Level Up (A5E) Strength − Size matters

[Minigiant]

I'm not entirely sure I understand what you mean by "modern fantasy" here.

Do you mean literature?
Film?
TV shows?
TTRPGs?

Something else?

I haven't done an extensive survey, but my initial impression is that as a general rule there is a strong correlation between strength and size in modern fantasy. It may not be perfect, but it certainly exists.

All of the above.

Fantasy in modern film, books, comic, video games, TTRPGs, and TV doesn't push a large correlation between size and strength until you get to extreme sizes.

And that point Size gains a correlation with low speed or dexterity.

From what I've seen, when size becomes a factor in a character's strength it comes at the cost of being a clumsy oaf. So you only see it in actual Large size creatures like Giants and Minotaurs. Human sized beings don't get much of a size boost in strength and have been shrinking in size since the 80s.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

All of the above.

Fantasy in modern film, books, comic, video games, TTRPGs, and TV doesn't push a large correlation between size and strength until you get to extreme sizes.

And that point Size gains a correlation with low speed or dexterity.

From what I've seen, when size becomes a factor in a character's strength it comes at the cost of being a clumsy oaf. So you only see it in actual Large size creatures like Giants and Minotaurs. Human sized beings don't get much of a size boost in strength and have been shrinking in size since the 80s.

I mean ... no?

That's not what I've seen, or read. People that are strong (as in super, or abnormally, strong) are almost universally BIG in fantasy. Oaf or not.

Do you have specific ideas otherwise? Because this doesn't correlate, at all, to most genre fiction (literature, film, TV shows) that I am familiar with.

 

[MichaelSomething]

3.5 did factor in size in a bunch of stuff. Didn't Pathfinder nerf that; I wonder why??

 

[CapnZapp]

3.5 did factor in size in a bunch of stuff. Didn't Pathfinder nerf that; I wonder why??

Balance.

On the other hand Strength retains it's primacy for weapon damage in Pathfinder 2.

5E made something like eleven changes to how weapon damage is calculated compared to 3E as regards the Strength-Dexterity balance.

Pathfinder 2 don't use most of them, with the result almost every non-magical damage dealer has a decent or great Strength score.

 

[cmad1977]

The half orc barbarian used his base weight to save himself from being lifted off a cliff and dropped to his doom.

“The stone coatle grapples you! It yanks you to the edge and over...”
“Can it carry me?”
“.... wha.. I mean it grappled you so...”
“I’m 425 lbs. Plus I’m carrying ALL the supplies...”
“Let’s see what the calculator says... 15x15... 225...oh...Kay....”

The party was able to save him before the other gargoyles could help.

Well played lifting/carrying rules. Well played.

 

[Haldrik]

It feels like among those with similar work put into it, that size still matters a lot. Are they close to getting rid of weight classes in the fighting sports or in power lifting? Just like in D&D, in real life is it the combination of the base (pre-work) physical attributes and the work put into honing them that matters?

Actually, reallife fighting weightclasses is how I got interested in size.

It turns out, the smaller one is the MORE Size matters.

Where one heavyweight is 40 pounds heavier than an other heavyweight doesnt really matter. But if one person is even 10 pounds heavier than a lightweight, it matters alot.

The range of each weightclass increases as size increases, and narrows as size decreases.

Interestingly, the proportions resemble a Golden Ratio.

Weight is significant in reallife combat.

So much so, it seems worthwhile to split up Medium into Big and Little. Because the bigger combatant has a reallife advantage.



I am comfortable with magical creatures being magically strong. But when it comes to natural creatures, I look a bit closer concerning plausibility.

For example, a woman can be a statistical outlier and incredibly strong. But then I assume she has a physique that corresponds to such strength. Ropy lean muscles can be strong. I assume muscles of some kind, and size more likely than not.

 

[Haldrik]

I mean ... no?

That's not what I've seen, or read. People that are strong (as in super, or abnormally, strong) are almost universally BIG in fantasy. Oaf or not.

Do you have specific ideas otherwise? Because this doesn't correlate, at all, to most genre fiction (literature, film, TV shows) that I am familiar with.

There is Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and numerous superheroes, including Wonder Woman. But these examples are "magically" strong. Buffy has some kind of primal spirit, and Wonder Woman is an Amazon, understood as a mythical nonhuman.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

There is Buffy the Vampire Slayer, and numerous superheroes, including Wonder Woman. But these examples are "magically" strong. Buffy has some kind of primal spirit, and Wonder Woman is an Amazon, understood as a mythical nonhuman.

Part of it is how you define fantasy! Personally, I don't include super heroes (its own genre) or BTVS in the genre, but I can understand that the genre boundaries are loosely defined (the age-old 'Star Wars is fantasy, not sci fi' debate) .

Even so, there still tends to be many examples of the size/strength correlation. In Buffy, for example, you often see that they are playing against type (Buffy, but also Glory!).

But you also see the size/strength correlation- the Beast (big) was stronger than a slayer (in that case, Faith), and it was telegraphed by the SIZE of the Beast.

Anyway, it's all inconsistent (of course) but generally, size and strength are highly correlated.

 

[Charlaquin]

I mean ... no?

That's not what I've seen, or read. People that are strong (as in super, or abnormally, strong) are almost universally BIG in fantasy. Oaf or not.

Do you have specific ideas otherwise? Because this doesn't correlate, at all, to most genre fiction (literature, film, TV shows) that I am familiar with.

Did you see the Mountain vs. the Viper in GoT? Both characters are strong AF. The Mountain’s size gives him a strength advantage, but a speed disadvantage. And in general, that show is full of strong characters who aren’t especially big.

How about LotR? Gimli is smaller than the rest of the fellowship (except the hobbits) but he’s generally framed as fighting using more direct application of strength as opposed to Legolas’ and Aragorn’s more agile approaches.

Fantasy video games, especially JRPGs are chock full of incredibly strong, waif-thin characters, as are fighting games, fantasy anime, comics... It’s a pretty common trope.

 

[Minigiant]

I mean ... no?

That's not what I've seen, or read. People that are strong (as in super, or abnormally, strong) are almost universally BIG in fantasy. Oaf or not.

Do you have specific ideas otherwise? Because this doesn't correlate, at all, to most genre fiction (literature, film, TV shows) that I am familiar with.

Depends on what you call big. Modern depiction of Hercules and Achilles don't display them as overly big.

And if you go into the superhero world, the super strong supes that aren't clumsy have been skrinking in muscle mass.

And let's not get into the budding East Asian, Western style fantasy market. Warriors coming from Japanese, Chinese, and Korean artists are thin.

And if you get into Western T and Film, strong men are often not huge do to needing real human actors. They're muscular but no way bodybuilder status like before. Then you have trends of them fighting with or against women. Since everyone doing have an Amazon fetish, you get men in strength matches with women and not auto winning.

Not that I'm saying people don't see a correlation with size and strength at all. I'm saying it;s combined with dexterity/agility. I would guess that people under 40 would see a very big person as stronger and clumsier. It's hand and hand.

So the choice would to be:

1. Let it as is
2. Make the Big characters both stronger but clumsier.