tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post8767361964303179107..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: Spells Through The Ages – Animal GrowthDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger20125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-59549573124104189012014-09-05T13:07:47.717-04:002014-09-05T13:07:47.717-04:00I'll add that I'm interested and surprised...I'll add that I'm interested and surprised in this discussion at how many people were accustomed to using the spell on already-large animals. I seriously never even thought about anyone using it that way -- taking cues from the OD&D & AD&D monster lists, I always assumed that "giant animal" meant something that was formerly small and inoffensive, blown up to scary size.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-57883677539543043572014-09-04T10:44:50.577-04:002014-09-04T10:44:50.577-04:00Yes, it bothers me; it seems unbalanced at this le...Yes, it bothers me; it seems unbalanced at this level. Creating multiple 20+ HD monsters is out of scope for other spells at this level.<br /><br />It's the same problem as <i>polymorph</i> (<a href="http://deltasdnd.blogspot.com/2014/05/spells-through-ages-polymorph.html" rel="nofollow">link</a>; esp. consider Andy Collins' rant at the end). In particular, if a DM introduces a Tyrannosaur or some new 50HD monster, he'll surely overlook the fact that this spell can turn them into 100 HD creatures to the benefit of the players. Unbounded power are always unbalanced.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-77945442546732668012014-09-04T10:38:20.805-04:002014-09-04T10:38:20.805-04:00:-) !:-) !Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-72102136924304263442014-09-04T10:37:35.265-04:002014-09-04T10:37:35.265-04:00FYI, Superdan.net is me also. Yes, the hit dice av...FYI, Superdan.net is me also. Yes, the hit dice average for Medium creatures is also 4 in AD&D; the monsters and core stats are mostly copy-and-pasted between editions.<br /><br />Linked below you can see a spreadsheet confirming that for all 1E AD&D monsters (includes MM, FF, MM2 books). Average for Small: 2HD, Medium: 4HD, Large: 8HD (same as 3E). <br /><br /><a href="http://www.superdan.net/download/blog/deltasdnd/AD&D-MonstersBySize.pdf" rel="nofollow">http://www.superdan.net/download/blog/deltasdnd/AD&D-MonstersBySize.pdf</a>Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-84591466331202995252014-09-03T13:48:41.821-04:002014-09-03T13:48:41.821-04:00A: You need to add a giant Aqua-cat to your encoun...A: You need to add a giant Aqua-cat to your encounter tables if you ever run "Corsairs of Medero" again. <br /><br />That ship full of dudes looks really cool, larger than life furry terrain features notwithstanding. <br /><br />B:What else would the internet possibly be for? <br /><br />C: It's an effective unit, but its loyalty is entirely dependent on who feeds it, and even then it's provisional loyalty at best. :)BigFellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03052419088140204154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-44691698653390267572014-09-03T13:47:06.446-04:002014-09-03T13:47:06.446-04:00I also have no issue with the lack of upper bound ...I also have no issue with the lack of upper bound on hit dice. We are using magic to increase the size of some potentially impressive creatures. Doubling the size of an elephant or great white shark should lead to some pretty impressive creatures. I'm OK with that.<br /><br />Let me ask you this, does the lack of an upper bound on hit dice bother you? If so, why? I'm curious.Monkapotomushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15863829877299943297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-77789203131391084822014-09-03T13:43:24.770-04:002014-09-03T13:43:24.770-04:00I think trying to find a connection between size a...I think trying to find a connection between size and number of hit dice is dubious at best. I don't think there was that much thought put into it and lets be honest, these are fantasy monsters that don't abide by modern day physics. The stats for a monster are often internally consistent even if they aren't consistent with other monsters.<br /><br />If it says to double hit dice I'm inclined to just double everything else since those values are typically a ratio of the hit dice and more consistent. If the bonus to attack is 2/3 the creatures hit dice than just keep the same ratio using the new hit dice. Monkapotomushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15863829877299943297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-61189761148571933722014-09-03T13:29:38.636-04:002014-09-03T13:29:38.636-04:00I don't have any experience with the earlier v...I don't have any experience with the earlier versions of the spell but my table saw the 2E version used A LOT. It was one of the most popular non-Wizard spells. <br /><br />Per the spell description we doubled the hit dice, doubled the damage done, and I if I remember correctly we doubled the attack bonus. The bonus to attack is the only fuzzy number since they are not as clear about it but doubling it seemed reasonable. <br /><br />For 3E we did not see it used as often for some reason. When it was used I used a hodge podge of implementations. If there was a dire version of the animal, I used that. If there wasn't I might just double their stats if it seemed OK, and otherwise I would use the methods described in the spell if I had time. I eventually put together a table of the common animals with their adjusted stats so it was available if needed, but it never was. I think most of the time I was able to use a dire version of the animal or the stats for a dire animal that was close to what I needed.Monkapotomushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15863829877299943297noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-87700366284897856532014-09-03T13:24:43.366-04:002014-09-03T13:24:43.366-04:00I am all for at the table, easy calculations be it...I am all for at the table, easy calculations be it x2HD or HP/ or +2 to certain values (Saves, AC), whatever.<br />FWIW in my home game I have the usual animals stated out, but I also have a number of generic animal stats "Medium Sized Predator" "Small Herbivore" in case I need a random critter on the fly. Baquieshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08357103428591599364noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-72953418331906438772014-09-02T16:17:26.632-04:002014-09-02T16:17:26.632-04:00The average HD for a man-sized creature is 4HD?! I...The average HD for a man-sized creature is 4HD?! In which edition? I think his math may be off.<br /><br />Okay, I read the links and I think there’s a little misinterpretation here. There’s a difference between “man-sized” and “medium-sized.” A bugbear (for example) is larger than man-sized, as is a gnoll (for example) with proportionately larger HD. “Medium-sized” is a definition for 3rd edition D&D which likes to use a lot of categories (fine, diminutive, large, huge, gigantic, etc.) combined with monster “type” to give a more systematic approach to their mechanics (a la GURPS or something). A man-sized creature (i.e. something on the scale of a human) has and has always had 1HD unless it is (as Williams states) especially tough or formidable…like supernatural creatures. Lumping things like a “death salad” (15HD) or astral deva (12HD) or trumpet archon (12HD) or any number of “medium-sized” monsters into the same category as an orc and saying “the average HD for a man-sized creature is 4” is patently ridiculous. A medium-sized Godling with 100HD may skew the average for the size category of monster; that doesn’t mean the average man-sized humanoid can take 5 or 6 dice of damage or that humans are “under strength.”<br /><br />To put it more succinctly: I disagree with your assessment that the D&D precedent is to base HD on height. And I don’t think Super Dan’s article is incredibly pertinent here as I was talking about “normal” humanoids (like humans) rather than supernatural demons or monsters that fall into a "medium" size category…but I wasn’t really discussing 3rd edition equivalents anyway.<br /><br />[a giant insect is much larger than 8x its normal mass...but then a normal-sized ant or fly would have less than "1 hit point" (how many normal ants could you kill with one well-placed blow of a war hammer to an anthill?]<br /><br />3rd Edition would have been better served to leave out the “double HD” entirely and simply used the size increase (with equivalent benefits) seeing as how the 3E MM already set standards as to how changes in size affect a creature’s stat profile.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-27996909641514354802014-09-01T23:10:16.180-04:002014-09-01T23:10:16.180-04:00Ha! Hardcore.Ha! Hardcore.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-85652519739322487712014-09-01T20:29:08.115-04:002014-09-01T20:29:08.115-04:00Never seen it cast. Was not even aware it was a s...Never seen it cast. Was not even aware it was a spell.Thiles Targonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02928790313150694394noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-22402551521909450742014-09-01T11:26:59.758-04:002014-09-01T11:26:59.758-04:00Comedy rule of three.Comedy rule of <a href="https://scontent-b-lga.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/222406_233519323345384_3707904_n.jpg?oh=1961ae5d2eaa559387652d5c72d71903&oe=547C327B" rel="nofollow">three</a>.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-55202345056309897542014-09-01T11:25:27.978-04:002014-09-01T11:25:27.978-04:00And here's where I post Internet cat picz all ...And here's where I post Internet cat picz all day. <a href="https://fbcdn-sphotos-e-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xaf1/v/t1.0-9/281666_233520350011948_7879933_n.jpg?oh=a42b199f69d708c13019e9b67f2d904d&oe=547059FC&__gda__=1416960731_9e27b389190063f44f2863b019d95d8c" rel="nofollow">Looky</a>.Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-43239324396639300992014-09-01T11:19:39.075-04:002014-09-01T11:19:39.075-04:00Hunh. Very different with the one-animal only effe...Hunh. Very different with the one-animal only effect. Thanks for that info! Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-55560625427779270662014-09-01T11:17:56.172-04:002014-09-01T11:17:56.172-04:00Note that animal growth is on the wizard (magic-us...Note that <i>animal growth</i> is on the wizard (magic-user) spell list in all the editions mentioned above. <br /><br />I'd disagree on the x8 hit dice assessment. At best, strength comes from bone & muscle cross-section, i.e., a 2D factor, so x4 would be an upper bound, explaining why small insects are proportionally the strongest as compared to the 3D weight factor (<a href="http://insects.about.com/od/antsbeeswasps/f/ants-lift-50-times-weight.htm" rel="nofollow">link</a>). <br /><br />But the precedent in the D&D rules is mostly that hit dice are indeed proportional to height. The <i>average</i> hit dice for man-sized creatures is actually 4 hit dice; at large/giant-sized it's 8; and so forth. We might say that humanoids are unusually weak for their size (compare men to apes), unless they have special training and advance levels. (Prior analysis on this point: <a href="http://www.superdan.net/gaming/dnd3/dndmisc/monster_hit_dice.html" rel="nofollow">link</a>)Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-69097654616645336622014-09-01T10:52:12.486-04:002014-09-01T10:52:12.486-04:00I would presume the Chainmail version of the spell...I would presume the Chainmail version of the spell would be something like. "Place one of your pets on the sand table."<br />;)BigFellahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03052419088140204154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-13246263219913297382014-09-01T10:16:17.160-04:002014-09-01T10:16:17.160-04:00I started play with Mentzer's BECM series, and...I started play with Mentzer's BECM series, and his Expert set DOES include the spell where BX does not. It's a third level cleric spell, range 120', duration 12 turns, affects one animal only, and doubles its size which in this case simply means giving it double damage and double carrying capacity. Hit points and armor class are explicitly stated as not changing.<br /><br />So that's how I've always run the spell (never had anyone try to cast it when I ran AD&D or 3E).Dennis Laffeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03053699552003336733noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-57987530853105731212014-09-01T09:33:42.285-04:002014-09-01T09:33:42.285-04:00[*ahem* that should be "I'd LIKE to point...[*ahem* that should be "I'd LIKE to point out..." I'm not lying. Jeez!]JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-67560190401689012472014-09-01T09:32:26.200-04:002014-09-01T09:32:26.200-04:00I can't ever remember seeing this one used, pr...I can't ever remember seeing this one used, probably because A) it's not present in B/X (which is how I started...I skipped OD&D), and B) we never had any druids PCs in our AD&D campaigns (other than the odd 1E bard, I suppose).<br /><br />However, I'd lie to point out that if you double the height, length, and width of a creature then you are increasing its volume by a factor of 8, not 2 (2x2x2), and HD should probably be increased accordingly. <br /><br />A good example of this is the hill giant: being 12' tall, it's twice the height of a man and (presumably) proportioned the same in width and length. It's HD? Eight...eight times that of a (1HD) human.<br /><br />Just saying.JBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.com