If a post like this has been made before please direct me to it. I couldn't find anything of the like, so I figured I'd ask
Also, this character is a pipe dream. I have never played this character before, I want to make him 100% legal and okay to play before I dare play him.
So a TL;DR backstory, there is a team comp for MOBAs (League of Legends Specifically) that consists of 4 supports and 1 DPS. The idea was the supports would almost exclusively buff and heal and tank for the DPS, while the DPS would mow people down from the backline. It's been nerfed since, but the idea came back to me while I was making a character. That idea morphed into:
Make a Character that can become as big as possible, and be the ultimate frontline (Only in size, not in actual damage)
I came up with this: A Bugbear Fighter (Rune Knight), with at least 1 spell caster, one with Enlarge/Reduce.
I going to focus on the main question and not the combo I set up for the character, does character/weapon size effect damage?
The Rune knight feature at level 10 gives you an extra 3d4 inches in height. The character was 8 feet tall before, and for the sake of argument I gave him the full 12 inches in height. The Giant's Might feature at level 18 (Runic Juggernaut technically) lets you grow 2 sizes (Medium to Huge), and he would be some 36 feet tall. Enlarge/Reduce can make you grow in all dimensions by 2, therefore doubling your height, so 72 feet tall. He wields a great sword that would grow to scale (4ft * 8 = 32 feet).
In the DMG, it says, "Big monsters typically wield oversized weapons that deal extra dice of damage on a hit. Double the weapon dice if the creature is Large, triple the weapon dice if the creature is Huge, quadruple the weapon dice if it's Gargantuan." (p. 278)
The character would be considered Gargantuan in weight and height, and would have a weapon to scale, so wouldn't the weapon deal extra damage? I know I'm biased when I say this, but it seems reasonable to me. I asked a few D&D buddies and they said it makes sense to them. I asked an old DM and he said no, because we are a group of heroes, not a Godzilla monster and crew. We are power rangers, not a muscle man with his team in a backpack. Because everyone's contributions matter, it wouldn't apply to the character as to make everyone feel like they are on the same playing field. I asked someone with 0 D&D experience (just on a whim), and he said it made sense to him. To me it seems strong, but it's reasonable. After all, a sword taller than my house would probably do more damage than one that's 4 feet tall.
Counterpoints to consider, would be how monster rules don't apply to characters (I can't think of any off the top of my head but I think there's at least 1). Enlarge/Reduce also already increases weapon damage (by 1d4) so I understand why the size increase wouldn't add to that more but I feel like it should, as it doesn't restrict it either.
I've only managed to confuse myself, does anyone know the definitive answer?
Technically, giant's might and enlarge already increase your damage to represent your increased size. Not to the same level as monsters already that size (especially enlarge), but they do. So there shouldn't be any expectation to get even more damage than the rules say.
D&D is not a simulation game, so the rules don't always align with what you expect, especially when you push it to it's limits.
Becoming gargantuan by using the Rune Knight abilities would make a character deal an extra 1d10 damage to the first weapon attack plus an extra 1d4 damage to all weapon attacks.
The Storm Kings thunder module does have an item called a Potion of Giant Size that has a more lore-friendly damage increase, allowing you and your weapons to become huge and you roll 3x the damage dice to all weapon attacks. Combining this with the enlarge spell would mean you'd have a Gargantuan sized character.
Becoming gargantuan by using the Rune Knight abilities would make a character deal an extra 1d10 damage to the first weapon attack plus an extra 1d4 damage to all weapon attacks.
The Storm Kings thunder module does have an item called a Potion of Giant Size that has a more lore-friendly damage increase, allowing you and your weapons to become huge and you roll 3x the damage dice to all weapon attacks. Combining this with the enlarge spell would mean you'd have a Gargantuan sized character.
Technically, giant's might and enlarge already increase your damage to represent your increased size. Not to the same level as monsters already that size (especially enlarge), but they do. So there shouldn't be any expectation to get even more damage than the rules say.
D&D is not a simulation game, so the rules don't always align with what you expect, especially when you push it to it's limits.
Thank you both, I was just curious and it's fun to imagine a building-sized-sword wielding bugbear . If it did go through with full scaling damage it would deal upwards of 96d6 damage from it, but I understand why not. thank you for the assistance.
Characters with the giant foundling background are larger then others of the species, I have a 8 foot goliath, say if this extra bump in size could raise his hight by a quarter, reaching 10 foot, then he would be large, then he could use a large weapon with out a disadvantage. he also has primal build so would he be able to then use huge weapons? whats the damage scaling rule for weapons? I hear a huge creature does triple the amount of damage as a medium character, but that means without bonuses my lvl 1 characater weilding a great axe would do 3d12 damage. But I know that it isn't the same for creatures as for monsters becuase a medium sized character doesn't do more damage then a small character. but thats becuase they use the same sized weapons. The increase in weapon size is the thing that increases a characters damage, right? Please tell me your opinion on wether I should be aloud to use huge weapons without disadvantage and what that would imply.
Are you sure that the height and weight increase would change the game-mechanical size category of the character? I think all PCs are limited to medium size. That's why the huge PC races such as goliath are the same medium size as dwarves, but get the carry weight etc. doubled to represent their size.
There are spells and effects that change the size category of a creature, but I don't think changing a character's height and weight would do that. I'll gladly be proven wrong! :D
I think the exact reason is to avoid huge balance issues with oversized weapons.
Also, remember that a large creature takes up 10x10 feet of space on the grid. That probably wouldn't be fun to play in the long run. Literally dungeon CRAWLING, because you don't have enough space to walk upright. :D
I was confused by the Giant Foundling background until I did some digging and realized it was a UA background from 2022. UA stuff isn't always allowed, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, the background only has one line in its description which states that you have grown to a "remarkable size". It does not say how much taller you are than average for your race, or imply that you become a size larger. Simply that you are a "remarkable size", which I take to mean that you are much taller than normal for your race. The actual feature that the background grants is the "Strike of Giants" feat, which is just a kind of smite ability that apes the new Goliath Subraces.
So, no... without homebrewing, the Giant Foundling background does not allow you to exceed your race's height enough to be considered large, even if you're applying the background to a race that is already extremely tall.
A creature's size category is not determined by their height and/or weight, it is its own independently defined attribute. For example a 4 foot, 150 pound Dwarf is Medium in size. If a wizard casts Enlarge/Reduce on the Dwarf they grow to be 8 feet tall and weigh 1200 pounds. As you note a Goliath can naturally be 8 feet tall and yet is Medium in size. This discrepancy is particularly notable with Gargantuan sized creatures which can be described as being much bigger than the 40ft x40ft space a Gargantuan sized creature occupies.
Powerful Build allows you to be considered one size category larger when determining carrying capacity, effectively doubling it. Carrying capacity has nothing to do with being able to effectively wield a weapon and a Medium sized creature with only a 10 strength has enough carrying capacity to lift even the heaviest of Large sized weapons. For the purpose of wielding a weapon (or any purpose other than carrying capacity) a Goliath is a Medium sized creature.
There is no general rule for scaling a weapon's damage based on size. The DMG offers guidance to DMs when homebrewing monsters with manufactured weapons that is probably what you are thinking of: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#Step11Damage. But this isn't a rule and there examples where WotC don't follow their own recommendation, like Centaur, or Ogre. And in any case this is just for monsters, none of this pertains to players.
There are various methods players can use to increase their size but they all handle increasing weapon size differently. Enlarge/Reduce for example causes weapons to increase in size along with the target and said weapons deal an additional 1d4 damage of the same type. A Rune Knight's Giant's Might (https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/tcoe/fighter#GiantsMight) feature also grows equipment worn by the player but doesn't change the damage done by their weapons. Instead it allows the player to add 1d6 damage to an attack once on their turn, and this is independent of of they had sufficient space to actually grow in size. So for players it will depend on the specific effect used to increase in size category.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
Technically playing a tall character would make it harder to find cover, but honestly cover doesn't come up super often, so it's not a major issue. Particularly since even with wildcard stats there's still a bit of a bias towards playing the big and tall races as melee types, so they wouldn't be looking to use it in typical combat situations. And that assumes the DM is tracking player size in more precise terms than Small or Medium when considering cover. Overall, it's not likely to move the needle much.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
First, I wouldn't say the avg medium character is 5' tall. Many, if not most, will be taller than that.
Beyond that, height and rules interactions really will depend on your DM. There are no hard rules on how tall someone can be and still be considered a medium creature. And technically, your height doesn't matter, its your creature size that matters. If you are medium, you have certain pluses and minuses regardless of if you are 5' tall or 8' tall. Now, a DM might rule that the 8' character has a harder time ducking behind something for cover, and that might be reasonable. Hopefully, they'd similarly rule it's much easier for them to climb a 10' wall, since they can probably reach the top of it very easily. Neither of those situations are in the rules, however. As a medium creature, there isn't an official mechanical difference.
Honestly, the best thing is not to think too much about height. A lot of the rules get really wonky when you start considering the vertical dimension.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
Yes and no.
1. A Medium character is 5x5 on the grid. A Large character is 10x10. Correct. All player races are Medium or Small.
2. Your character's Height and Weight doesn't have any clearly defined game-mechanical effect - only their Size category does.
3. Your character's Height and Weight only matter when the DM says it matters. Crouching isn't an action, so the taller character can just be described to crouch in order to use the same Cover.
4. Height and Weight only matter narratively. There are for example no mechanics for fitting armor/clothing. So unless the DM wants to do it differently, all armors fit all shapes and sizes by default. 5e is streamline like that. :)
However: The DM can decide that a tall person can easily scale a certain wall and a small person can easily crawl through a narrow passage. Or that someone can't see a short person behind a wall and the short person can't see them from behind the wall either. Etc. But that's purely a DM decision.
5. Carrying capacity is not based on the character's weight, only Size and Strength Score. Your carrying capacity if the same whether you are a Medium size 50kg wood-elf or a Medium size 150kg dragonborn. Only your Mechanical Size and Strength Score + some features matter.
So being tall or short has very few mechanical advantages or disadvantages.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
A medium creature controls a 5' by 5' area in combat. Size category doesn't actually have a direct relation to physical size, unless you're talking about gelatinous cubes
This means you can have a medium creature that is taller than 5' or a large creature shorter than 10'
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
A medium creature controls a 5' by 5' area in combat. Size category doesn't actually have a direct relation to physical size, unless you're talking about gelatinous cubes
This means you can have a medium creature that is taller than 5' or a large creature shorter than 10'
What?
Okay, so what is the basis then? I always was under the assumption based on spells like Enlarge/Reduce and Rune Knight abilities, and the fact that small races typically stood between 2-4 ft tall and medium from 4-8 ft that Size category directly correlated with…well size, relatively based on factors of 2 (doubled in all dimensions = size category increase, and vice versa)
I always though it worked like this: 2ft and below : Tiny :: 2-4ft : Small :: 4-8 ft : Medium :: 8-16 ft : Large :: 16-32 ft : Huge :: 32+ : Gargantuan.
I know that some creature might fulfill these dimensions in Other dimensions, i.e. length(Giant Snake) or diameter (Giant Spider) but they are still fulfilled right? I have always had some doubts on this topic so if you could enlighten us as to the exact system Davyd I am sure we would all be much obliged.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
A medium creature controls a 5' by 5' area in combat. Size category doesn't actually have a direct relation to physical size, unless you're talking about gelatinous cubes
This means you can have a medium creature that is taller than 5' or a large creature shorter than 10'
What?
Okay, so what is the basis then? I always was under the assumption based on spells like Enlarge/Reduce and Rune Knight abilities, and the fact that small races typically stood between 2-4 ft tall and medium from 4-8 ft that Size category directly correlated with…well size, relatively based on factors of 2 (doubled in all dimensions = size category increase, and vice versa)
I always though it worked like this: 2ft and below : Tiny :: 2-4ft : Small :: 4-8 ft : Medium :: 8-16 ft : Large :: 16-32 ft : Huge :: 32+ : Gargantuan.
I know that some creature might fulfill these dimensions in Other dimensions, i.e. length(Giant Snake) or diameter (Giant Spider) but they are still fulfilled right? I have always had some doubts on this topic so if you could enlighten us as to the exact system Davyd I am sure we would all be much obliged.
There's not really a hard system, it's pretty much just a ballpark thing. Ogres and even Ogrillon (Half-Ogres) are Large, for instance, but that's more a function of general mass as opposed to height, and a Lion is Large even though by both longest dimension and weight they're well below something like an Ogre. Plus they keep all PC races Small or Medium, partly to keep indoor environment design fairly simple, and partly because being Large would seriously tune up certain features, like Reach or Aura effects.
Tldr: Size category in 5e is basically just a question of "what sounds right for any given creature?".
Don't try to find some hard-and-fast mathematical formula that determines the rules, because it doesn't work that way.
PCs are small or medium and by default should control one 5'x5'x5' cube in combat. That is the starting point and all the rest is squeezed and stretched and contorted to fit that game demand as best as it can.
This is first and foremost a game, not a fantasy world simulation, and there's baseline limitations imposed to ensure that it stays fun and accessible, even if those limitations prevent certain character options. OP's desire to create a PC that deals quadruple damage dice is a perfect example of why 5e is designed this way.
3.5e had a table relating each size category to size in teef (hight or length). 5e doesn't. This is by design. Size categories in 5e are supposed to be blurry and open for interpretation. You might use the 3.5e table for general reference, but don't take it too seriously. Lion and brown bear are large, their despite real-life counterparts falling in the 3.5e range for medium creature. Centaur monster is large, while the playble race is medium. Likewise for the naga.
Likewise, there aren't any set-in-stone rules for size categories in terms of damage, stealth etc. This is mostly up for the DM to call.
Weren’t Centaurs and Minotaurs Large, and Fairies Tiny? Why did this change? What would the requirements for you size changing be outside of a magical spell effect designed to do so? If it is Mass, how come Warforged are Medium? Also, can one of you leave an outline of this 3.5 table.
Weren’t Centaurs and Minotaurs Large, and Fairies Tiny? Why did this change? What would the requirements for you size changing be outside of a magical spell effect designed to do so? If it is Mass, how come Warforged are Medium? Also, can one of you leave an outline of this 3.5 table.
Also, who is OP?
The creature statblocks for those use those size categories, but they keep PCs in Small and Medium to avoid complications to both level design and balance.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
If a post like this has been made before please direct me to it. I couldn't find anything of the like, so I figured I'd ask
Also, this character is a pipe dream. I have never played this character before, I want to make him 100% legal and okay to play before I dare play him.
So a TL;DR backstory, there is a team comp for MOBAs (League of Legends Specifically) that consists of 4 supports and 1 DPS. The idea was the supports would almost exclusively buff and heal and tank for the DPS, while the DPS would mow people down from the backline. It's been nerfed since, but the idea came back to me while I was making a character. That idea morphed into:
Make a Character that can become as big as possible, and be the ultimate frontline (Only in size, not in actual damage)
I came up with this: A Bugbear Fighter (Rune Knight), with at least 1 spell caster, one with Enlarge/Reduce.
I going to focus on the main question and not the combo I set up for the character, does character/weapon size effect damage?
The Rune knight feature at level 10 gives you an extra 3d4 inches in height. The character was 8 feet tall before, and for the sake of argument I gave him the full 12 inches in height. The Giant's Might feature at level 18 (Runic Juggernaut technically) lets you grow 2 sizes (Medium to Huge), and he would be some 36 feet tall. Enlarge/Reduce can make you grow in all dimensions by 2, therefore doubling your height, so 72 feet tall. He wields a great sword that would grow to scale (4ft * 8 = 32 feet).
In the DMG, it says, "Big monsters typically wield oversized weapons that deal extra dice of damage on a hit. Double the weapon dice if the creature is Large, triple the weapon dice if the creature is Huge, quadruple the weapon dice if it's Gargantuan." (p. 278)
The character would be considered Gargantuan in weight and height, and would have a weapon to scale, so wouldn't the weapon deal extra damage? I know I'm biased when I say this, but it seems reasonable to me. I asked a few D&D buddies and they said it makes sense to them. I asked an old DM and he said no, because we are a group of heroes, not a Godzilla monster and crew. We are power rangers, not a muscle man with his team in a backpack. Because everyone's contributions matter, it wouldn't apply to the character as to make everyone feel like they are on the same playing field. I asked someone with 0 D&D experience (just on a whim), and he said it made sense to him. To me it seems strong, but it's reasonable. After all, a sword taller than my house would probably do more damage than one that's 4 feet tall.
Counterpoints to consider, would be how monster rules don't apply to characters (I can't think of any off the top of my head but I think there's at least 1). Enlarge/Reduce also already increases weapon damage (by 1d4) so I understand why the size increase wouldn't add to that more but I feel like it should, as it doesn't restrict it either.
I've only managed to confuse myself, does anyone know the definitive answer?
Technically, giant's might and enlarge already increase your damage to represent your increased size. Not to the same level as monsters already that size (especially enlarge), but they do. So there shouldn't be any expectation to get even more damage than the rules say.
D&D is not a simulation game, so the rules don't always align with what you expect, especially when you push it to it's limits.
Becoming gargantuan by using the Rune Knight abilities would make a character deal an extra 1d10 damage to the first weapon attack plus an extra 1d4 damage to all weapon attacks.
The Storm Kings thunder module does have an item called a Potion of Giant Size that has a more lore-friendly damage increase, allowing you and your weapons to become huge and you roll 3x the damage dice to all weapon attacks. Combining this with the enlarge spell would mean you'd have a Gargantuan sized character.
Thank you both, I was just curious and it's fun to imagine a building-sized-sword wielding bugbear . If it did go through with full scaling damage it would deal upwards of 96d6 damage from it, but I understand why not. thank you for the assistance.
Characters with the giant foundling background are larger then others of the species, I have a 8 foot goliath, say if this extra bump in size could raise his hight by a quarter, reaching 10 foot, then he would be large, then he could use a large weapon with out a disadvantage. he also has primal build so would he be able to then use huge weapons? whats the damage scaling rule for weapons? I hear a huge creature does triple the amount of damage as a medium character, but that means without bonuses my lvl 1 characater weilding a great axe would do 3d12 damage. But I know that it isn't the same for creatures as for monsters becuase a medium sized character doesn't do more damage then a small character. but thats becuase they use the same sized weapons. The increase in weapon size is the thing that increases a characters damage, right? Please tell me your opinion on wether I should be aloud to use huge weapons without disadvantage and what that would imply.
Are you sure that the height and weight increase would change the game-mechanical size category of the character? I think all PCs are limited to medium size. That's why the huge PC races such as goliath are the same medium size as dwarves, but get the carry weight etc. doubled to represent their size.
There are spells and effects that change the size category of a creature, but I don't think changing a character's height and weight would do that. I'll gladly be proven wrong! :D
I think the exact reason is to avoid huge balance issues with oversized weapons.
Also, remember that a large creature takes up 10x10 feet of space on the grid. That probably wouldn't be fun to play in the long run. Literally dungeon CRAWLING, because you don't have enough space to walk upright. :D
Finland GMT/UTC +2
I was confused by the Giant Foundling background until I did some digging and realized it was a UA background from 2022. UA stuff isn't always allowed, but that's neither here nor there.
Anyway, the background only has one line in its description which states that you have grown to a "remarkable size". It does not say how much taller you are than average for your race, or imply that you become a size larger. Simply that you are a "remarkable size", which I take to mean that you are much taller than normal for your race. The actual feature that the background grants is the "Strike of Giants" feat, which is just a kind of smite ability that apes the new Goliath Subraces.
So, no... without homebrewing, the Giant Foundling background does not allow you to exceed your race's height enough to be considered large, even if you're applying the background to a race that is already extremely tall.
Watch Crits for Breakfast, an adults-only RP-Heavy Roll20 Livestream at twitch.tv/afterdisbooty
And now you too can play with the amazing art and assets we use in Roll20 for our campaign at Hazel's Emporium
A creature's size category is not determined by their height and/or weight, it is its own independently defined attribute. For example a 4 foot, 150 pound Dwarf is Medium in size. If a wizard casts Enlarge/Reduce on the Dwarf they grow to be 8 feet tall and weigh 1200 pounds. As you note a Goliath can naturally be 8 feet tall and yet is Medium in size. This discrepancy is particularly notable with Gargantuan sized creatures which can be described as being much bigger than the 40ft x40ft space a Gargantuan sized creature occupies.
Powerful Build allows you to be considered one size category larger when determining carrying capacity, effectively doubling it. Carrying capacity has nothing to do with being able to effectively wield a weapon and a Medium sized creature with only a 10 strength has enough carrying capacity to lift even the heaviest of Large sized weapons. For the purpose of wielding a weapon (or any purpose other than carrying capacity) a Goliath is a Medium sized creature.
There is no general rule for scaling a weapon's damage based on size. The DMG offers guidance to DMs when homebrewing monsters with manufactured weapons that is probably what you are thinking of: https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dmg/dungeon-masters-workshop#Step11Damage. But this isn't a rule and there examples where WotC don't follow their own recommendation, like Centaur, or Ogre. And in any case this is just for monsters, none of this pertains to players.
There are various methods players can use to increase their size but they all handle increasing weapon size differently. Enlarge/Reduce for example causes weapons to increase in size along with the target and said weapons deal an additional 1d4 damage of the same type. A Rune Knight's Giant's Might (https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/tcoe/fighter#GiantsMight) feature also grows equipment worn by the player but doesn't change the damage done by their weapons. Instead it allows the player to add 1d6 damage to an attack once on their turn, and this is independent of of they had sufficient space to actually grow in size. So for players it will depend on the specific effect used to increase in size category.
So If I understand this correctly. A medium PC takes up a 5 by 5 area, and the average medium sized PC is roughly 5 feet tall. And a large creature takes up an area of 10x10 feet. but just because your character is ten feet tall doesn't mean their a large character. So they don't get a damage increase from their naturally acurring size. but they do have a harder time with stuff like half vs full cover, and a character who's 10 feet tall isn't neccecarily faster then a five foot tall character. This all makes it sound like playing a big character is like playing a pack mule since they have a disadvantage in combat but an advantage in carrying capacity since carrying capacity is determined by weight.
Technically playing a tall character would make it harder to find cover, but honestly cover doesn't come up super often, so it's not a major issue. Particularly since even with wildcard stats there's still a bit of a bias towards playing the big and tall races as melee types, so they wouldn't be looking to use it in typical combat situations. And that assumes the DM is tracking player size in more precise terms than Small or Medium when considering cover. Overall, it's not likely to move the needle much.
First, I wouldn't say the avg medium character is 5' tall. Many, if not most, will be taller than that.
Beyond that, height and rules interactions really will depend on your DM. There are no hard rules on how tall someone can be and still be considered a medium creature. And technically, your height doesn't matter, its your creature size that matters. If you are medium, you have certain pluses and minuses regardless of if you are 5' tall or 8' tall. Now, a DM might rule that the 8' character has a harder time ducking behind something for cover, and that might be reasonable. Hopefully, they'd similarly rule it's much easier for them to climb a 10' wall, since they can probably reach the top of it very easily. Neither of those situations are in the rules, however. As a medium creature, there isn't an official mechanical difference.
Honestly, the best thing is not to think too much about height. A lot of the rules get really wonky when you start considering the vertical dimension.
Yes and no.
1. A Medium character is 5x5 on the grid. A Large character is 10x10. Correct. All player races are Medium or Small.
2. Your character's Height and Weight doesn't have any clearly defined game-mechanical effect - only their Size category does.
3. Your character's Height and Weight only matter when the DM says it matters. Crouching isn't an action, so the taller character can just be described to crouch in order to use the same Cover.
4. Height and Weight only matter narratively. There are for example no mechanics for fitting armor/clothing. So unless the DM wants to do it differently, all armors fit all shapes and sizes by default. 5e is streamline like that. :)
However: The DM can decide that a tall person can easily scale a certain wall and a small person can easily crawl through a narrow passage. Or that someone can't see a short person behind a wall and the short person can't see them from behind the wall either. Etc. But that's purely a DM decision.
5. Carrying capacity is not based on the character's weight, only Size and Strength Score. Your carrying capacity if the same whether you are a Medium size 50kg wood-elf or a Medium size 150kg dragonborn. Only your Mechanical Size and Strength Score + some features matter.
So being tall or short has very few mechanical advantages or disadvantages.
Finland GMT/UTC +2
A medium creature controls a 5' by 5' area in combat. Size category doesn't actually have a direct relation to physical size, unless you're talking about gelatinous cubes
This means you can have a medium creature that is taller than 5' or a large creature shorter than 10'
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Woops, I have a bad memory. Strength effects carrying capasity. not weight
What?
Okay, so what is the basis then? I always was under the assumption based on spells like Enlarge/Reduce and Rune Knight abilities, and the fact that small races typically stood between 2-4 ft tall and medium from 4-8 ft that Size category directly correlated with…well size, relatively based on factors of 2 (doubled in all dimensions = size category increase, and vice versa)
I always though it worked like this: 2ft and below : Tiny :: 2-4ft : Small :: 4-8 ft : Medium :: 8-16 ft : Large :: 16-32 ft : Huge :: 32+ : Gargantuan.
I know that some creature might fulfill these dimensions in Other dimensions, i.e. length(Giant Snake) or diameter (Giant Spider) but they are still fulfilled right? I have always had some doubts on this topic so if you could enlighten us as to the exact system Davyd I am sure we would all be much obliged.
There's not really a hard system, it's pretty much just a ballpark thing. Ogres and even Ogrillon (Half-Ogres) are Large, for instance, but that's more a function of general mass as opposed to height, and a Lion is Large even though by both longest dimension and weight they're well below something like an Ogre. Plus they keep all PC races Small or Medium, partly to keep indoor environment design fairly simple, and partly because being Large would seriously tune up certain features, like Reach or Aura effects.
Tldr: Size category in 5e is basically just a question of "what sounds right for any given creature?".
Don't try to find some hard-and-fast mathematical formula that determines the rules, because it doesn't work that way.
PCs are small or medium and by default should control one 5'x5'x5' cube in combat. That is the starting point and all the rest is squeezed and stretched and contorted to fit that game demand as best as it can.
This is first and foremost a game, not a fantasy world simulation, and there's baseline limitations imposed to ensure that it stays fun and accessible, even if those limitations prevent certain character options. OP's desire to create a PC that deals quadruple damage dice is a perfect example of why 5e is designed this way.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
3.5e had a table relating each size category to size in teef (hight or length). 5e doesn't. This is by design. Size categories in 5e are supposed to be blurry and open for interpretation. You might use the 3.5e table for general reference, but don't take it too seriously. Lion and brown bear are large, their despite real-life counterparts falling in the 3.5e range for medium creature. Centaur monster is large, while the playble race is medium. Likewise for the naga.
Likewise, there aren't any set-in-stone rules for size categories in terms of damage, stealth etc. This is mostly up for the DM to call.
Weren’t Centaurs and Minotaurs Large, and Fairies Tiny? Why did this change? What would the requirements for you size changing be outside of a magical spell effect designed to do so? If it is Mass, how come Warforged are Medium? Also, can one of you leave an outline of this 3.5 table.
Also, who is OP?
The creature statblocks for those use those size categories, but they keep PCs in Small and Medium to avoid complications to both level design and balance.