[Basic] Guidelines for Using Shortest Two Dimensions Over Single Longest

[scc]

OK recently I asked a question about snakes and snake-like races (Ie Naga) get a discount to ST because of their size (And not be easier to hit in the process.

One post to thread raised an important question: Are snakes long enough in relation to their width, to qualify for the rule on B550 that says use the smallest two dimension, instead of the single longest, to determine SM?

Or in short for, how long a a 2 foot in radius object need to be before you use those 2 feet, and not however long it is, to determine it's SM for targeting purposes?

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by scc

Are snakes long enough in relation to their width, to qualify for the rule on B550 that says use the smallest two dimension, instead of the single longest, to determine SM?

Sure.

Originally Posted by scc

Or in short for, how long a a 2 foot in radius object need to be before you use those 2 feet, and not however long it is, to determine it's SM for targeting purposes?

A 2 foot radius is a 4 foot diameter. I'd go 40 feet or 13 yards. Generally, if it's 10x longer than it is wide, use width for targeting purposes.

This was my take when this came up before.

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

…RAW treats human-shape as the norm, a box-shape as normSM +1, and a sphere as normSM +2. I was suggesting that once a shape gets too skinny, e.g. a snake or rope, you should consider treating its width as its relevant SM dimension.

Although, for the snake I'm thinking … using it's width for the initial size modifier and then adding 3…. It'd be plus +2 for a sphere the same diameter as the width of the snake, so an extra +1 on top of that seems appropriate.

[scc]

Whoops, sorry meant diameter

[Gnome]

Originally Posted by Captain Joy

This was my take when this came up before.

I think whatever system we come up with should produce the given values for the two snakes in Campaigns. A Diamondback Rattlesnake has a diameter of at most 4 inches, which would be SM-7. Even if you add 3 to that you only get to SM-4, not SM-1.

I couldn't find reliable info on the girth of an Indian Python with a quick web search, possibly because their diameter is very much dependent on how large a prey they're currently digesting, but if we imagine that the python could be over two feet in diameter, then your formula works better this case: SM-3+3 = SM0. That said, I'm having some trouble imagining a 15' snake that's over 2' in diameter...

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by Gnome

I think whatever system we come up with should produce the given values for the two snakes in Campaigns. A Diamondback Rattlesnake has a diameter of at most 4 inches, which would be SM-7. Even if you add 3 to that you only get to SM-4, not SM-1.

I couldn't find reliable info on the girth of an Indian Python with a quick web search, possibly because their diameter is very much dependent on how large a prey they're currently digesting, but if we imagine that the python could be over two feet in diameter, then your formula works better this case: SM-3+3 = SM0. That said, I'm having some trouble imagining a 15' snake that's over 2' in diameter...

When slashing at a snake with a sword, I wouldn't use the snake's width's SM +3, I'd use it's length's SM. I'd use its width's SM +3 for things like thrusting attacks and arrows.

I.e. use the dimension that makes the most sense given the attack.