Talk:Giantkin (5e Race)

Musicus Meter Score: 5.5-6.5

This race has a score of 5.5-6.5 according to the Musicus Meter race guidelines. With this metric, first-party races' scores range from 4.5 to 8. This is a guideline, not a rule, and it's important to use your own judgment alongside this scoring.

This scoring may be the groundwork for a focused {{needsbalance}} usage. A contributor to this page may request a detailed breakdown of this page's balance. Without this information, {{needsbalance}} may then be removed. This meter cannot be the sole basis for a needsbalance template, but may be included as an accessory to a wider discussion of a race's balance.

This template should only be placed on a race's talk page. If this template is not placed on the talk page, please move it.

--ConcealedLight (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2018 (MDT)

This page has drifted very far from my original vision, and I've given up on trying to re-balance it back into place, but... I admit to being curious. Also, why shouldn't the boulder be described as having the Thrown (30/150) property? That's the correct notation in the weapon rules, right? --73.131.98.169 08:28, 10 March 2018 (MST)

It doesn't flow well and a boulder isn't considered equipment so it can't have a weapon property. As such the limit is placed on the characters ability to throw it rather than the boulders ability to be thrown. If that makes sense... --ConcealedLight (talk) 08:33, 10 March 2018 (MST)

*shrug* I politely disagree, and feel the present version heavily clutters the rule, but hey. ...Wonder if I should go back and restore my original intentions for each giant subrace now? It's been a while... --SpectralTime (talk) 08:39, 10 March 2018 (MST)

Ok. Do you not like the current state of this race? I believe my edits have help clean things up greatly while maintaining the original look and feel. Reading through the previous revisions there isn't much difference between how I found it and these original intentions you seem to be alluding to. Could you clarify what you mean by that? --ConcealedLight (talk) 13:16, 10 March 2018 (MST)

I wrote the original Giantkin article a while ago, and it has since been heavily-edited. In particular, the Frost and Fire subraces are completely unrecognizable from their original state, and I don't just mean the awful grammar. I just burned out on trying to keep things after a while. --73.131.98.169 14:02, 10 March 2018 (MST)

I mean it is a wiki so this is to be expected. I'll check back through to the earliest logs and bring some stuff back into play if I think its suitable. While I'm at it I'll bring the subraces power into line as their pretty variable comparatively. --ConcealedLight (talk) 16:00, 10 March 2018 (MST)

I think that worked out quiet well. Thoughts? --ConcealedLight (talk) 16:22, 10 March 2018 (MST)

Concerns: The frost giantkin is probably fine, if quite bland and boring compared to the half-orc. The fire giantkin is something I have issues with, since it's throwing around innate magic that fire giants do not possess. Honestly... I think I'll re-edit the whole thing to my liking one more time for good measure, then see how you like that one.

Also, I resent giving every last one of them a Constitution boost. Yes, giants typically have high Constitution; this is because they are monsters and having good Constitution saves and high hitpoints makes them better challenges for the player. As player races, though, just slapping high Constitution on every giantkin subrace makes them boring and less-distinct from one another, hence my attempt to give each subrace a different modifier when I created this page. --SpectralTime (talk) 14:09, 16 March 2018 (MDT)

Some of your edits are good whilst others are vague and don't fit the 5e standard. Fire Giant's Practiced Tactics allows for one to add their proficiency bonus regard of if they have proficiency or expertise in the skill meaning it broke bounded accuracy so I corrected this. You gave the Storm giants a largely unneeded buff to their bolt of fury by increasing the damage die and removing its range limit. I've changed it back so it's on par with the Dragonborn breath weapon. The rest is aight. --ConcealedLight (talk) 08:47, 18 March 2018 (MDT)

Limiting the uses of the Practiced Tactics trait is probably a good idea, and I support it wholeheartedly. I hadn't remembered the exact language for the dwarven Stone Cunning skill I was attempting to ape. That said, I disagree that reducing the damage dice for the Bolt of Fury is acceptable or necessary. (Though adding the range in absolutely is, holy crap. Whoops.) This is because you compare it to the dragonborn breath weapon, but said breath weapon is an area attack, while the bolt is not, necessitating in my mind better damage compared to the breath weapon. Second, well... I've always felt, and still feel, not only that the dragonborn is actually an extremely-weak and poorly-designed player race compared to almost any other choice, but that the breath weapon thereoff is a weak and badly-designed special attack, and thus trading favorably the dragonborn's breath weapon is not, in and of itself, a bad thing. (This is second because I recognize it is not a universally-held opinion.) --SpectralTime (talk) 10:56, 18 March 2018 (MDT)

These are good points, I hadn't considered the aoe aspect vs the single target so I moved it back up to d8's. Any other concerns you have because I'm gucci? --ConcealedLight (talk) 11:12, 18 March 2018 (MDT)

...I don't know what that means, but I don't really have more concerns, no. I'm pretty happy with this page as it presently exists, actually, and I thank you kindly for your help with it. If ya wanna look at my other content sometime, feel free, though I acknowledge a lot of it has been so futzed with over time I can't vouch for its quality any longer. --SpectralTime (talk) 11:14, 18 March 2018 (MDT)

It's no problem, happy I could help. Gucci is just another way of saying good really. --ConcealedLight (talk) 07:49, 19 March 2018 (MDT)