Dex is already a god stat and useful to everyone. It doesn't need even more benefits.
If anything, I'd give a minimum strength requirement to more things like longbows. Still works off dex, but needs str 11 to use much like some armours.
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.
Well, TBH the stats are kind of confusing. It would certainly make sense that wisdom, since it governs perception, would be used for aim instead of dexterity which is supposed to measure agility. But If you've ever aimed a bow, you know that it isn't too hard to get it to point to the target. The real problem is keeping your hand steady, and timing letting go of the bowstring at the right time. Keeping a steady hand isn't related to wisdom, and nor is timing. So dexterity was the only real choice.
And as for all melee using dex to attack, that makes no sense. You don't see people trying to flourish their attacks with a 6 foot long, one foot wide greatsword. You just see them hitting things as hard as possible.
Lastly, the reason all these stats are wonky is most certainly because the creators know that It's difficult to make all your stats good without being horribly ineffective. A fighter can't afford to have a good strength, dexterity, constitution, and wisdom score.
EDIT: Pantagruel666 Basically said the exact same thing as I did in the first paragraph so you can just ignore that. Or not, I don't care.
If you want to talk about realism, melee attacks should actually be a combination of strength and dexterity, since you don't just flail wildly with a sword and hope that you hit something vital. Even with a warhammer or mace, you need to aim for vulnerable points in the opponent's armor- just smacking them on the breastplate isn't going to accomplish much besides annoying them and making your arm tired. And even with a dirk, the amount of power you can put behind your blow is important.
But D&D only uses a single stat for any given action, so we have our overly-simplified combat.
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.
fwiw... PHB p78, in the Monk section, half way down reads...
"Certain monasteries use specialized forms of the Monk weapons. For example you might use a Club that is 2 lengths of wood connected by a chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a Monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in Chapter 5, Equipment"
5e encourages "flavor text". Arabian scimitar, cavalry sabre, pirate cutlass, jungle machete, Egyptian khopesh, Japanese wakizashi ... all the same animal in 5e.
If you look at the biggest baddest weapons in 5e, they do 2d6 or 1d12 damage. Does it seem more appropriate for 2 swords to do d6, or d8 each?
or Just con your DM into letting you use the d8 scimitars from 2e. :)
If you want to talk about realism, melee attacks should actually be a combination of strength and dexterity, since you don't just flail wildly with a sword and hope that you hit something vital. Even with a warhammer or mace, you need to aim for vulnerable points in the opponent's armor- just smacking them on the breastplate isn't going to accomplish much besides annoying them and making your arm tired. And even with a dirk, the amount of power you can put behind your blow is important.
But D&D only uses a single stat for any given action, so we have our overly-simplified combat.
I actually think it would be a better system if actions took a combination of stats to be effective. For instance as you mention, strength and dexterity working together to form attack precision and attack damage etc.
I actually think it would be a better system if actions took a combination of stats to be effective. For instance as you mention, strength and dexterity working together to form attack precision and attack damage etc.
You should try Iron Kingdoms or Warhammer RPGs then.
Finesse. Yes definitely. Especially weilding two handed. If I were to dm i would rule that if you use it two handed you have the finesse stat.
Light? Not so much. Sure it isn't that heavy a weapon. But compare it to a dagger. It is.
Longswords shouldn't be duel weilded. Not normally, it makes sense with a dagger or something in the off-hand. So if you took the feat. Yeah. My ideal is my ranger with longsword, uses his off hand to throw darts and daggers.
Conclusion, a longsword suits two handed best, two handed it can be a hell of a lot more finesseful then a shortsword, one of the most finesseful weapon types out there. Just need to watch some hema sparring to see that.
I'll also add. That a greatsword is just a bigger longsword that definitely needs strength. Whether it heavier wide blade or longer
Now to the other issue. Rapiers. Giving longsword finesse makes rapiers just worse off weapons. So solutions.
A: one handed longsword becomes d6(and as said, maybe make it str only). As it basically used as a short sword with two handed option and harder to duel weild. Also adding the logic that taking a hand off such a weapon, loses it's potential making it harder to handle. If you ever hold one, or a larp one, even a bastardsword, you will see this. Longer handle/blade= less ease.
B: longswords being harder to have proficency with. Rogues and Bards don't get them. Probably the meaner option.
If strength is a measure of bodily power and dexterity is a measure of agility, reflexes, balance, poise, then I'd say, while strength would apply to the weight of weapon that could be wielded before penalties begin to apply, that dexterity modifiers should apply to all to-hit rolls.
High strength could also allow higher strength bows to be used by ranged combatants so as to allow them to shoot further.
If strength is a measure of bodily power and dexterity is a measure of agility, reflexes, balance, poise, then I'd say, while strength would apply to the weight of weapon that could be wielded before penalties begin to apply, that dexterity modifiers should apply to all to-hit rolls.
High strength could also allow higher strength bows to be used by ranged combatants so as to allow them to shoot further.
If strength is a measure of bodily power and dexterity is a measure of agility, reflexes, balance, poise, then I'd say, while strength would apply to the weight of weapon that could be wielded before penalties begin to apply, that dexterity modifiers should apply to all to-hit rolls.
High strength could also allow higher strength bows to be used by ranged combatants so as to allow them to shoot further.
Finesse. Yes definitely. Especially weilding two handed. If I were to dm i would rule that if you use it two handed you have the finesse stat.
Why? Longswords were all about power. There's never been anything finesse about longsword use. You use two hands so you can hit harder to penetrate armor.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Actually, a two-handed grip on a sword added precision and leverage so that you could strike more easily at the less-protected parts of your enemy. You really couldn't just bash your way through armor with a sword.
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.
Actually, a two-handed grip on a sword added precision and leverage so that you could strike more easily at the less-protected parts of your enemy. You really couldn't just bash your way through armor with a sword.
Realistically, there are zero weapons where you can get away with either pure dexterity or pure strength: you need strength to move fast, and you want excess strength for precision, but you also most certainly want reaction time and accuracy. Modern fencing weapons are lighter than any real sword and are used in a highly artificial way, but fencers most certainly do weight training, and on the other hand, being clumsy with an axe is a good way to hurt yourself.
However, this is a game, and has traditions such as the weak but nimble character vs the slow hulking brute, which is a far more interesting encounter than the weak and slow character vs the fast and strong character...
Actually, a two-handed grip on a sword added precision and leverage so that you could strike more easily at the less-protected parts of your enemy. You really couldn't just bash your way through armor with a sword.
Realistically, there are zero weapons where you can get away with either pure dexterity or pure strength: you need strength to move fast, and you want excess strength for precision, but you also most certainly want reaction time and accuracy. Modern fencing weapons are lighter than any real sword and are used in a highly artificial way, but fencers most certainly do weight training, and on the other hand, being clumsy with an axe is a good way to hurt yourself.
However, this is a game, and has traditions such as the weak but nimble character vs the slow hulking brute, which is a far more interesting encounter than the weak and slow character vs the fast and strong character...
Merry Christmas!
Oddly a nimble character with 8 str and 20 dex can still get +5 damage (6 more with a short sword than with a still light and balanced club) while a hulking brute with 20 str and 8 dex can still get +5 to hit [against opponents including nimble characters and will o wisps...] despite a sub-average level of ability with "Physical agility, reflexes, balance, [and] poise".
If strength is a measure of bodily power and dexterity is a measure of agility, reflexes, balance, poise, then I'd say, while strength would apply to the weight of weapon that could be wielded before penalties begin to apply, that dexterity modifiers should apply to all to-hit rolls.
High strength could also allow higher strength bows to be used by ranged combatants so as to allow them to shoot further.
On consideration that dexterity has enabled you to hit, strength could widely be applied to maximise damage.
It would be quite a change for D&D to start using two ability scores simultaneously for determining attack modifiers. That would probably also require redoing how armor works so that doesn't just add a flat modifier to your odds of being struck by an attack.
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.
I picked no.
Dex is already a god stat and useful to everyone. It doesn't need even more benefits.
If anything, I'd give a minimum strength requirement to more things like longbows. Still works off dex, but needs str 11 to use much like some armours.
Wait, It was Homebrew?
I could have sworn it was official content. I didn't see anything that stated that It was homebrew.
Well, TBH the stats are kind of confusing. It would certainly make sense that wisdom, since it governs perception, would be used for aim instead of dexterity which is supposed to measure agility. But If you've ever aimed a bow, you know that it isn't too hard to get it to point to the target. The real problem is keeping your hand steady, and timing letting go of the bowstring at the right time. Keeping a steady hand isn't related to wisdom, and nor is timing. So dexterity was the only real choice.
And as for all melee using dex to attack, that makes no sense. You don't see people trying to flourish their attacks with a 6 foot long, one foot wide greatsword. You just see them hitting things as hard as possible.
Lastly, the reason all these stats are wonky is most certainly because the creators know that It's difficult to make all your stats good without being horribly ineffective. A fighter can't afford to have a good strength, dexterity, constitution, and wisdom score.
EDIT: Pantagruel666 Basically said the exact same thing as I did in the first paragraph so you can just ignore that. Or not, I don't care.
If you want to talk about realism, melee attacks should actually be a combination of strength and dexterity, since you don't just flail wildly with a sword and hope that you hit something vital. Even with a warhammer or mace, you need to aim for vulnerable points in the opponent's armor- just smacking them on the breastplate isn't going to accomplish much besides annoying them and making your arm tired. And even with a dirk, the amount of power you can put behind your blow is important.
But D&D only uses a single stat for any given action, so we have our overly-simplified combat.
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.
Yes, that is homebrewed, one of mine.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
fwiw... PHB p78, in the Monk section, half way down reads...
"Certain monasteries use specialized forms of the Monk weapons. For example you might use a Club that is 2 lengths of wood connected by a chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a Monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in Chapter 5, Equipment"
5e encourages "flavor text". Arabian scimitar, cavalry sabre, pirate cutlass, jungle machete, Egyptian khopesh, Japanese wakizashi ... all the same animal in 5e.
If you look at the biggest baddest weapons in 5e, they do 2d6 or 1d12 damage. Does it seem more appropriate for 2 swords to do d6, or d8 each?
or Just con your DM into letting you use the d8 scimitars from 2e. :)
I actually think it would be a better system if actions took a combination of stats to be effective. For instance as you mention, strength and dexterity working together to form attack precision and attack damage etc.
Altrazin Aghanes - Wizard/Fighter
Varpulis Windhowl - Fighter
Skolson Demjon - Cleric/Fighter
You should try Iron Kingdoms or Warhammer RPGs then.
Finesse. Yes definitely. Especially weilding two handed. If I were to dm i would rule that if you use it two handed you have the finesse stat.
Light? Not so much. Sure it isn't that heavy a weapon. But compare it to a dagger. It is.
Longswords shouldn't be duel weilded. Not normally, it makes sense with a dagger or something in the off-hand. So if you took the feat. Yeah. My ideal is my ranger with longsword, uses his off hand to throw darts and daggers.
Conclusion, a longsword suits two handed best, two handed it can be a hell of a lot more finesseful then a shortsword, one of the most finesseful weapon types out there. Just need to watch some hema sparring to see that.
I'll also add. That a greatsword is just a bigger longsword that definitely needs strength. Whether it heavier wide blade or longer
Now to the other issue. Rapiers. Giving longsword finesse makes rapiers just worse off weapons. So solutions.
A: one handed longsword becomes d6(and as said, maybe make it str only). As it basically used as a short sword with two handed option and harder to duel weild. Also adding the logic that taking a hand off such a weapon, loses it's potential making it harder to handle. If you ever hold one, or a larp one, even a bastardsword, you will see this. Longer handle/blade= less ease.
B: longswords being harder to have proficency with. Rogues and Bards don't get them. Probably the meaner option.
If strength is a measure of bodily power and dexterity is a measure of agility, reflexes, balance, poise, then I'd say, while strength would apply to the weight of weapon that could be wielded before penalties begin to apply, that dexterity modifiers should apply to all to-hit rolls.
High strength could also allow higher strength bows to be used by ranged combatants so as to allow them to shoot further.
We aren't playing pathfinder here.
nor hopscotch or cluedo!
Why? Longswords were all about power. There's never been anything finesse about longsword use. You use two hands so you can hit harder to penetrate armor.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
Actually, a two-handed grip on a sword added precision and leverage so that you could strike more easily at the less-protected parts of your enemy. You really couldn't just bash your way through armor with a sword.
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.
Realistically, there are zero weapons where you can get away with either pure dexterity or pure strength: you need strength to move fast, and you want excess strength for precision, but you also most certainly want reaction time and accuracy. Modern fencing weapons are lighter than any real sword and are used in a highly artificial way, but fencers most certainly do weight training, and on the other hand, being clumsy with an axe is a good way to hurt yourself.
However, this is a game, and has traditions such as the weak but nimble character vs the slow hulking brute, which is a far more interesting encounter than the weak and slow character vs the fast and strong character...
Merry Christmas!
Oddly a nimble character with 8 str and 20 dex can still get +5 damage (6 more with a short sword than with a still light and balanced club) while a hulking brute with 20 str and 8 dex can still get +5 to hit [against opponents including nimble characters and will o wisps...] despite a sub-average level of ability with "Physical agility, reflexes, balance, [and] poise".
More realistically:
On consideration that dexterity has enabled you to hit, strength could widely be applied to maximise damage.
It's what most non-D&D game systems do, but it's a big system rebalance and should probably go along with converting armor into damage reduction.
A rebalance could come with 6e.
It could acknowledge that an 18 str, 18 dex fighter would typically have a higher to hit potential than a 20 str, 8 dex "hulking brute".
It would be quite a change for D&D to start using two ability scores simultaneously for determining attack modifiers. That would probably also require redoing how armor works so that doesn't just add a flat modifier to your odds of being struck by an attack.
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.
Currently, we have two abilities that can govern both to hit and damage. Alternatively, we could consistently use dex to hit and str to damage.