The "Size Discount for ST -- Why?" Discussion

[Tallor]

Why does greater size have a discount, exactly?

[Ottriman]

As a crude patch for the fact that being a giant creature would otherwise be way too expensive. It's not a very good patch in my opinion, I myself prefer different ST scaling that makes each +1 ST have impact whether you are superman or a mouse.

[vicky_molokh]

Being larger tends to necessitate having higher ST to compensate for the increased equipment weight. In fact, armour weights are rather unforgiving. Also, being large = being easier to get hit = needing more HP to compensate. IMHO SM is still a net drawback at its current cost, and cheaper ST is a benefit that is rather situational/campaign-specific.

[simply Nathan]

I would prefer just giving high SM a negative point cost based on how big you are relative to the campaign norm (something like -15 or -25 for the first +1 SM, -10 or -15 for +2, and -5 per each +1 SM thereafter) and note how much ST and Move a creature of a given size ought to have in terms of its absolute size. Being big is mostly advantageous due to being strong, but in a fantasy game neither one necessarily follows the other.

[Flyndaran]

Size Modifier has numerous facets that many games overlook making it more variable of a disadvantage than most.
I'm not a fan of effectively penalizing the not super strong of large characters.

[Boomerang]

Originally Posted by Tallor

Why does greater size have a discount, exactly?

I like that rule. In my campaigns where the best defences are cover or not being seen at all, being larger is a major disadvantage. Cheaper strength seems like a fair way of offsetting the downside of being a bigger target.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Boomerang

I like that rule. In my campaigns where the best defences are cover or not being seen at all, being larger is a major disadvantage. Cheaper strength seems like a fair way of offsetting the downside of being a bigger target.

There are two problems with that.

One is that you get less points back for being big if you're less strong, when being weak probably makes being big even worse.

The other is that if you are big and strong, even with the discount you're paying a lot of points for something which will in many respects be a net loss in a game like you describe.

I would be surprised if there's any case where the ST discount will make being big over-powered, but that doesn't mean that it's good.

[Flyndaran]

The higher the TL the more disadvantageous positive SM, and the less advantageous high strength, becomes.
But yeah, it is odd to discount one thing that's only loosely connected to what's actually disadvantageous.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

One is that you get less points back for being big if you're less strong, when being weak probably makes being big even worse.

Gas-bag balloon aliens are overpriced, for example. They're not heavy, thus not strong, but they're huge. Thus, they're easy to hit, and have no compensation for that fact.

On the flip side, the slightly-larger but super-strong character (SM +1 and ST 110) saves ~100 points, thus his SM gave him 100 points.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

Gas-bag balloon aliens are overpriced, for example. They're not heavy, thus not strong, but they're huge. Thus, they're easy to hit, and have no compensation for that fact.

On the flip side, the slightly-larger but super-strong character (SM +1 and ST 110) saves ~100 points, thus his SM gave him 100 points.

Yeah, they're very unfair in comparison...

But per point 2, the latter guy still spent 900 points on something that stacks up really badly compared to just about any other way to have spent 900 points. The SM+1 might be worth it, but the build that made the SM+1 worth it is not likely to be.