SM and ST value add to each other, and SM makes ST cheaper)