Large Creature Damage

[Lobo316]

I also pre select what weapons the monsters use, and when used by larger monsters, such as Ogres and Trolls, I increase the damage dice a step, so if a D8 in human hands, I make it a D10 in an Ogres or Trolls hand, and even higher in the hands of giants.

Hey Treebore (and anyone else who cares to chime in) I pulled this from another thread you had commented on, and wanted to ask, is that really "neccessary"? I mean, it seems to me that the 4th printing of the M&T book (green cover, displacer beast) increases the damage on some of those larger creatures already (example, the ogre gets a +3, the minotaur gets a +4).

I'm just curious if you implimented that rule before the latest printing or did you still feel it neccessary to increase the damage potential, even with the increase?

And for the record, not saying it's a bad thing, in fact, I may even start doing it myself. Just curious to the thought process behind it.

Also, is anyone else doing something similiar to Tree for large creatures?

[Treebore]

Yes, I up the damage dice as well as use the added STR modifier. That or I just use the 2E MM version.

[Lord Dynel]

I haven't. To each their own and all, but I don't think it's necessary. I think the +3 is more than sufficient, especially when coupled with a weapon. But yeah, stepping up weapon damage by one die would work well, I think.

[Omote]

I haven't. To each their own and all, but I don't think it's necessary. I think the +3 is more than sufficient, especially when coupled with a weapon.

This right about here sums up my thoughts on the matter. I rarely increase weapon damage. And in the rare case that I do, it's because of a BBEG or an enemy unique (such as a kobold fighter or the like).

~O

[Treebore]

All I can say is I have been running 1 to 2 C&C games every week for about 7 years now, and it gives me the game play I like to see. So I totally agree with "to each their own", and this is how I get what I want out of C&C. Stronger monsters. Which I hate how weak they are in 1E, and love in 2E with their over all power increases. So as far as monsters go, I go much more for their 2E feel than their weaker 1E, and C&C feel. With some exceptions, with C&C. Like C&C dragons and the Prysmal Eye are deadly enough as written. Plus to me monsters are always "malleable". So if I am using an Ogre or three against a level 2 or 3 party, I'll modify them as I need to not over power the PC's. So I may drop the STR bonus, leave the damage dice of the weapons the same, or just have them use their fists. So ultimately, it is what I need for creating a challenging, but hopefully not over powerful, and/or not a boringly under powered, encounter is what I go for. So I'll do whatever I feel I need to do to get that kind of encounter.

So normally, I actually adapt monsters from their 2E write ups, not from C&C. Which totally bypasses what I do or do not do with the C&C versions. Since the 2E write up is my usual base line.

[koralas]

I both agree and disagree with Treebore...

Why does a short sword do more damage than a dagger, a long sword more than a short sword, etc.? The size of the weapon. If an ogre picked up a human sized long sword, it would be as if using a short sword for him, with the damage potential of a longsword. But an equivalent sized weapon in ratio to the body, that ogre size longsword is at least the size of a bastard sword, or possibly even a two-handed sword. So if using ratio appropriate weapons, then yes, increase the damage base of the weapon used.

[Treebore]

I both agree and disagree with Treebore...

Why does a short sword do more damage than a dagger, a long sword more than a short sword, etc.? The size of the weapon. If an ogre picked up a human sized long sword, it would be as if using a short sword for him, with the damage potential of a longsword. But an equivalent sized weapon in ratio to the body, that ogre size longsword is at least the size of a bastard sword, or possibly even a two-handed sword. So if using ratio appropriate weapons, then yes, increase the damage base of the weapon used.

I think maybe I should describe it that way, because that is essentially the way I am thinking it. The weapons are actually larger, IE "Ogre sized". I don't see Ogres using human sized weapons, except as "impromptu". So when I say an Ogre is armed, they are actually using an Ogre sized weapon, hence the increased damage dice, because, proportionately, what is a "long" sword for an ogre would be bigger, and thicker, to properly fit the ogres massive hand. A human could not use it, even if over all it is maybe the size of a 2 handed sword to a human, because the handle grip is simply too big for a human hand to wrap around, let alone grip properly to keep control while swinging it.

An Ogre may be able to grip a human sized sword grip, but it would feel very wrong, and probably also cause them difficulties with maintaining their grip.

Plus in my settings, I always assume an ancient lost history that the Ogres used to actually be an advanced civilization that fell long ago and degenerated into what they are now. Unless I run Faerun. For that setting, I actually have an area where the old, civilized, Ogres still live. So actually having Ogre sized weapons in existence makes more sense, because they have found weapons made long ago by their ancestors. Or in Faerun, they have weapons made by their civilized and more intelligent versions. Or they have weapons of appropriate size made by Fire Giants, etc...