Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Slapstick87 10-22-07, 05:22 PM	Long story short: Dexterity will determine attack bonus for melee attacks as well as ranged attacks. I am strongly concidering removing Max Dex bonus and replacing it with Medium Armor giving a -2 Dex penalty, and Heavy Armor giving a -4 Dex penalty. Any immediate thoughts about pro's and con's? Short story long: In my game I decided to let Dexterity determine the attack bonus, for both melee and ranged attacks. I find this much more realistic. Actually so much more realistic that I can no longer force myself to play with the current system, thinking that "If it works, don't fix it". Thus I came upon an interesting problem. What about max dex bonus? I think it's reasonable that a swordsman in light armor would have an easier time hitting his target, than someone encased in two inches of solid steel. But then again, I think that a very agile person in full plate, should have an easier time striking his slow-moving opponent in full plate. And what about an agile person in full plate vs a less-than-agile person in medium armor... Then I came upon a solution that I can't understand why no-one has used before. Simply let the armor incur a penalty to dexterity! It makes perfect sense that even if your naturally slow or quick, putting on clothes of solid metal will make you move just a little bit slower. I'm concidering allowing strength to alleviate the penalty. Perhaps Medium armor should decrease Dex with 4 and Heavy armor should decrease Dex with 8. But then let any strength modifier decrease the Dex penalty by 2. Or just let Medium decrease dex by 2 and Heavy by 4 and let that be all. What do you guys think? Would it work? I think it would. - Slapstick
Erk_ 10-22-07, 05:33 PM	It works if you want people to not use heavy armours in your game. In effect, this lowers the AC of all the higher armours. Since dex bonus applies to characters' AC, lowering the character's dex when in heavy armour lowers his AC by 4 as well. Are you going to increase AC to compensate? Further, what kind of fighter would accept a -4 penalty to hit, most of the time? to-hit bonuses, especially at lower levels, are the warrior-class's bread-and-butter (well no, to-damage is, but power attack is harder to use if hit bonuses are much lower). Additionally, I think you're overestimating how encumbering armour was. By all reports, a suit of plate armour was not actually very imposing on most movement. :) It boils down to: do you have a problem with low-str high-dex characters abusing heavier armours? Are your combat characters eclipsing the other party members with their massive ACs? If not, then why do you feel the need for this change? I would recommend the already significant penalty of just having existing Max Dex values apply to dex bonus to attack as well. Thus a character in full plate could only apply +1 from dexterity onto attack, a pretty big penalty if he relies on dex.
Slapstick87 10-22-07, 06:04 PM	Every warrior would rely on dex. Dexterity governs the to-hit bonus. Furthermore a -4 to Dexterity would only give a -2 to hit. It's true that a -4 to dexterity would give a -2 to AC, but seeing as how a full plate gives +8 to AC it's still a +6 net bonus. Plus I'm letting medium and heavy armor give half it's AC as DR. - Slapstick
Novem 10-22-07, 06:36 PM	I like where this is going- helps reduce MAD and is much more realistic. Furthermore, it sounds like Slapstick is waiving the Max Dex to AC, so a high-AC character in full plate will actually have higher AC than normal, and DR, too- This looks like a wonderful rule, both from a player and DM perspective.
Slapstick87 10-22-07, 06:56 PM	Yes, the Max Dex bonus is out. Penalty to Dex replaces it. Just to make that clear. However, should high strength reduce the dex penalty? That would make both strength and dexterity important for a fighter who wants to use heavy armor, as I think it should be. - Slapstick
Novem 10-22-07, 06:59 PM	Sounds reasonable.
CrimsonDeath 10-22-07, 08:06 PM	IMO, this makes Dex more powerful than it was to begin with and creates (or aggravates) multiple attribute dependency for melee combatants. It makes two-weapon fighting and alternative damage sources (sneak attack, etc) more attractive, though. I mean under this system, what do you get from Dex? Armor Class (with no max dex due to armor/load) Melee Attack Bonus Ranged Attack Bonus Reflex saves What do you get from Strength? Melee damage Carrying capacity You may consider introducing a feat (Powerful Swing?) that allows you to use Strength instead of Dexterity for melee attack rolls (maybe limit it to one- or two-handed weapons), much like Weapon Finesse normally allows you to apply your Dexterity bonus instead of Strength for attack with light weapons. Also, you'd obviously remove Weapon Finesse from the prerequisites of any feat or prestiege class that noremally requires it.
Slapstick87 10-22-07, 08:42 PM	Ah yes, I should probably mention that A) I use the Wound / Vitality system B) High BAB classes (Fighter, Barbarian etc.) add their str modifier to wound points. How about this: For two-handed weapons, the dex bonus to attack cannot exceed the str bonus. Two-handers would still be important for the all-mighty power-attack, and to successfully wield them you would need a fair bit of strength. If one chose to fight with the more precise and elegant one-handers - you would hit more often, but you wouldn't do as much damage. Furthermore, I've decided to let strength alleviate the dex penalty from armor. Thus to negate as much dex penalty as possible, a high strength is adviced. Still not certain how much the penalty should then be and how much the str should help. - Slapstick
Erk_ 10-22-07, 09:39 PM	Every warrior would rely on dex. Dexterity governs the to-hit bonus. Furthermore a -4 to Dexterity would only give a -2 to hit. It's true that a -4 to dexterity would give a -2 to AC, but seeing as how a full plate gives +8 to AC it's still a +6 net bonus. Plus I'm letting medium and heavy armor give half it's AC as DR. - Slapstick Ah, I see... I assumed a -2 or -4 to dexterity checks etc. A -2/-4 to the attribute is not quite as serious. I still don't really like the idea, myself. It doesn't make sense to how I see armour as working, for one thing. Reducing it with STR would help, but again doesn't fit my perception of armour function. That's your call... I also think that STR is appropriate as a to-hit base already, since Dex is such a heavy lifter to begin with (forget the DMG claiming str is more important, dex is way more useful), so perhaps I am unqualified to comment :)
Slapstick87 10-23-07, 02:56 AM	It doesn't make sense to how I see armour as working, for one thing. Reducing it with STR would help, but again doesn't fit my perception of armour function. Well clearly, armor isn't designed to slow you down. But I would argue that it does so nonetheless. Heavy cavalry wear covered in plate and moved slowly, with heavy horses. Light cavalry would wear light armor, and move very swiftly. I assume the same goes without the horse. Armor is designed to give you maximum protection, and also covers quite a bit of your face. A limited ability to see and react to what you see would give you a penalty to everything dex represents, at least imo. Also being wheighed down wouldn't help. There's a reason why scouts, archers and light cavalry never bothered with heavy armor. And there's a darned good reason why knights and footmen wore heavy armor. It was to survive a hailstorm of arrows and as many swordstrikes as possible. Sure it made them move slower, but that didn't bother them. They had light cavalry to do the other job. - Slapstick
Erk_ 10-24-07, 12:55 AM	It does slow one down, but I am not certain it slows one down that much, beyond adding a bit of inertia - and not all that much of that; 55 lbs is not an enormous addition. By all reports I've ever read from those who have actually worn heavy armour, it is not particularly hindering to freedom and speed of movement at all. That's a large part of what you pay for in the massive price of plate armour, in real life. Of course, this is fantasy: your mechanic doesn't look imbalanced, which is why I say if you like it that way, go for it.
Slapstick87 10-24-07, 09:21 AM	I see your point. I guess the max dex bonus from the core rules let me to believe that armors slow you down quite considerably. I'll keep the penalty to dex, but allow the feat Armor Specialization to lessen it, as well as strength. That way you'll have to be trained in armor to use it efficiently, and being strong helps quite a bit as well. End result is: Most fighters will use it without taking much notice, but a rookie can't put on a full plate and move comfortably. Furthermore, dexterious fighters in plate will actually be harder to hit than non-dextrous fighters in plate. Dexterity is suddenly attractive for a fighter even if he's in full plate, but an untrained rogue or archer will find it too cumbersome. Thanks for the input. - Slapstick
Voran 10-31-07, 08:40 PM	Hm. Under this system, how would things like Giants hit things? Typically high strength mediocre to average Dex.
Nadaka 10-31-07, 09:15 PM	IMO strength is better for to hit than dex for most circumstances. Especially the larger weapons. Strength allows you accelerate your weapon faster. This not only imparts more kinetic energy, but reduces time to target and allows you to redirect the path of your weapon more easilly. This greatly increases accuracy for a number of reasons. *Reduced time to target reduces the time the target has to avoid the attack. *Easier redirection of path allows you to correct the flight of your weapon towards the target as it evades and also allows you to recover and attack again more quickly. *higher kinetic energy reduces the effect of incidental angles of attack and results in deeper penetration of materials under all circumstances (except with highly deformable weapons against compression resistant materials, pistol rounds penetrate deeper in concrete because rifle rounds tend to liquefy under the stress of impact). While dexterity may allow one to be more precise, it doesn't mean anything of your weapon isn't moving fast enough to strike the enemy effectively. The actual speed of the weapon would be determined by strength rather than dexterity.
Slapstick87 11-01-07, 10:24 AM	@ Voran: New Feat: Mighty Muscles Makes Mush of Micy Men You can spend 2 vitality points to get +1 to hit. Max bonus possible is con modifier + strength modifier. Requirements: Strength 16. How does that sound? @ Nadaka: Isn't dexterity a measurement of how quick you are? It improves inititive, reflex saves etc. To a large degree I don't think being quick is about being strong. When training a swordsman, they teach balance and mobility, agility and quickness. Not how many barrels of cheese you can lift. And as to your three arguments: 1: True 2: I strongly disagree that is about strength. IMO that's clearly dexterity. 3: That's how much damage you do, not whether you hit or not. Which is governed by strength Being strong certainly has it's merit, and imo especially when it comes to blunt weapons, and two-handers. But when it comes to spears and swords, I'd bet Zorro could out-manouver Gimli in a heartbeat. If anyone who actually study swordmanship would care to give a respons that would be great. P.S. That I disagree doesn't mean I don't value your feeback. I do! :)
Nadaka 11-01-07, 02:39 PM	No training for combat generally doesn't involve a lot lifting cheese barrels, because those are not the muscles with the greatest effect on the speed of an attack. Instead you strike over and over again, building the muscles you actually use. Dexterity is quickness of response, one with a high dex reacts sooner. However when it comes to the rate of movement, speed is determined by mass and acceleration. acceleration is determined by force. force is determined by strength. Changing the path of a moving weapon is just as much acceleration as swinging it is. It therefor still requires strength. Though yes, dexterity would allow you to start changing the path sooner. However I would probably call this a tie for the effective use of either ability. in this particular instance. Consider for a moment Bruce Lee. Without his fantastic strength he would not have been able to move nearly as fast as he did. Penetration is still a factor in hitting unless your armor gives no AC bonus, only DR or hardness. I am not saying that dexterity isn't important or that it should never apply to attack rolls. Only that strength is at least as important in the majority of cases, and always more important when dealing with longer or heavier weapons more so due to the force required to accelerate.
Knightblde 11-01-07, 05:18 PM	Your logic is flawed, not the game system. Dexterity, the ability to move exactly where you want, allows you to touch your target, not damage it. Combat Example: Take a 100 lb woman, untrained that punches a 200 lb man. He is going to shrug off the hit with no damage. Now that man punches the woman. If she gets up, she will be in pain for a week. Combat Example: A 100 lb woman punches a 200lb man that blocks the attack. The woman cannot bypass the block. The 200 lb man will blow through the feeble block of a 100 lb woman. Non Combat Example: Take a 28 oz framing hammer. A 200 lb man can hit is target way more times than a 100 lb woman. The hammer is to heavy to guide to the target. Don't get stuck on the rules just because of a one sided view. Also, with your proposed change, every attack bonus in every Monster Manual will have to be updated. You will have a lot of work in front of you, and that work will make your monsters very weak.
Slapstick87 11-01-07, 09:34 PM	Okay... I see your point. However, strength is not speed! They aren't exactly opposites, but training speed and training strength is quite different. It kind of boils down to Power = Strength + Speed. Power can be defined as how quickly you can demonstrate strength. Strength shouldn't be the only thing taken into concideration when calculating AB. But for the sake of easy game-play and gamerules, I'll admit that Power = Strength or Speed is an "abstraction" that I can live with. However I will add this to my houserules: All 2-handed and smaller piercing weapons: Adjust AB for dex or str, whatever is the highest. All 1-handed and smaller slashing weapons: Adjust AB for dex or str, whatever is the highest. All 1-handed light and smaller bludgeon weapons: Adjust AB for dex or str, whatever is the highest. Obviously the "Weapon Finesse" feat is out, but this shouldn't bring any unbalance into the game. And I'm keeping my armor rules! :D Thanks for all the responses. - Slapstick