Post/Author/DateTime	Post
SomeNinja 11-23-04, 03:54 PM	Has anyone else thought that using Dex for attack rolls is a more realistic idea? When I play we use Dex for attack rolls, and strength for damage.
SearcherOmega 11-23-04, 03:59 PM	I believe STR to attack rolls is supposed to represent: 1) Ability to pierce armor 2) Ability to keep weapon 'level' and balanced while striking. However, I hope you're aware of the Weapon Finesse feat, which makes light weapons (plus rapiers and others) able to be used with DEX to hit rather than STR. IE: It makes sense for a rapier to hit better with DEX, but a greatsword? "You gracefully heave the hulking blade and nimbly crush the gnoll's skull..."
olliehighzero 11-23-04, 04:01 PM	perhaps dex should be used in a weapon that requires a high level of...manual dexterity, such as a nunchaku. ERRATA! 0.02$ ollie
allenchan 11-23-04, 04:02 PM	most armor is magical force, armor, or natural armor, and its strength that you need to rip through that. you could always use half your str half your dex, or soemthing. but they try to keep the mechanics simple.
Fixxxer 11-23-04, 04:19 PM	I believe STR to attack rolls is supposed to represent: 1) Ability to pierce armor 2) Ability to keep weapon 'level' and balanced while striking. I've always believed that using STR for attack rolls was supposed to represent your ability to batter through your opponent's defenses, to keep your strike true, despite your opponent trying to deflect it and (as you said) punching through armor or into the joints of armor. There's a feat in the PHB that allows you to use your DEX for attack rolls (with certain weapons). The reason there is a feat for this intead of an option is that anyone can pick up a stick and use it to bash through huis opponent, like a club...but not everyone can pick up a stick and use it in the fashion of an escrima stick. That takes training.
Sensei Gith 11-23-04, 10:18 PM	I've had no balance problems with giving weapon finesse out for free. The reason there is a feat for this intead of an option is that anyone can pick up a stick and use it to bash through huis opponent, like a club...but not everyone can pick up a stick and use it in the fashion of an escrima stick. That takes training. A club is a balanced and powerful weapon (for a simple one). It is no more powerful if the wielder is using "finesse". Describing it as turning into an escrima stick ignores the skill of the character using it with their strength score.
AnARiOn wHiTeFiRe 11-24-04, 01:31 AM	Just think which attributes each ability affects.... str affects only attack and damage rolls(ok and carrying limits and some skills) whereas dex affects atk rolls(if using w.finesse),initiative,AC,Ref saves (and hide and msilently), so in my opinion its a much more useful ability than str(also note the feats u can get for high dex-two weapon fighting,whirlwind attack etc...)
Wil Harvey 11-24-04, 03:40 AM	Someone could make a great case for having strength affect attack rolls and the guy next to him could make just as great of a case saying dexterity should affect attack rolls. What it comes down to is balance. Like has been mentioned, if dex is used for attack rolls, suddenly it's being used for way too many things: melee attack rolls, ranged attack rolls, initiative, reflex saves, armor class, and some very good skills. Strength would then be used for damage and some skills that are pretty easily made useless by cheap, mid-level magic. It's just not balanced. But, of course, it's your game, so do with it whatever makes you comfortable and whatever makes you enjoy the game more.
Asi the red 11-24-04, 04:19 AM	Hey ya'. Besides balance issues, Str. makes sense for attack rolls. Think about it. Pick up a wooden baseball bat and try to swing it in a swordlike fashion, attempting to put enough force behind it to hurt someone if you hit them with it. Now, are you being forceful, or dexterous? Is it the strength of your arms and shoulders that lets you pick a spot, swing the bat and hit it, or is it your agility and nimbleness? Can you put enough speed into the swing to not have the blow deflected by your opponent's weapon, or off his shield? Does that speed come from raw strength, or from agility? For some weapons, like small light weapons and weapons made to take advantage of speed instead of strength, it's agility over power. There are a few stock weapons that I could see letting Finesse apply to, mostly ones that require alot of precision, spears and the like, but anything that needs to be swung and relies on impact over placement and isn't something that anyone can use should probably use str.
Watchman 11-24-04, 04:57 AM	A good fighter is at least reasonably strong, just so that at the very least he or she can land blows of any force. Being very strong certainly doesn't hurt any - if you happen to be, all the better for you. But you sure as heck are totally screwed if you are CLUMSY. Unccordinated. Slow. All the strenght in the world isn't going to do you the least bit of good against even a semi-skilled opponent you can't hit and who likely guts you while you're still swinging and you'll first realize something's wrong when you're drowning in your own blood or watch your sword arm fly off or whatever. Thus far all the martial arts that even pretend to have anything to do with fighting I've even read about have specifically stressed technique, precision and coordination nevemrind speed (though that comes more or less on its own as a byproduct of the training). This is not to say that physical conditioning is neglected, far from it - but then swinging a three-kilo longsword for two hours is a pretty good workout to begin with - but the emphasis is clearly on proper application of force over havig lots and lots of it. And the characteristics that relate to applying strenght in a precise, controlled fashion at high speeds are in D&D under the heading "Dexterity". Now, one has to make allowances for the oddities of the D&D game system, such as the comparative impossibility of raising your beginning stats (barring abuse of Wish spells and the like even a 20th-level superhero will have gained no more than FIVE measly points over his entire career...), patently ridiculous as it is. Personally I rather like the approach Conan D20 uses - finesseable weapons can be used with Dex bonus without any further ado, and use different rulers against armor from nonfinesseable weapons (the latter add the wielder's Str bonus to the weapon's Armor Piercing rating and if the total is greater than the armor's total Damage Reduction (no AC there) the DR is bluntly halved - finesses ignore armor completely if the attack roll beats the defense score by at least the DR value and otherwise will have to deal with the full amount). Finesse weapons can still try to punch through armors normally if the wielder so desires, and several "heavy" weapons can be Finessed under certain conditions - for example a bastard sword used with two hands, which probably has a better bet at going through heavy armor that way. As for regular D&D, I'd suggest making Finesse an "automatic" Feat with the caveat that you must be proficient with any Finesseable weapon you wish to wield as such; and slapping any negative Dex modifiers as a straight penalty to attack rolls on the grounds that clumsy mammoths are going to have a wee bit of trouble connecting.
angryman 11-24-04, 10:14 AM	If DEX were used for "to hit" then it would be too valuable. It would cover AC, ref saves, vital skills, initiative and ranged and melee to hit...
Wil Harvey 11-24-04, 12:11 PM	Think about it. Pick up a wooden baseball bat and try to swing it in a swordlike fashion, attempting to put enough force behind it to hurt someone if you hit them with it. Now, are you being forceful, or dexterous? Is it the strength of your arms and shoulders that lets you pick a spot, swing the bat and hit it, or is it your agility and nimbleness? Can you put enough speed into the swing to not have the blow deflected by your opponent's weapon, or off his shield? Does that speed come from raw strength, or from agility? Ok. Now try hitting a baseball while swinging with all of your strength. When you're trying to hit someone with a weapon, you're not just trying to hit them. You're trying to hit them where it hurts. You're trying to find the chink in their armor, you're trying to connect with their vital points as they try and avoid you. In a perfectly realistic system, I think both dexterity and strength would factor into one's ability to hit with a melee weapon. You have to dextrous enough to actually hit your opponent in spots worth hitting an opponent, but you have to be strong enough to ensure your blow isn't easily deflected and to be capable of pushing your way through armor or natural armor. But that's getting way too complicated for D&D.
Tony Vargas 11-24-04, 12:50 PM	Has anyone else thought that using Dex for attack rolls is a more realistic idea? Lots of folks have thought of that, going way back. Several games that hit the market within a few years of OD&D did this or something like it. Gama World 1st Ed, a TSR game which used a system /very/ similar to D&D, used DEX for attack rolls (but not AC, IIRC). Hero System uses DEX for attack rolls. RuneQuest went one better and let any stat that might help contribute to your attack % - STR, DEX, INT & 'Power' (mystical connectedness to the universe) all improved your chance to hit. However, in 3E D&D, the relative worth of characteristics would be thrown out of balance. DEX already adds to AC, ranged attack, initiative, REF saves, and a lot of very important skills and checks. It's arguably and overpowered stat as it is. And it's already /possible/ to add it to some melee attacks, as well. Taking all melee attacks away from STR and giving them to DEX certainly overpowers DEX, and leave STR with only carrying capacity and melee/thrown damage...
Origin 11-24-04, 05:15 PM	I do understand that yes, dex is an overpowered stat, but a ranger should not be forced to divide his best attribute points between the two (I play with simple gaining 76 attribute points to choose from). Even if you don't play the way I do, it should be adding his next best roll to wisdom, not strength. I think it should depend (about attack and damage rolls) if you are a fighter or a ranger, or any other class that is mainly melee. You only need 12 dex if you are a fighter, as you are very likely to be using fullplate (which provides 1 max dex bonus). Then use a composite bow, and you are already great. And chances are you won't be using a small weapon, unless you are two-weapon fighting. So, your just as good as a Ranger (about) that has 12 str (with what I said earlier applying). Strength is used for many checks (not skills) such as bashing down a door, or tightening a rope (not tying it). Those checks are quite often used, and if your a fighter, you really don't need a lot of those hide, spot, and move silently skills. If your a ranger, you will much more often need those skills, but you won't be bashing down steel doors anytime soon. So, yes, it's true, dexterity is in a way more powerful, but so is strength, so you really can't complain. I still say, if your a ranger, or a rogue, maybe a bard (at players choice), you should use dex as all of the attacking modifiers. Or is your a fighter, stay like that. It doesn't really matter.
Aracor 11-24-04, 05:45 PM	I agree. But if you want to use finesse to hit, take the Weapon Finesse feat. There's no real problem with the feat now that you don't have to choose a specific weapon to use it with. ~Aracor
Watchman 11-24-04, 05:49 PM	Actually owning RQ, I'd just point out it only counted Str bonus (twice, I recall) and Dex for the category of stat bonus that affects attack actions. The bonus-type that affected (among others) parry skills and dodging mostly worked on Dex, and counted the character's Size stat as a negative penalty. On the other hand, HP were the average of Siz and Con and damage bonuses were calculated from Siz and Str... It's not actually as complicated as it sounds. However, on the whole the RQ combat system isn't all that better than D&D's - it's rather better in some areas, but has its share of serious shortcomings. I'm rather in love with the system GURPS uses. It has its flaws - especially when dealing with creatures of a size markedly different from the human - but on the whole it's about the best I've seen thus far. Anyway, if you wish to increase the role of Dex in D&D combat you might try using an average of Str and Dex bonuses for attack rolls (bar Finesse, naturally) - that way both of them are important, as well they should be.
Nom 11-24-04, 06:54 PM	I do understand that yes, dex is an overpowered stat, but a ranger should not be forced to divide his best attribute points between the two (I play with simple gaining 76 attribute points to choose from). Even if you don't play the way I do, it should be adding his next best roll to wisdom, not strength. I think it should depend (about attack and damage rolls) if you are a fighter or a ranger, or any other class that is mainly melee.A ranger has a choice. If he goes heavy melee, he wants Str, with as much Dex as he can afford for AC, skills, Ref. If he goes light melee or archery (generally preferred options), he wants Dex, with enough Str to keep up carrying capacity. Your complaint seems to be based on the idea that the ranger is somehow uniquely hampered by "multiple attribute dependency" (MAD). He's not. Paladins and monks are far more restricted than rangers. Note that Str is not just brute force, it's the ability to bring your muscles into play, typically in athletic situations. You'll notice that the 'athletic' skills - Climb, Swim and Jump - are all Str based. In fact, it would be reasonable to say that brute force is included in Str because it doesn't fit anywhere else. Dex is reflexes and finesse, two rather different abilities lumped into one package.
Sensei Gith 11-24-04, 08:09 PM	Several people have claimed that giving attack rolls to dexterity would overpower it by far. This ignores two things: first, the existance of the weapon finesse feat (why no complain about that if it's that broken?) and second, damage. Attack rolls are just a way to deal damage. As long as strength can also be used for attack rolls it will be far more effective offensively than strength. At worst, letting characters use dexterity is one free feat for about half the classes.
allenchan 11-24-04, 08:36 PM	Several people have claimed that giving attack rolls to dexterity would overpower it by far. This ignores two things: first, the existance of the weapon finesse feat (why no complain about that if it's that broken?) and second, damage. Attack rolls are just a way to deal damage. As long as strength can also be used for attack rolls it will be far more effective offensively than strength. At worst, letting characters use dexterity is one free feat for about half the classes. Because its only for light weapons. And its one feat that they should be forced to spend. :P
Ranger REG 11-25-04, 01:38 AM	I do understand that yes, dex is an overpowered stat, but a ranger should not be forced to divide his best attribute points between the two (I play with simple gaining 76 attribute points to choose from). Even if you don't play the way I do, it should be adding his next best roll to wisdom, not strength. I think it should depend (about attack and damage rolls) if you are a fighter or a ranger, or any other class that is mainly melee. The same can be argued for Paladin, who need Str to inflict greater damage with his sword, Cha to "scare" undead and any unholy terrors, and Wis to cast divine spells. You only need 12 dex if you are a fighter, as you are very likely to be using fullplate (which provides 1 max dex bonus). Then use a composite bow, and you are already great. And chances are you won't be using a small weapon, unless you are two-weapon fighting. So, your just as good as a Ranger (about) that has 12 str (with what I said earlier applying). Combat-wise, fighters excel. But rangers have other abilities. Strength is used for many checks (not skills) such as bashing down a door, or tightening a rope (not tying it). Those checks are quite often used, and if your a fighter, you really don't need a lot of those hide, spot, and move silently skills. If your a ranger, you will much more often need those skills, but you won't be bashing down steel doors anytime soon. Well, if this discussion takes place when we're using the Nonweapon Proficiency System of 2nd Edition, I would agree with you, since this system allow you to rely heavily -- emphasis on heavily -- particular attribute (or abilities). But thanks to 3e and the new Skill System, you can develop and improve your skills, even if you're a natural klutz. As for the often-used Str-based checks, they're used if called upon. But Dex has passive use, especially when it comes to improving your Armor Class or trying to succeed on a Reflex saving throw. I mean it's always on, you don't need to call upon, unless you choose to not to use it of your own volition. So, yes, it's true, dexterity is in a way more powerful, but so is strength, so you really can't complain. I still say, if your a ranger, or a rogue, maybe a bard (at players choice), you should use dex as all of the attacking modifiers. Or is your a fighter, stay like that. It doesn't really matter. But what you're asking is to deny fighter's strength (no pun intended) in order to give dextrous-oriented characters a much greater edge. IOW, you want to give rangers the edge at the expense of the fighter's.
Dunelord 11-25-04, 03:39 AM	The problem dex to hit is that it is covering the same ground as base attack. It covers you skill with hitting someone in a fairly meaningful way.
Failut 11-25-04, 04:08 AM	Because its only for light weapons. And its one feat that they should be forced to spend. :P My only problem with Weapon Finess is that you have to have a +1 BaB to get it. This makes a first lvl rogue (who is able to back stab for extra damage, proving that he does know how to use his weapon to it's utmost) unable to get it as a feat. I view it as a free feat for combat classes who normaly use light weapons as their main source of damage (a.k.a. Rogues and such). For everyone else the feat is as normal.
Ranger REG 11-27-04, 02:35 AM	If you're going to give that Weapon Finesse as a 1st-level class feature for the rogue, I'd limit it to only light weapons and only when wearing light or no armor. If the rogue want to Finesse a rapier, he'll have to acquire the normal feat.
Wil Harvey 11-27-04, 04:10 PM	My only problem with Weapon Finess is that you have to have a +1 BaB to get it. This makes a first lvl rogue (who is able to back stab for extra damage, proving that he does know how to use his weapon to it's utmost) unable to get it as a feat. I view it as a free feat for combat classes who normaly use light weapons as their main source of damage (a.k.a. Rogues and such). For everyone else the feat is as normal. You're looking at it wrong. Sneak attack doesn't mean the rogue knows how to use his weapon any better, or to its utmost, if you will. It means he is better able to strike vital spots. The weapon skill doesn't go up per se, but when his opponent can't defend himself as well as normal, the rogue can use his weapon to hit a vital point. If you give rogues weapon finesse at a level they're not even capable of getting it at normally, you're giving them a pretty sizable low-level benefit. Something to keep in mind.
Cune 11-27-04, 07:30 PM	Do you mean giving Rogues the Feat for free, or just without the +1 BAB prerequesite? The later seems for me more a flavor Question. I see my personal Combat Role for L1 in protecting the Wizards back. At least as long Chars Intelligence isn't far away from average. Nothing speaks against an 6 Int Half Orc L1 feeling like an unstoppable Combat Machine, but Rogues (at least mine) have at least average Int.
Quarterstaff 11-28-04, 02:18 PM	dunelord just pointed out the fact of why you dont use dex because bab dos that that determins how you aim with all weopons including ranged dex is how steady you are not how acurate you are
Sensei Gith 11-28-04, 10:58 PM	BAB is skill, not talent. There are countless ways in D&D for acquired skill to augment natural talent. Claiming that BAB is the sole source of accuracy and combat dexterity is like claiming that since tumble ranks represent how good you are at tumbling, dexterity should be cut out of the picture.
Dunelord 11-28-04, 11:34 PM	BAB is skill, not talent. There are countless ways in D&D for acquired skill to augment natural talent. Claiming that BAB is the sole source of accuracy and combat dexterity is like claiming that since tumble ranks represent how good you are at tumbling, dexterity should be cut out of the picture. I don't think anyone here is claiming that they are the same thing, simply that they go over a lot of the same ground, i.e. the abilty to hit a spot that is going to allow damage to be done. Yes dexterity does represent natural talent and base attack does represent skill gained from experince. As to the overpowering issue the idea isn't that allowing the switch in exchange for a feat isn't overpowering, but giving the feat for free would seem to be at first glance. Doing this wouldn't be as bad as just flat out useing dex to hit and not useing str to hit at all.
ILL34GL3 11-29-04, 07:37 PM	My only problem with Weapon Finess is that you have to have a +1 BaB to get it. This makes a first lvl rogue (who is able to back stab for extra damage, proving that he does know how to use his weapon to it's utmost) unable to get it as a feat. I view it as a free feat for combat classes who normaly use light weapons as their main source of damage (a.k.a. Rogues and such). For everyone else the feat is as normal. I think the rogue's sneak attack bonus proves he can make a very effective strike to vital areas when the victim is unaware of his presence or can't give his full attention to defending himself. Has nothing to do with ability with a particular weapon. Therefore rogue still should have to acquire the weapon finesse feat. As for always using dex to determine attack bonus: Just because an 8 year old is fast(dexterity) enough to hit me with a fist doesn't mean it'll do any appreciable damage. However if a heavyweight boxer were to a swing at me, he could probably power(strength) through my hands and arms as I try to defend myself and land a devastating blow. Hope these examples make my point clear.
Bane 11-30-04, 11:57 AM	My brother has incredible dexterity. He's in fencing, and he's pretty good for the amount of training he's had. Give us each a foil, and he could take me to pieces. I have 50+ pounds on my brother. This translates into greater strength and constitution. Put us in a wrestling match, and things are quite different, simply because I can soak his blows easier than he can soak mine, despite the fact that he has some training in wrestling too. Which one of us would be better in a fight? It entirely depends on the context of the fight. Overall, I would say that we're just about equal, and the balance shifts based on circumstances. Pretty good metaphor for how all of the classes are balanced, isn't it?
firewalker 11-30-04, 03:45 PM	As to the RQ Att. Bonus I remember the following ingrediences STR, DEX/2, INT. But anyway, to the dex vs. str discussion. This is my IRL impression as a martial artist of 7-8 years. With strength you can force your hit through the defence, parrying weapons, armor etc. It makes damage because of the force. With dex, or agility, you use your skill to do the exact same. In my experiance no-forcefull way of inflicting damage is much more leathal. The reason for this is that you are not striking you opponent but you are cutting. Try it next time you are cutting bread, one strike - only using our strength and one cut. Offcause you could also try hitting meat (from a dead animal), a bundle of straw or a water melon (only for the display) In regard to D&D I think the core rules are ok. But would improve if you could use dex to your to hit roll, on all weapon. This will give D&D another problem stamina/ability to wield the weapon. Theirfore don´t change notthing it works as it is! Sorry for any misspelling etc.
Dunelord 11-30-04, 08:39 PM	I think you can make a decent case for any stat to be the basis of to hit. Con could reprsent that you have enough endurance to keep swinging with the same force, Int or Wis to know where to hit, and okay I don't really see one for Cha. A big part of it is balance, and another is rounding off to the nearist accurate stat. Stronger people tend to be able to ignore or overcome more defeneces in real life, and in the game it makes the stat worth having. If either dex or str can be used to hit why not take the one that adds to AC, reflex saves, and more skills? Other then damage what good would str do? When it comes to damage str is already a close to underpowered. There are a ton of ways to add to damage - magic weapons, power attack, weapon spec/greater weapon spec, acrane strike, sneak attack, ranger bonus, and smite just to name a few.
VerosFortis 12-01-04, 12:54 AM	I think strength is the right choice. I am a fairly big bloke. 6'3" and well built. I own a long sword and to hold it in one hand takes a fair bit of strength. To keep it steady and aim it certainly requires more strength than dex. You can be as dexterous as you like but if you’re not reasonably strong you couldn’t properly lift aim and use a long sword / great sword / etc. And I really don’t see dex as being as important as strength when your throwing around a big axe :). The argument that something with high dex could take apart something that was un-coordinated is a good one BUT it is exactly why dex is added to AC. This bonus represents how hard you are to hit. I do agree however that a few weapons differ ie the rapier. And possibly you shouldn’t need to take a feat to use dex instead with these weapons... maybe it should be automatic.
ILL34GL3 12-01-04, 05:03 AM	I'm seeing people give examples of martial arts and fencing prowess as examples supporting dex being used to determine attack bonuses. I agree. However martial arts and fencing require training, which is what the weapon finesse feat represents. Anyone who tries to justify dex determined attack bonus sans weapon finesse is just a munchkin.
Sensei Gith 12-01-04, 04:44 PM	I'm seeing people give examples of martial arts and fencing prowess as examples supporting dex being used to determine attack bonuses. I agree. However martial arts and fencing require training, which is what the weapon finesse feat represents. Any sort of combat requires training. "Dextrous" combat is no exception. I could still, with no training and a probable strength penalty, score more hits on a target in melee than a clumsier but otherwise identical person. Anyone who tries to justify dex determined attack bonus sans weapon finesse is just a munchkin. Did the boards eat the rest of your post or was that supposed to be uselessly inflammaory? Other then damage what good would str do? For a sorcerer, other than spellcasting, what good does charisma do? You can shore up that 12 with spell focus and pearls of power. Strength is attack and damage. Dexterity is only half of that equation. Your offensive output is essentially your probabilty of hitting multiplied by your damage. Dexterity increases that equation linearly while strength increases it quadratically. The complete elimination of strength from attack rolls would severely weaken strength, but free weapon finesse would not. Just because an 8 year old is fast(dexterity) enough to hit me with a fist doesn't mean it'll do any appreciable damage. However if a heavyweight boxer were to a swing at me, he could probably power(strength) through my hands and arms as I try to defend myself and land a devastating blow. Counting free weapon finesse: 8-year old Str 6 Dex 14 Attack: +2 Damage: 1d3-2§ (avg .33) Heavyweight boxer Str 18* Dex 10 Improved Unarmed Strike Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike Attack: +5 Damage: 1d3+4 (avg 5) Not exactly a fair comparison. *Yes, this means that he's the strongest in a group of 216 average people. Please don't panic.
Tony Vargas 12-01-04, 04:56 PM	I think you can make a decent case for any stat to be the basis of to hit.... and okay I don't really see one for Cha. Feinting, intimidation and 'psyching out' the other guy...
Dire Celestial Bonobo 12-02-04, 01:29 AM	But anyway, to the dex vs. str discussion. This is my IRL impression as a martial artist of 7-8 years. With strength you can force your hit through the defence, parrying weapons, armor etc. It makes damage because of the force. With dex, or agility, you use your skill to do the exact same. In my experiance no-forcefull way of inflicting damage is much more leathal. Can't say as I agree, particularly since the examples you give are draw cuts/slicing, which is of limited usefulness against armoured targets (which, including natural armour, are most D&D foes). As a martial artist of...a while...I've noticed that strength allows one to simply force through a lot of techniques, getting much the same effect as a weaker but more skilled person. While this is most true for grappling and locking techniques, keep in mind that weapon combat often involved the weapons being used to push each other or the opponent around (corps-a-corps), and actual wrestling was not uncommon in swordfights (http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=351) Moreover, strength allows the use of various techniques that simply aren't available to a weaker person. If you have the option to dart around or to blast through his guard (or any of the myriad options in between), you're in much better shape than someone with not choice but to go around. That being said, obviously Str and Dex both play important roles in landing damaging blows with a weapon. If you can only choose one of them for attack rolls, and if armour is represented as a penalty to those rolls, as it is in D&D, then the ability to power through that armour is important enough that Strength is most likely the correct choice.
Relic 12-02-04, 02:40 AM	I designated each weapon on whether it uses Strength or Dexterity to attack. A character with a Dexterity weapon uses his Dexterity for attack rolls but he does not add any bonuses to damage from Strength. If he wants to add his Strength bonus to damage he has to take a feat called Power Finesse. Thus, characters benefit from using Dexterity to attack rolls with certain weapons but they still need to use a feat to have any increased damage output.
ILL34GL3 12-02-04, 06:20 AM	Any sort of combat requires training. "Dextrous" combat is no exception. I could still, with no training and a probable strength penalty, score more hits on a target in melee than a clumsier but otherwise identical person. I agree that all types of combat benefit from training. I still believe a rapier wielding swashbuckler requires more training than an axe wielding viking. Did the boards eat the rest of your post or was that supposed to be uselessly inflammaory? My bad. Didn't mean to offend. I didn't realize you represent the lollipop guild. :rimshot: For a sorcerer, other than spellcasting, what good does charisma do? You can shore up that 12 with spell focus and pearls of power. Strength is attack and damage. Dexterity is only half of that equation. Your offensive output is essentially your probabilty of hitting multiplied by your damage. Dexterity increases that equation linearly while strength increases it quadratically. The complete elimination of strength from attack rolls would severely weaken strength, but free weapon finesse would not. Dexterity adds bonuses to AC, many useful skills and IMHO the most important save. If you want to give a free weapon finesse feat to your players to have dex affect attack rolls(but only when its beneficial to the player) then you are making dex an even more powerful attribute. Do you make characters with low DEX, wielding light weapons take a penalty in this case since you don't believe weapon finesse represents training? Disregard that last question, I just remembered that munchkins don't have low scores. Can I have a free lollipop to go with my free feat? What a great welcome to munchkin land. :invasion: Counting free weapon finesse: 8-year old Str 6 Dex 14 Attack: +2 Damage: 1d3-2§ (avg .33) Heavyweight boxer Str 18* Dex 10 Improved Unarmed Strike Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike Attack: +5 Damage: 1d3+4 (avg 5) Not exactly a fair comparison. *Yes, this means that he's the strongest in a group of 216 average people. Please don't panic. Ya got me on this one. Bad example.
FitzNighteyes 12-02-04, 11:51 AM	Being accurate with a large weapon (ie non-finessable) is definately a Str attribute. Changing your point of aim with a larger weapon requires muscle power, not hand-eye coordination or dextrous skill with your hands. Even lighter weapons require this, unless you have special training in their use (or a natural talent for applying your hand-eye coordination and dextrous skill). IMO, D&D has the best method for representing this. Str to all attack rolls, and a feat to use Dex with lighter weapons (which can represent training or natural skill).