So as many people have already pointed out the example of Drizzt uses scimitars to dual weild, Icingdeath and Twinkle.
Secondly just no, dex is already SUPER strong in 5e, reflex save, AC, initiative and a host of skills. There doesn't need to be more weapons capable of finesse, the rapier already exists for getting a d8 weapon, it doesn't need to be expanded on. If you want the dual weilding artful fighter get scimitars, it's only 1 damage less on average
Realistically yes, longswords relied on finesse over strength perhaps the most of all weapons. But also realistically longswords were really bad in one handed grip like most DnD characters use them, designed almost entirely for two-handed use. DnD is not designed to be realistic - rapiers for example relied on the strength a lot, despite the pop-culture stereotypes of them being light duelling weapons, and longbows required such an enormous amount of strength and stamina archeologists can identify archers by their arm bones.
It would have been so simpler if the designers had done away completely with the real-life names of the various weapons and made up their own names like a "Feather Sword" for a dex based weapon and a "Club Sword" for a str based version. This discussion would have then been totally moot.
Realistically yes, longswords relied on finesse over strength perhaps the most of all weapons. But also realistically longswords were really bad in one handed grip like most DnD characters use them, designed almost entirely for two-handed use. DnD is not designed to be realistic - rapiers for example relied on the strength a lot, despite the pop-culture stereotypes of them being light duelling weapons, and longbows required such an enormous amount of strength and stamina archeologists can identify archers by their arm bones.
Not just arm bones, the amount of strength need to use a longbow had a pronounced effect on an archer's entire skeleton.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Just as much as I think longbows should be allowed to add strength modifier to the damage roll.
Dexterity already have a ton of buffs and is probably the most powerful stat in the game. I don't think dex should get more of the strength domain, I think it's the other way around.
Imean when you think about it, the average drawback weight for a longbow is about 60 pounds, but there are indeed longbows that have a drawback weight much higher.
Take the green arrow's bow. It has a drawback weight of 125 pounds, which someone with -1 strength wouldn't be able to use efficiently. Or even hawkeye's bow, which has an uncanny drawback weight of 250 pounds.
Even if they make it a different weapon, you should actually be able to use strength when calculating the damage of a shortbow and/or longbow.
Well, by default a bow in older editions used your dex modifier for attack and got no stat bonuses to damage. In 3rd Edition they added "Mighty" composite bows, which were nonmagical bows that were built for different strength levels. You could add your strength bonus to the damage roll of the bow up to whatever ability score it was rated for, but if your strength was below that level you took a penalty to attack rolls. So a Might Str 16 Composite Longbow would allow you to add up to a +3 modifier to your damage rolls.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Could always go with the way 3.5 did it -- Finesse weapons can use dex to attack, but damage is always determined by strength. Trims down on Dex being a god stat and people dumping strength, though at that point you'd probably want to add some MAD to spellcasters.
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Dexterity's never been the most well-defined stat, to be honest, but at least most of what it does has no implication it makes you any better at aiming - that's what wisdom ought to do, since wisdom is the Perception stat (by similar logic, wisdom's description fits Initiative better than dexterity does). Dexterity being the stat for dnd bows is simply tradition, just like wisdom saves are traditionally the ones used for willpower-like effects, even though literally nowhere else in the rules does wisdom do anything remotely similar to willpower (none of the stats directly suggest they'd be good for willpower, but charisma is confidence and intelligence is rationality, so both have better arguments than wisdom). Ignoring balance for the moment, the most consistent rule would probably be that ranged weapon accuracy is wisdom, melee weapon accuracy is dexterity, and damage for both weapons is strength.
Dexterity's never been the most well-defined stat, to be honest, but at least most of what it does has no implication it makes you any better at aiming - that's what wisdom ought to do, since wisdom is the Perception stat
Aiming isn't mostly about perception (more about eye-hand coordination and reaction time), and the type of perception it does involve (awareness of distances, positions, speeds, etc) isn't particularly related to Perception and should probably be rolled against Dex anyway.
Dexterity's never been the most well-defined stat, to be honest, but at least most of what it does has no implication it makes you any better at aiming - that's what wisdom ought to do, since wisdom is the Perception stat (by similar logic, wisdom's description fits Initiative better than dexterity does).
You don't miss a shot in basketball because you can't perceive the hoop correctly. Aiming requires coordination and motor skills, which fits in perfectly with acrobatics, sleight of hand, etc.
Just as much as I think longbows should be allowed to add strength modifier to the damage roll.
Dexterity already have a ton of buffs and is probably the most powerful stat in the game. I don't think dex should get more of the strength domain, I think it's the other way around.
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
So as many people have already pointed out the example of Drizzt uses scimitars to dual weild, Icingdeath and Twinkle.
Secondly just no, dex is already SUPER strong in 5e, reflex save, AC, initiative and a host of skills. There doesn't need to be more weapons capable of finesse, the rapier already exists for getting a d8 weapon, it doesn't need to be expanded on. If you want the dual weilding artful fighter get scimitars, it's only 1 damage less on average
Realistically yes, longswords relied on finesse over strength perhaps the most of all weapons. But also realistically longswords were really bad in one handed grip like most DnD characters use them, designed almost entirely for two-handed use. DnD is not designed to be realistic - rapiers for example relied on the strength a lot, despite the pop-culture stereotypes of them being light duelling weapons, and longbows required such an enormous amount of strength and stamina archeologists can identify archers by their arm bones.
It would have been so simpler if the designers had done away completely with the real-life names of the various weapons and made up their own names like a "Feather Sword" for a dex based weapon and a "Club Sword" for a str based version. This discussion would have then been totally moot.
Not just arm bones, the amount of strength need to use a longbow had a pronounced effect on an archer's entire skeleton.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Just as much as I think longbows should be allowed to add strength modifier to the damage roll.
Dexterity already have a ton of buffs and is probably the most powerful stat in the game. I don't think dex should get more of the strength domain, I think it's the other way around.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
Dude that is actually an ingenious idea!
Imean when you think about it, the average drawback weight for a longbow is about 60 pounds, but there are indeed longbows that have a drawback weight much higher.
Take the green arrow's bow. It has a drawback weight of 125 pounds, which someone with -1 strength wouldn't be able to use efficiently. Or even hawkeye's bow, which has an uncanny drawback weight of 250 pounds.
Even if they make it a different weapon, you should actually be able to use strength when calculating the damage of a shortbow and/or longbow.
That’s actually how it worked in older editions of D&D.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Well, by default a bow in older editions used your dex modifier for attack and got no stat bonuses to damage. In 3rd Edition they added "Mighty" composite bows, which were nonmagical bows that were built for different strength levels. You could add your strength bonus to the damage roll of the bow up to whatever ability score it was rated for, but if your strength was below that level you took a penalty to attack rolls. So a Might Str 16 Composite Longbow would allow you to add up to a +3 modifier to your damage rolls.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
The weapon that Pirates used are called cutlesses (cutli?)
He/Him
Threads: Cult of Chaos, The Supreme Court of Sauce.
The First Archpriest of The Supreme Court of Sauce (now just a priest)
First member of the Chaos Council.
Click here if you are cool
Well, I'm sure that makes sense, because you still have to actually aim the weapon, so adding strength instead of dexterity to the attack roll could be a possibility. That being said, adding strength to damage is supposed to represent that your buffness makes you inflict more damage. As far as I'm aware, the +dex to damage with ranged weapons is probably to represent aiming to vital body parts such as the head, heart, or crotch (joke). I think that D&D 5e should have something similar, if not a bow that just uses strength for both damage and attack rolls. they could put it in a new sourcebook or maybe even an item players can find in a new adventure.
Either way, just think of how awesome a ranged barbarian would be!
https://www.dndbeyond.com/magic-items/1243170-heavy-longbow
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Huh.
but IDK why it's a magic item, it isn't really magical, per se.
Could always go with the way 3.5 did it -- Finesse weapons can use dex to attack, but damage is always determined by strength. Trims down on Dex being a god stat and people dumping strength, though at that point you'd probably want to add some MAD to spellcasters.
Because we cannot yet make homebrewed nonmagical items.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Dexterity's never been the most well-defined stat, to be honest, but at least most of what it does has no implication it makes you any better at aiming - that's what wisdom ought to do, since wisdom is the Perception stat (by similar logic, wisdom's description fits Initiative better than dexterity does). Dexterity being the stat for dnd bows is simply tradition, just like wisdom saves are traditionally the ones used for willpower-like effects, even though literally nowhere else in the rules does wisdom do anything remotely similar to willpower (none of the stats directly suggest they'd be good for willpower, but charisma is confidence and intelligence is rationality, so both have better arguments than wisdom). Ignoring balance for the moment, the most consistent rule would probably be that ranged weapon accuracy is wisdom, melee weapon accuracy is dexterity, and damage for both weapons is strength.
Aiming isn't mostly about perception (more about eye-hand coordination and reaction time), and the type of perception it does involve (awareness of distances, positions, speeds, etc) isn't particularly related to Perception and should probably be rolled against Dex anyway.
You don't miss a shot in basketball because you can't perceive the hoop correctly. Aiming requires coordination and motor skills, which fits in perfectly with acrobatics, sleight of hand, etc.
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
Finesse weapons can be used as strength weapons.
Come participate in the Competition of the Finest Brews, Edition XXVIII?
My homebrew stuff:
Spells, Monsters, Magic Items, Feats, Subclasses.
I am an Archfey, but nobody seems to notice.
Extended Signature
I believe that bow is from Dungeon of the Mad Mage and is not homebrew
That particular version is homebrew, whether or not there's a non-homebrew from DoMM.