Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Neofish 11-04-06, 05:31 PM	I was thinking about ruling (in my next game) that your Dexterity modifier is used for all attack rolls, and your Strength modifier is used for all damage rolls, what do you think? I know it makes fighters a little more MAD, but I feel it kinda makes abit more sense. Good or bad idea? i'm curious to know how others feel about the matter.
LukiLoki 11-04-06, 05:50 PM	There's a feat for that. Which has restrictions (light weapons, chain, rapier). Across the board would overvalue Dex., which gives you a better AC, ranged attack mod., Reflex save, and Initiative already.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-04-06, 07:06 PM	Holy crud, I just had an epiphany! Trading Str for Dex in AB might work if the power attack ratio was nerfed or if Str bonus to damage were multiplied. Hmm, must consider the possibilities...
Nebo 11-04-06, 08:20 PM	Actually, when I first started playing D&D that's how I thought it was anyway, and that didn't seem to break anything.
Granx Gemcutter 11-05-06, 01:54 AM	Actually, the Str bonus to hit has a basis in real life physics. Case in point: A scimitar has a similar weight and balance to a baseball bat. Picking up a baseball bat and swinging it has more to do with strength. Yes, coordination has a bit to do with it, but controlling the bat requires a good deal of strength.
Tyler Do'Urden 11-05-06, 02:12 AM	I played in a game that did this once. I should've played an archer. What exactly is gained by doing this?
Oneiros 11-05-06, 11:21 AM	Using Dex to hit certainly changes the emphasis of stats, and there are a few other ripple effects as well. One system, written by a WotC published game designer, can be found at The Waking Lands (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_combat_variant_page.htm). It uses Dex to hit, Armor as DR and a type of Defense Bonus instead of AC. Definitely worth taking a look at.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-05-06, 11:42 AM	Actually, the Str bonus to hit has a basis in real life physics. Case in point: A scimitar has a similar weight and balance to a baseball bat. Picking up a baseball bat and swinging it has more to do with strength. Yes, coordination has a bit to do with it, but controlling the bat requires a good deal of strength. It could easily be argued that the swinger's strength, if sufficient, enables him to effectively ignore the bat's weight. This does make hitting the ball easier, but the swinger's coordination is what gives him true finesse and the ability to hit a home run more than once in a blue moon. Maybe if I capped the Dex bonus to hit at the Str bonus... What exactly is gained by doing this? Just a bit of realism. If you're playing standard d&d, it's not worth the effort to change all this but I'm revamping anyway so it's not a problem for me.
058 11-05-06, 07:49 PM	For something like a rapier, finesse is infinitely more important that the strength of the wielder. Anyone can run you through; the rapier's design assures that (one pound of pressure to puncture human flesh, a child could manage that), but getting to you is the difficult part. For something like a mace, it doesn't much matter how dexterous you are, unless you're so clumsy that you drop everything; you hit someone with a club in the right spot with no force, and it doesn't matter one bit. You hit'im in the wrong spot with a lot of force, it still hurts a heck of a lot. That's why the weapon finesse feat applies as it does; things like rapiers take dexterity, while more cumbersome and large weapons take strength. Another example: With a longsword, it's more about breaking through your enemy's defence than getting around it; it's just too unwieldy to worry about getting extremely accurate thrusts and such. A shortsword, on the other hand, is light and wieldy enough that you can easily whip and weave through your foe's defences.
Grod_The_Giant 11-05-06, 08:25 PM	I was thinking that weapon finessable-weapons can automatically use dex. modifier (a guy trying to use strength for a rapier? I can just see him hacking away with the tiny blade...) and the feat allows you to use your dex. modifier for damage.
X-Codes 11-05-06, 09:34 PM	I was thinking that weapon finessable-weapons can automatically use dex. modifier (a guy trying to use strength for a rapier? I can just see him hacking away with the tiny blade...) and the feat allows you to use your dex. modifier for damage. Anything that can be described as "hacking" with a rapier could be strength or finesse, but more than either it's just plain stupid. The rapier wasn't designed to slash, it was designed to pierce. Regardless of whether you use force or finesse, you wield it the same way. Higher Strength allows you to swing your weapon faster and harder, making your attacks harder to dodge and more easily penetrate armor. Using weapon finesse you are trying to flick the deatly part of your weapon through a vulnerable flaw in your opponent's defenses, which makes it harder for your opponent to react to your attacks and makes your armor less effective since it's most vulnerable points are being attacked. The former you really can do with anything, but the latter requires a light, quick weapon to compensate for the speed you lose by not throwing your weight into the attacks. Thus, weapon finesse only works with light and specialty weapons.
Mandarbgrim 11-05-06, 09:46 PM	I was thinking that weapon finessable-weapons can automatically use dex. modifier (a guy trying to use strength for a rapier? I can just see him hacking away with the tiny blade...) and the feat allows you to use your dex. modifier for damage. I would probably make that extra Dex damage precision damage.
058 11-05-06, 10:01 PM	Anything that can be described as "hacking" with a rapier could be strength or finesse, but more than either it's just plain stupid. The rapier wasn't designed to slash, it was designed to pierce. Regardless of whether you use force or finesse, you wield it the same way. Not true. The rapier was designed with both in mind; over the centuries of its use as a gentleman's weapon, designs got slimmer and slimmer to accommodate the style of fighting that inexplicably developed around the weapon. Rapiers in the time period that D&D is set around would have had blades a good bit thicker than your modern foils and épées (though still not as thick as a longsword or even a shortsword). It is quite plausible that someone would be hacking away with a rapier. Granted, it might not be the most effective way to use one, but it is certainly plausible. I do take issue with the fact that a character with weapon finesse isn't going to get very much damage out of their weapons. The truth of the matter is that being stabbed with a dagger will kill you just as fast as getting thwacked by a longsword, the same going for being run through by a rapier or having your head lopped off by a scimitar. Even if you aren't putting as much behind a rapier's thrust as a longsword's swing, one is as likely to do great amounts of damage as the other. Adding Dex to damage for weapon finesse, I wouldn't be averse to (although perhaps just make it 1/2 Dex + Strength, to keep Dex from becoming an overpowered attribute), something like the Swashbuckler's ability to add Intelligence to damage.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-06-06, 01:46 AM	Okay so if a character's str bonus is doubled for damage, it will ensure that the 'big beefy warrior' archetype will remain in existance. One catch: who will ever use a rapier again? Maybe this isn't a problem though; d&d at its core is a medieval game, and the rapier is a renaissance weapon. Still, rapiers do go with a few character archetypes and I'm sure a lot of players just like them. So how to create a niche for the rapier? The only thing that I can think of is to set up a rule for all weapons that your Dex bonus to AB can't exceed your Str bonus. Now for certain weapons like the rapier, the rule is broken; say that your Dex bonus to AB can't be higher than your Str bonus +4. It does add complication but that's the only way I can think of at the moment to keep rapiers an option.
Oneiros 11-06-06, 09:46 AM	Okay so if a character's str bonus is doubled for damage, it will ensure that the 'big beefy warrior' archetype will remain in existance. One catch: who will ever use a rapier again? Maybe this isn't a problem though; d&d at its core is a medieval game, and the rapier is a renaissance weapon. Still, rapiers do go with a few character archetypes and I'm sure a lot of players just like them. So how to create a niche for the rapier? The only thing that I can think of is to set up a rule for all weapons that your Dex bonus to AB can't exceed your Str bonus. Now for certain weapons like the rapier, the rule is broken; say that your Dex bonus to AB can't be higher than your Str bonus +4. It does add complication but that's the only way I can think of at the moment to keep rapiers an option. Let me point once again to the Combat Variant (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_combat_variant_page.htm) at The Waking Lands. The system uses Dex Mod to BAB, and uses Armor as DR. It also uses Parry rules. Piercing Weapons halve DR (but can't power-attack), and Weapon Finesse adds 1 and a half Dex to parrying. There are also several feats to improve the effectiveness of a piercing weapon, and a couple to take advantage of the off-hand main-guache style of fighting with a rapier. So the lightly armored fencer is just as viable in this system as the power-attacking, zwei-hander plate-mailed tank. Really, while Dex adds to all BAB seems like a simple change, there are a lot of little effects that ripple out from it that need to be taken into account. I think the Walking Lands version does so admirably. As far as needing to double STR damage, I don't think that's neccessary. The damage bonus is still useful, and if you double it, a crit against a player from a powerful creature can quickly become insta-kill, especially if power attack still applies. Also the argument that STR alone is all that's needed to hit and do damage is somewhat true... if you're playing T-ball. If there's a wily pitcher involved, you also need Dex just to connect with the ball. And then imagine that t
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 02:07 PM	Look at the extremes. Take a world class female gymnast who is 5 feet tall and about 100 lbs (something like 10 STR and 18 DEX), and a world class power lifter who is 6 feet 200 lbs (something like 18 STR and 10 DEX). Give them both a greatsword. Who do you think will have better control of the weapon? Now have them both swing the weapon at an armored dummy. Who do you think is more likely to break through the armor? STR for melee attacking is more realistic than DEX, with obvious exceptions.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-06-06, 02:38 PM	Look at the extremes. Take a world class female gymnast who is 5 feet tall and about 100 lbs (something like 10 STR and 18 DEX), and a world class power lifter who is 6 feet 200 lbs (something like 18 STR and 10 DEX). Give them both a greatsword. Who do you think will have better control of the weapon? Now have them both swing the weapon at an armored dummy. Who do you think is more likely to break through the armor? STR for melee attacking is more realistic than DEX, with obvious exceptions. This is a better demonstration of how Str = damage while Dex = AB. Str +++ = smashing thru armor; Dex +++ = hitting in the first place. Not that hitting a dummy is hard for anyone, but hitting an opponent with a strong sense of self-preservation can be.
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 02:49 PM	This is a better demonstration of how Str = damage while Dex = AB. Str +++ = smashing thru armor; Dex +++ = hitting in the first place. Not that hitting a dummy is hard for anyone, but hitting an opponent with a strong sense of self-preservation can be. Last time I checked you had to break through the armor to damage someone. In addition, who is most likely to swing the weapon more accurately to make sure the hit is square. The weak but dextrous gymnast, or the strong weight lifter. The ability to stop and redirect a heavier weapon takes force and strength. If a baseball player wants to improve his hitting he takes steroids to improve his strength not his dexterity. Is dexterity an important physical attribute. Absolutely. Is it more important than strength for swinging clubs and swords around. Absolutely not.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-06-06, 02:59 PM	Let me point once again to the Combat Variant (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_combat_variant_page.htm) at The Waking Lands. The system uses Dex Mod to BAB, and uses Armor as DR. It also uses Parry rules. Piercing Weapons halve DR (but can't power-attack), and Weapon Finesse adds 1 and a half Dex to parrying. There are also several feats to improve the effectiveness of a piercing weapon, and a couple to take advantage of the off-hand main-guache style of fighting with a rapier. So the lightly armored fencer is just as viable in this system as the power-attacking, zwei-hander plate-mailed tank. Hm I like the idea behind these parry rules, but they're very involved...I feel a tinker job coming on!
Tequila_Sunrise 11-06-06, 03:14 PM	Last time I checked you had to break through the armor to damage someone. You would think so wouln't you? But in reality, heavily armored opponents are best taken down by "a mighty buffet upon the helm" as Sir Lancelot does so often. Ever try to even tap someone on the head that doesn't want you to? Aim and agility are just as important as speed. In addition, who is most likely to swing the weapon more accurately to make sure the hit is square. The weak but dextrous gymnast, or the strong weight lifter. In terms of controlling a weapon, strength only matters until the point where the weapon becomes light enough (relatively) for the wielder to take advantage of their full finesse. Hence my idea of Dex mod cannot exceed Str mod. Being way more strong than is necessary to effectively use your weapon does not grant you extra finesse with it. P.S. As of now, I agree to disagree with you because I'm really not interested in arguing anymore. Oh, and gymnasts are anything but weak; my little sister is one and she can almost beat me up!
Ghenesh 11-06-06, 03:23 PM	In a game i created i used Dex for the key ability to hit, actually i used 8 abilities based a bit on my gaming and DMing experience in diferent games: Strenght, Dexterity, Agility, Vitality, Intelligence, Will, Perception and Charisma. While Agility had more to do with speed and reactions, Dexterity was about coordination and careful movements. To fix the Strenght issue on wielding a weapon, i created a STR prerequisite for every weapon, having less Strenght than necessary means a penalty to every attack roll equal to the diference between the prerequisite and the Strenght score.
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 03:41 PM	You would think so wouln't you? But in reality, heavily armored opponents are best taken down by "a mighty buffet upon the helm" as Sir Lancelot does so often. Ever try to even tap someone on the head that doesn't want you to? Aim and agility are just as important as speed. I played 8 years of varsity football (highschool and college), I am aware of speed, agility, and strength. Ever tired to chase, grab, and pull down someone that doesn't want you to? Yes a certain amount of dexterity is required, but strength is overwhelmingly more important. The ability to just "touch" someone is different in reality and in game. A touch attack can be finessed. Swinging a 10 pound sledge can not. If dexterity was used for all attacks then that means a 98 lb weakly with 3 STR would be just as likely to hit with said 10 lb sledge as a 18 STR warrior if they happened to have the same dex. I don't think so. That is not logical at all. In terms of controlling a weapon, strength only matters until the point where the weapon becomes light enough (relatively) for the wielder to take advantage of their full finesse. Hence my idea of Dex mod cannot exceed Str mod. Being way more strong than is necessary to effectively use your weapon does not grant you extra finesse with it. Agreed, but then you are overly complicating the game for a small subset of weapons. There is a feat that allows this, or you can simply decide light weapons and finesse weapons can automatically be finessed if the wielder so desires. In addition, by saying the ability to finesse is dependent on how heavy the weapon is, you are basically saying the ability to finesse is strength related. Really the ability to finesse a weapon is more related to weapon balance than weapon weight. This is due to changes in the moments of inertia of the weapon and the torques required to control the weapon based on these moments. P.S. As of now, I agree to disagree with you because I'm really not interested in arguing anymore. Oh, and gymnasts are anything but weak; my little sister is one and she can almost beat me up! Female gymnasts are weak, relatively. Unless your little sister benches over 195 lb and can squat over 260 lbs I would consider her weak in this discussion. Those numbers are the minimum numbers for someone to recieve a strength bonus (STR 12) according to the carrying capacity charts. You sister may be strong for a girl, or compared to you, but overall she is probably not.
LukiLoki 11-06-06, 04:11 PM	The main thing, as I said before, is not realism, but acceptable balance among the attributes. Dex is already the "best" combat stat, because of Initiative, AC, Reflex save and ranged AB. Another aspect of all this, though, is that, just like the mental attributes, there is no easy way to encapsulate all of what a body is capable of doing and how well in just three numbers. There is overlap, IRL, among the concepts strength, dexterity, and constitution. Hitting a baseball was being batted around as an example (groan). I'll take that as an illustration. As it was pointed out, anybody able to hit a 95 mph fastball needs a pretty darn good dexterity, in terms of reaction time. But, the stronger hitter can hit the ball harder. There's also the element of what's called "bat speed." Distinct from reaction time (elapsed time before initiation of the swing), this is how fast the bat moves through the swing. You need to be strong, obviously, to get a piece of lumber going really fast, but many pure hitters, or "contact hitters" in the majors have tremendous bat speed, not just power-hitters (the strength-oriented home-run type hitters). The question of the strength of female gymnasts is similar. World-class gymnasts are phenomenal athletes, and they are tremendously strong. But, as Calvin points out, they're not necessarily "strong" in the same sense as a powerlifter is strong. Their strength is "core strength," and it's essentially in service to dexterity, i.e. it enhances their agility. Just saying that in any real-world physical activity, there's a complex interplay between what end up being reified and compartmentalized concepts in a reasonably simple combat simulation. Ultimately, "realism" has to take a backseat to workable mechanics.
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 04:58 PM	Well said LukiLoki
058 11-06-06, 06:24 PM	Calvin, the problem with your arguments is that you're using greatswords and sledges for your examples. There are also weapons like shortswords, rapiers, quarterstaves, daggers--heck, the majority of the D&D weapon list--that don't rely upon strength to do their damage. As I mentioned, a child could run you through with a rapier. A shortsword depends more upon hitting someone at all than hitting them hard, because it's light and fast. Being supremely buff won't help you with that weapon nearly as much as being nimble and fast. So, yes--strength is vitally important for bludgeoning or extremely large weapons, but dexterity is of greater importance for the smaller, sharper ones. Oh, and personally, I'd rather have a sword-fight with a male body-builder who could bench two hundred pounds than a fit female gymnast--I know I can hit the seven foot, mostly immobile target, and, small as I am, avoid his attacks. The hundred-pound athlete, I'm not quite so sure about.
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 07:59 PM	Calvin, the problem with your arguments is that you're using greatswords and sledges for your examples. This is not a problem. It is the opposite argument. Instead of saying all weapons should use dexterity for attack because some weapons are light and finessable, I am saying dexterity should NOT be used because most weapons are NOT finessable and use great swords and mauls as examples. There are also weapons like shortswords, rapiers, quarterstaves, daggers--heck, the majority of the D&D weapon list--that don't rely upon strength to do their damage. Light weapons and finessable weapons as defined by the game rules are not really the majority of the weapon list. I have NEVER in this discussion said dexterity should not be used for some weapons, I just do not think it should be used for ALL weapons because some weapons are obviously not finessable. Also in your quote you mention damage, not attack, I hope you did not mean that. I think we can all agree a stronger person can do more damage with a club than a weak person. As I mentioned, a child could run you through with a rapier. A shortsword depends more upon hitting someone at all than hitting them hard, because it's light and fast. Being supremely buff won't help you with that weapon nearly as much as being nimble and fast. Ever seen an olympic sprinter. They are a bunch of scrawny, skinny, emaciated bunch. Oh wait, no they aren't. Strength in many cases equals speed. Weapons are lethal, that is their purpose. They are MORE lethal in the hands of a someone who is faster, stronger, or both. So, yes--strength is vitally important for bludgeoning or extremely large weapons, but dexterity is of greater importance for the smaller, sharper ones. Like a hand axe? Oh wait, no strength is more important for that. Or a light pick? Nope strength again. Oh, and personally, I'd rather have a sword-fight with a male body-builder who could bench two hundred pounds than a fit female gymnast--I know I can hit the seven foot, mostly immobile target, and, small as I am, avoid his attacks. The hundred-pound athlete, I'm not quite so sure about. I'm a six foot, 225 lb ex-football. I'd kick the crap out of 5 foot, 100 lb gymnast in a knife fight. It's called reach for the win. Plus if I ever got her grappled, she is screwed. I'd choke her out with one hand before she'd know what to do. Plus now you are no longer talking about just attack bonus. You are ALSO talking about avoiding attacks which IS dexterity. So a more dextrous person should be more difficult to hit, gaining them an advantage. I'm just saying, take the power lifter and gymnast and give them both mauls and the power lifter will win. This very simple scenario is reason enough why dexterity should not be used instead of strength as the primary attack bonus ability for ALL weapons, as the OP proposed.
DM Zoc 11-06-06, 08:16 PM	If you want a realistic, balanced combat system that takes all things into account and subsequently takes forever to resolve, play GURPS. In D&D, I would argue that strength is already far superior to dex in terms of combat potential, and that dex bonus to hit instead of strength is needed for game balance. At low levels (after level 2, when heavy armor is within reach), Dex only adds to AC for characters who aren't supposed to be getting hit anyway; the paladins, samurai, and knights will all be wearing big heavy armor that mitigates the bonus. They can just load up on strength and they have all bases (to hit, damage, and AC) covered for a typical melee combat. At higher levels, AC becomes prohibitive compared to the damage you'd be giving up on a two-handed power attack. Every +1 to hit becomes one more point that you're comfortable power attacking with, so those +4 strength gloves are adding seven damage to every attack. Using dex to hit would mean that fighter types have a reason to balance strength and dex, and Conan might not be the only viable melee character past level 5 (and by viable I mean that they contribute significantly more than they could in other party roles). I would rather see some fighters with 24 strength and 24 dex, or some other combination, instead of every one with 40 strength and 10 dex. I hate that a 40 strength giant with ten hit dice can use his great club to hit a 40 dex pixie, with at least 50% accuracy.
calvinNhobbes 11-06-06, 09:24 PM	I hate that a 40 strength giant with ten hit dice can use his great club to hit a 40 dex pixie, with at least 50% accuracy. Not exactly, don't forget that smaller creatures get a size bonus to AC, and larger creatures get an attack penalty. Also, this isn't that unreasonable, you don't even have to make it that extreme. Just think of trying to hit a cat with a bat. Not too hard really.
The_Normal_Anomaly 11-06-06, 09:39 PM	Just saying that in any real-world physical activity, there's a complex interplay between what end up being reified and compartmentalized concepts in a reasonably simple combat simulation. Ultimately, "realism" has to take a backseat to workable mechanics. Amen. I feel that it must be brought up. There is a grain of real world physics behind the stats and rule, but only as far as it remains somewhat balanced or at least makes some sense. There are some quite high dex heros in this fantasy style, someone like Robbin Hood but it seems like a large number are in the style of being a sword swingin' manly man. As a personal view, strength to hit may have been a move just to make the melee warrior more attractive to help keep this ratio of manly men to ranged combatants. The dex based character's damage seems to come in the form of sneak attack or the favored enemy and things in that line, found in classes made for good dex score characters. Yes, there are alternative options, but your main dex based characters have classes built to use that dex to good effect. This is a fantasy game, not a real world game. How you hit someone is mostly flavor. The fighter with a good strength score can have the flavor of hitting with quick blows to weak points. Not every melee strength based character swings like a barb. To put it another way: Str can be seen as how much you can lift, how much force you put behind those blows, useful for prying that door open, and your general prowess at killing something that is within melee reach. Dex can be seen as how quickly you can get your sword out to attack, dodging out of the way and reducing your chances to be hit, and holding the bow steady to plant the arrow in your select target. Str is much a show that the character is a serious melee fighter. That strength may be using speed to plant the sword in places that the armor doesn't protect well. Nothing says that you can't flavor a power attack as swording someone in the face or the neck. Indeed, I think that this would often be the case, otherwise you get the hulk problem of sourceless strength. "You just chopped the monster in half, but where did all of that extra power and force come from?" could easily be "Ahh, you stabbed him in the eye, good job man. That must have been hard to hit, but you really killed him dead." Likewise, the barbarian could be worded to enter a cold fury where he places his blows in good places while in kill mode. More like he just snaps and puts his knife in the foe's heart than actually ripping said foe in half like a standard barbarian. Stats are abstract, flavor is what happens. Could the dex to all attack rolls work? Yes. I like the system as it is now. A little thinking and you realize that this sort of rule is just a change. I wouldn't say that it would shatter the game or make it much better. A change, perhaps limiting characters more than expanding them.
Malniemel 11-06-06, 10:29 PM	to me BAB is cooridination. I'm a light weight kickboxer, and a submission wrestler, hopefully a NHB fighter when I get old enough to legally participate in the events around my area (i'm not 18). I will tell you right now, d20modern is the way to go; however, this is my opinion. I will agree with the calvinNhobbes that it is HELLA HARD to fight anyone that is taller then you, it is also difficult to do much in combat. As i see it, size also affects strength. Considering I fight 350lbs dudes when i weight 155-160, I will be the first one to vouch, even with superior technique or speed, you can get mowed over with just a few punches because they have more weight to put into it. Moving down the line. There is a setting created for d20future. I know they are different systems (barely) But you might want to consider this. You start with both your strength and dexterity modifier added together. After this, you divide it by 2. To solve the dilema that one would argue with such things, for light weapons you keep the weapon finesse feat to add all of your dexterity modifier to it. Then there would be another feat (I don't remember what it was called) that incorperated your full str score. So it would look like this (str mod + dex mod)/2 w/o feats w/ weapon finesse (dex mod) w/ unnamed feat (str mod) You can have it either way, however, i would have to say that you would need to find a way to make strength more potent to balance out the game.
bruiserdeck 11-07-06, 12:05 AM	its always been my assumption that it was simply an oversimplification that is too annoying to change. I once did a game in which i modified this a bit. I basicly said that blunts and Axes = str swords generaly = str+dex/2 light swords and piercers and range = dex this lead to a problem with halflings being better with a heavy spear than ogers. so i had to add a feat that allowed pole weapons to be modified by str. (kind of like weapons finess for str) but then the player characters were upset "so my knight has to take a feat just to use a lance effectively?" and thus I made a whole list of changes. finess blunts (quarter staff) medium or large swords and spears = dex+str/2 light swords, non spear/javlin ranged and whips = Dex medium large blunts, pole weapons and axes = Str. that worked for a bit and i even went through the whole list of weapons in order to balance out every weapon to have some unique properties. finaly I just got tired of it all and on the next campeign returned everything back to the standard for simplicity sake.
DM Zoc 11-07-06, 05:59 AM	Not exactly, don't forget that smaller creatures get a size bonus to AC, and larger creatures get an attack penalty. Also, this isn't that unreasonable, you don't even have to make it that extreme. Just think of trying to hit a cat with a bat. Not too hard really. I was taking that into account; the BAB from the giant hit dice make up for the size penalty, and a bit more. To make the analogy closer, I'd suggest you think about hitting a hummingbird with a bat.
calvinNhobbes 11-07-06, 09:19 AM	I was taking that into account; the BAB from the giant hit dice make up for the size penalty, and a bit more. To make the analogy closer, I'd suggest you think about hitting a hummingbird with a bat. Depends on size of giant really. I was assuming a large sized giant and a pixie is small sized so two size steps, which is equivalent to a human (medium) to a cat (tiny). The BAB due to HD is a whole other issue. It assumes giants are natural fighters and good at hitting things. Also remember the weapon of a giant is very large compared to the pixie. In fact the giant's club is likely bigger than the pixie. The giant is not trying to finesse a pin to prick the pixie's eye. He is swinging a massive club, which really acts more like an area of effect attack than a focused attack. In addition, with 40 STR and the increased length of the club, the end of the club could be wiping around at 200+ miles per hour (baseball bats have bat speeds I think around 70 mph). Not quite so easy to dodge. In addition, I could hit a hummingbird with a baseball bat IF the bird actually stayed around to fight. Odds are I would never get close enough before it flew away.
Jeddi151 11-07-06, 11:05 AM	Two PCs make characters and rolls stats. By a miracle the stats are rolled...18/10/10/10/10/12. The Fighter puts his 18 in STR...and 12 in Con or Dex. The Wizard will put the 18 in INT and the 12 in probably Con or Dex. Using the rules as written...the fighter is in bad shape a little..but will still be awesome in good at dealing damage in melee combat with a +4 to hit +4 to damage. The Wizard has what is needs...a very high INT. Now...is Dex was required for the "To Hit" aspect...then fighter is now in a lot more trouble. +0 (or +1) to hit and +4 damage. The wizard on the other has in still awesome no matter what. Now..if a GM gave players who used light weapons the weapon finesse feat for free...that's fine cause i'm sure the fighter is still picking up the biggest thing he can find. If you make everyone use Dex though and make Fighters take a feat..its again another step down the ladder for Fighters since more in likely they will need to take a feat to un-do the game rule. Realism in game systems is great when its present...but d20 is usually not the system for it. -Carson
Tequila_Sunrise 11-07-06, 12:44 PM	Okay, I've decided how this can work for my revamp. I've made it balanced and relatively simple (of course not as simple as just tacking on your total bonus, but not nearly as complex as certain combat mechanics like grapple). If anyone gives a sheist, such as the OP, I'll be happy to share what I've decided on. TS
Neofish 11-07-06, 03:51 PM	Okay, I've decided how this can work for my revamp. I've made it balanced and relatively simple (of course not as simple as just tacking on your total bonus, but not nearly as complex as certain combat mechanics like grapple). If anyone gives a sheist, such as the OP, I'll be happy to share what I've decided on. TS Sure, lets see it dude. For everyone else, I can see the strong case as leaving the system as is, I really like the idea that strength is tied to muscle speed and thus used for melee. I was hesitant to change it in the first place (like many had have said) because it makes the fighter abit MAD in his ability scores. For the most part, I agree that is should remain as is. I'd like to thank everyone for thier arguments, I was expecting one or two comments at the most, but instead I was treating to many, so thank you everyone for helping me find a solution to my musing.
rydi123 11-07-06, 04:42 PM	to me BAB is cooridination. I'm a light weight kickboxer, and a submission wrestler, hopefully a NHB fighter when I get old enough to legally participate in the events around my area (i'm not 18). I will tell you right now, d20modern is the way to go; however, this is my opinion. I will agree with the calvinNhobbes that it is HELLA HARD to fight anyone that is taller then you, it is also difficult to do much in combat. As i see it, size also affects strength. Considering I fight 350lbs dudes when i weight 155-160, I will be the first one to vouch, even with superior technique or speed, you can get mowed over with just a few punches because they have more weight to put into it. Moving down the line. There is a setting created for d20future. I know they are different systems (barely) But you might want to consider this. You start with both your strength and dexterity modifier added together. After this, you divide it by 2. To solve the dilema that one would argue with such things, for light weapons you keep the weapon finesse feat to add all of your dexterity modifier to it. Then there would be another feat (I don't remember what it was called) that incorperated your full str score. So it would look like this (str mod + dex mod)/2 w/o feats w/ weapon finesse (dex mod) w/ unnamed feat (str mod) You can have it either way, however, i would have to say that you would need to find a way to make strength more potent to balance out the game. i was going to skipp to the end and suggest averaging the two, but then i saw this. so. in short: what he said^^^^^
Tequila_Sunrise 11-07-06, 05:07 PM	Okay here it is: Dex ALWAYS modifies AB (or the Combat skill in my revamp), with the following restictions: 1)Your Dex mod to Offense rolls cannot exceed your Str mod. 2)Rapiers, light weapons and bows: your Dex mod can exceed your Str mod by 4. 3)Daggers, Unarmed and Xbows: your Dex mod is never capped by your Str mod. Related rules: Your Str bonus is doubled for the purposes of damage. I feel this is necessary to upkeep the 'big beefy guy' archetype; with Dex to hit + power attack, there's no reason for any character to pimp out his Strength otherwise. This won't make every crit confirmation a possible KO, mostly because of my system of gradiated HPs which means more +++ of them. TS P.S. I welcome constructive criticism, but don't bother with any more 'it's unrealistic' or 'it's too much work for too little gain'. If you still feel this way, just agree to disagree with me and leave me to my tinkerings.
trenien 11-08-06, 01:23 AM	A bit late, but anyway... Considering that using some weapons with Str seems just silly, the rules' change we've come up with was as such : - Previously Finessable weapons are now automatically used with Dex (i.e. you CAN'T use Str with them) - Previuous Unfinessable weapons are still basically used with Str, as before. - Finesse still exists mostly as it was, but it now applies to weapons usually unfinessable; i.e. the feat represent training to use Dex with a weapon that hasn't been designed with this in mind. - Damage bonus come from Str in any case.
Frostraven 11-08-06, 07:36 AM	You would think so wouln't you? But in reality, heavily armored opponents are best taken down by "a mighty buffet upon the helm" as Sir Lancelot does so often. Ever try to even tap someone on the head that doesn't want you to? Aim and agility are just as important as speed. In terms of controlling a weapon, strength only matters until the point where the weapon becomes light enough (relatively) for the wielder to take advantage of their full finesse. Hence my idea of Dex mod cannot exceed Str mod. Being way more strong than is necessary to effectively use your weapon does not grant you extra finesse with it. P.S. As of now, I agree to disagree with you because I'm really not interested in arguing anymore. Oh, and gymnasts are anything but weak; my little sister is one and she can almost beat me up! 1) Bring back in strength requirements: -2 to attack and damage for EACH STRENGTH POINT BELOW the requirement. 2) Add a "max strength" effectiveness mod: A point where force no longer can affect the weapon's damage. (Attack bonuses still apply) 3) Add a dex mod: A number which allows you to have a +1 to attack and damage for each 2 dex up to this point IF you meet the stength requirement 1) This would take care of goblins wielding two-handed swords and remove the weightlifter versus gymnast problem. 2) No matter how hard you hit with a Rapier, there *is* a maximum (or a breakpoint leading to a steep downhill) of force that can be transfered from the weapon to the target. There would be a breaking-point, both literally and theoretically, for where the weapon shatters on impact and/or fails to transfer more force. 3) Fighters that can swing a blade as if it was a stick will most likely be able to use it with some finesse, as well as with force. When a duelist finds a soft spot with his Rapier, it is very likely that if he'll be able to maximize the damage by piercing an extra inch, twisting to make open wounds and cutting in a fatal direction when pulling the weapon back. You would not be able to penetrate a field plate or mesh of the same quality and material as the rapier itself. Rapier (Steel): Str: 6 Max: 14 Dex: 20 Two-Handed Sword (Iron): Str: 16 Max: 24 Dex: 12 Two-Handed Sword (Steel): Str: 16 Max: 26 Dex: 12 The scariest part of today's D&D is exactly the fact that strength raises *both* attack and damage, while dexterity only raise dodge AC, and often at the cost of nifty armor bonuses. Which gives: Brute Fighters: More damage as well as better attack. Swordsmen: More armor class at the cost of damage. Anyone who goes brute force, maxing attack rating and damage as well as hitpoints in current D&D are destined to succeed versus finesse-oriented swordsmen. Even in unarmored combat. Parry skill works wonders in that scenario-- as long as you manage to overcome the brute fighter's attack bonuses with your parry skill -- which is highly unlikely... But then again, I've not tried playing *against* anyone as much as with someone, and I hardly ever play anymore, anyway.
dizfactor 11-08-06, 10:05 AM	Last time I checked you had to break through the armor to damage someone. Well, if you're using class-based Defense and Armor as DR, instead of AC (like everyone really should be...I can't believe the crappy AC system has survived this long), then your STR bonus to damage still has to penetrate the DR of the armor. The Conan RPG has the best D20 fantasy-based combat system I've ever seen: * There are two kinds of class-based Defense, Parry Defense and Dodge Defense. Different classes have different Defense progressions in each type. * Parry Defense is STR-based (representing countering force with force) and Dodge Defense is DEX-based. * The armor check penalty for armor applies to your Dodge defense as well, which encourages DEX-based fighters to wear light armor. Also, Dodge Defense may suffer penalties when you're fighting in an enclosed space or on unsteady ground. * Parry Defense is not adversely affected by armor. However, you suffer penalties when you're not carrying a weapon or shield heavy enough to parry what the other guy is using. Furthermore, Parry can't be used against ranged attacks, ever. * Shields add a bonus to Parry defense for melee and to Dodge defense against ranged attacks. * Everyone in melee has the option to do a regular attack (STR) or a finesse attack (DEX). The relevant statistic affects both the attack and damage rolls. * Regular attacks and finesse attacks affect armor differently - regular attacks reduce armor DR by half when your STR bonus is really high and you're using a heavy weapon, whereas finesse attacks bypass DR entirely when your total attack roll is really high (chink in the armor). Basically, the system is set up so that you can be either a DEX-based, a STR-based fighter, or a more balanced fighter, and the choices you make have a strong impact on what kind of gear you use and your overall tactics. The fact that you can use either STR or DEX for both attack and defense really gives you a lot of options, but the set of situational modifiers and the ways different types of fighting work with different types of weapons and armor encourages players to work hard to make sure fights happen on their terms.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-08-06, 10:19 AM	1) Bring back in strength requirements: -2 to attack and damage for EACH STRENGTH POINT BELOW the requirement. 2) Add a "max strength" effectiveness mod: A point where force no longer can affect the weapon's damage. (Attack bonuses still apply) 3) Add a dex mod: A number which allows you to have a +1 to attack and damage for each 2 dex up to this point IF you meet the stength requirement This is the first thing I thought of but I discarded it because it would only work for the first couple of levels, until a charcter got to the str requirement. I also don't like the idea that a character may not be able to start play with their weapon of choice. The Conan RPG has the best D20 fantasy-based combat system I've ever seen: That sounds cool, but how does the system ensure that combat doesn't slow to a crawl? (One attack vs. two defense rolls)
dizfactor 11-08-06, 10:25 AM	That sounds cool, but how does the system ensure that combat doesn't slow to a crawl? (One attack vs. two defense rolls) You don't get to use both at once. You have to pick one. DM: He swings at you. What are you doing? Player: Dodging. DM: *rolls* That's a 26. What's your Dodge Defense? Player: 20. He hits.
Tequila_Sunrise 11-08-06, 01:53 PM	You don't get to use both at once. You have to pick one. That works.
Xeviat-DM 11-08-06, 02:45 PM	In a game i created i used Dex for the key ability to hit, actually i used 8 abilities based a bit on my gaming and DMing experience in diferent games: Strenght, Dexterity, Agility, Vitality, Intelligence, Will, Perception and Charisma. While Agility had more to do with speed and reactions, Dexterity was about coordination and careful movements. To fix the Strenght issue on wielding a weapon, i created a STR prerequisite for every weapon, having less Strenght than necessary means a penalty to every attack roll equal to the diference between the prerequisite and the Strenght score. This is exactly what I'm planning on doing. Light weapons require a 7 str; one-handed weapons require an 11 str; two-handed weapons require a 15 str. Requirements increase and decrease based on size.
RobbyPants 11-13-06, 03:14 PM	I was thinking about ruling (in my next game) that your Dexterity modifier is used for all attack rolls, and your Strength modifier is used for all damage rolls, what do you think? This would work very well with the whole armor as DR varient. The whole reason you use Str to hit in melee in the normal rules is that you can better overcome the armor. With these two varients in place, you use Dex (your coordination) to land the blows, and Str to overcome the armor DR. Come to think of it, I may consider using something like this in my next game ;). I guess I'll have to modify some feats and get rid of others (like weapon finesse).
Oneiros 11-13-06, 03:17 PM	This would work very well with the whole armor as DR varient. The whole reason you use Str to hit in melee in the normal rules is that you can better overcome the armor. With these two varients in place, you use Dex (your coordination) to land the blows, and Str to overcome the armor DR. Come to think of it, I may consider using something like this in my next game ;). I guess I'll have to modify some feats and get rid of others (like weapon finesse). Did I mention the Combat Variant (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_combat_variant_page.htm) at The Waking Lands? ;)
RobbyPants 11-13-06, 03:57 PM	Did I mention the Combat Variant (http://www.wakinglands.com/htm_files/the_combat_variant_page.htm) at The Waking Lands? ;) Opps :eek: I pretty much read the OP, and maybe one or two posts down before posting. Guess that saves me some work! Nice link. :D
DM Zoc 11-16-06, 05:05 PM	I've been thinking about this a little more, and I came to the conclusion that Dex is good for hitting small or moving targets, but doesn't really account for beating through the armor. Likewise, no amount of Strength will help you connect with your baseball bat, but it's vital toward making the hurt not be deflected. My idea was that Dex gives +1 per bonus to hit, to a maximum of your opponent's combined size, dex, and dodge bonuses to AC; Strength would give +1 per bonus to hit, to a maximum of your opponent's combined natural, armor, shield, and deflection bonuses to AC. (Any penalties to either stat would give you the penalty.) This way, you need coordination to get past an evasive defense, but strength to break through a thick shell. The problem is that it complicates combat by quite a bit, and would take quite a while to adjust between each opponent.
pmurray@bigpond.com 11-16-06, 06:29 PM	I'd go the other way and suggest Str for AC instead of Dex. Dex is how good you are with your fingers - guitar playing, lock picking, writing. Str is general physical prowess. A boxer could be clumsy with his hands (breaking delicate things) but still have a fine dodge bonus to AC. Str to AC instead of dex, modified but the usual penalties for various sorts of armour. A high Str person who goes lightly armoured would look like an athlete. Perhaps permit it as a feat.
calvinNhobbes 11-16-06, 09:29 PM	Strength equals speed and power. Faster things are harder to dodge, and power deals more damage. STR is important for hitting things and dealing damage. That is my view. Take it or leave it.
Xeviat-DM 11-17-06, 03:45 AM	Things do get very complicated when you bring "realism" into it. Strength lends to speed, but speedy strength is more properly defined as "explosivity"; there are strong individuals who are horribly slow. Coordination itself doesn't matter unless you connect with enough force. I'm currently looking to add Agility into the mix of stats. Agility will be AC and Reflex saves, Dex will be To Hit, and Str will be Damage and weapon size capacity. I'm not sure if it will work though.
calvinNhobbes 11-17-06, 10:22 AM	Strength lends to speed, but speedy strength is more properly defined as "explosivity"; there are strong individuals who are horribly slow. Strong, but slow individuals tend to be fat and therefore have to accelerate their extra flesh as well. This may make them slow in the sense of general movement (which is more dexterity), but not in their ability to swing a weapon. The weapon weight is the same. More force, same mass, equals greater acceleration. More acceleration equals faster weapon, faster weapon is harder to dodge.
Xeviat-DM 11-18-06, 04:49 AM	So reflexes (speed) have little to do with weapon vellocity you're saying? Well, the speed of a weapon seems to dictate the damage bonus; a slow strike will deal less damage (unless you get the chance to pin it to someone, but that becomes squeezing and is probably grappling). No matter how strong you are, if you're uncoordinated you're not going to place your strikes well. But a slow person can still be coordinated, which is why I advocate Dex and Agility being separate stats.
Stev Beren 11-18-06, 12:46 PM	Strong, but slow individuals tend to be fat and therefore have to accelerate their extra flesh as well. This may make them slow in the sense of general movement (which is more dexterity), but not in their ability to swing a weapon. The weapon weight is the same. More force, same mass, equals greater acceleration. More acceleration equals faster weapon, faster weapon is harder to dodge. . .if it has to be dodged in the first place, based upon if it is aimed correctly, which woudl be dex based.
calvinNhobbes 11-18-06, 05:02 PM	So reflexes (speed) have little to do with weapon vellocity you're saying? Well, the speed of a weapon seems to dictate the damage bonus; a slow strike will deal less damage (unless you get the chance to pin it to someone, but that becomes squeezing and is probably grappling). No matter how strong you are, if you're uncoordinated you're not going to place your strikes well. But a slow person can still be coordinated, which is why I advocate Dex and Agility being separate stats. No matter how coordinated you are, if you are so weak you cannot lift your own arm you cannot hit anything. Obviously a minimal level of strength or dexterity is required just to move. Obviously, defining all areas of strength by one stat or all forms of dexterity by one stat is not realistic. But given the fact that it is, what makes more sense to determine an ability to hit. My vote is strength by one simple example. Give a 6 ft 200 lb guy with 18 STR and 10 DEX, and a 5 ft 100 lb guy with 10 STR and 18 DEX, both a sledge hammer, who is going to be able to control the weapon better? Obviously certain weapons can benefit from finesse, the game already covers this. You can complicate it as much as you want. But it you want to keep it simple, strength is a much better attribute to use to hit than dexterity for melee weapons.
calvinNhobbes 11-18-06, 05:07 PM	. .if it has to be dodged in the first place, based upon if it is aimed correctly, which woudl be dex based. So if someone has 3 STR and 18 DEX and can't even lift the 10 lb sledge hammer, they should still be better at hitting something than someone who can actually lift the weapon? That is even less realistic. Is using only strength a perfect system? No. Is is better than using just dexterity? Yes. Can you make the game as complicated as you want? Sure, but why stop there. Why not add some more realism like fatigue from combat, more complicated reach rules (dagger vs sword should add extra bonuses for the sword), armor effectiveness based on damage type, etc, etc, etc, etc.
Stev Beren 11-19-06, 07:42 AM	So if someone has 3 STR and 18 DEX and can't even lift the 10 lb sledge hammer, they should still be better at hitting something than someone who can actually lift the weapon? That is even less realistic. Is using only strength a perfect system? No. Is is better than using just dexterity? Yes. Can you make the game as complicated as you want? Sure, but why stop there. Why not add some more realism like fatigue from combat, more complicated reach rules (dagger vs sword should add extra bonuses for the sword), armor effectiveness based on damage type, etc, etc, etc, etc. Actually, no - but then again, you are setting up a rather extreme straw man there. The probability of having a three Strength and an 18 dex is pretty low. Lets reverse it. What about someone with a three dex and an 18 strength? So if someone has 18 STR and 3 DEX and can't even lift the 10 lb sledge hammer without getting their arms tangled up in eachother, they should still be better at hitting something than someone who can precisely and accurately control their muscles? Well, if you get to use absurd examples. . . . Wether they can lift it or not is pretty simple; Weapon weight VS strength, but if they can HIT. . . Dex only is no more flawed than strength only. How about: Dex bonus + strength bonus/2 rounded up?
calvinNhobbes 11-19-06, 04:09 PM	How about: Dex bonus + strength bonus/2 rounded up? Sure you can do that, but why for only attack rolls? If strength is needed to move your body just like dexterity is then why not require that formula for AC (the stronger you are the less inhibiting armor would be) and attack rolls with range weapons (if you are too weak to hold the crossbow level then how can you aim it). So if someone has 18 STR and 3 DEX and can't even lift the 10 lb sledge hammer without getting their arms tangled up in eachother So you are saying if someone has 3 DEX they are so uncoordianted they can't pick up something? If that is the case then they also shouldn't be able to walk making them completely handicapped. When I think of someone with 3 DEX, I think of an old person with arthritis. They have difficulty with fine hand movements, walking is stiff, flexibility is very low, but they have still have strength to swing a newspaper to swat a fly. Or 3 DEX could be like a 2 year old who is still learning to control their movement. Even though infants fall down all the time, they can pick up a light object (plastic bat for example) and hit things (including their unsuspecting older siblings or relatives). Really the most important thing for weapon control is weight to strength ratio. Now I can see complicated combat manuevers (ie. feats) with weapons to require a certain DEX, or very complicated exotic weapons (chains and whips for example) to require a minimal amount of dex to use effectively and more importantly safely, but for swinging a rigid rod like weapon, I would say str over dex for control.
pmurray@bigpond.com 11-19-06, 07:12 PM	I'm suggesting that "strength" be understood to mean "athleticism". There are a number of ways of being strong - heck, it's just plain impossible to sum up all the possible body types in one stat. Dexterity means ... well, Dexterity. Compare a watchmaker and a boxer. Who'd have the best dodge modifier to AC? The other way to go would be to break out another physical stat: agility. This would suit me fine, because the mental stat "Wisdom" encompases two different things - self-awarness and physical warenss of your surroundings. Why the heck would a rogue have a low spot check? So, break out "Strength" into "Strenght" and "Aginilty", and "Wisdom" into "Wisdom" and "Perceptiveness".
Stev Beren 11-19-06, 08:31 PM	I'm suggesting that "strength" be understood to mean "athleticism". There are a number of ways of being strong - heck, it's just plain impossible to sum up all the possible body types in one stat. Dexterity means ... well, Dexterity. Compare a watchmaker and a boxer. Who'd have the best dodge modifier to AC? The other way to go would be to break out another physical stat: agility. This would suit me fine, because the mental stat "Wisdom" encompases two different things - self-awarness and physical warenss of your surroundings. Why the heck would a rogue have a low spot check? So, break out "Strength" into "Strenght" and "Aginilty", and "Wisdom" into "Wisdom" and "Perceptiveness". SO are you saying that Female Gymnast, who is atheletic, is flat out strong rather than dextrous?
pmurray@bigpond.com 11-19-06, 08:54 PM	SO are you saying that Female Gymnast, who is atheletic, is flat out strong rather than dextrous? Yes, so far as the word 'Strength' is used in the context of D&D.
Stev Beren 11-20-06, 05:20 PM	Yes, so far as the word 'Strength' is used in the context of D&D. THen that 90 pound female Gymnast, in D&D terms, would get a high bonus to damage when punching you? ANd, if Desterity is just your hand eye coordination, that a Jewler would be decidedly hard to hit?
calvinNhobbes 11-20-06, 06:05 PM	ANd, if Desterity is just your hand eye coordination, that a Jewler would be decidedly hard to hit? Those wily jewelers! :P
pmurray@bigpond.com 11-20-06, 08:17 PM	THen that 90 pound female Gymnast, in D&D terms, would get a high bonus to damage when punching you? ANd, if Desterity is just your hand eye coordination, that a Jewler would be decidedly hard to hit? Ever been punched by a female gymnast? Having said that, you are quite right: in the real world, females are not as strong as equivalent males. Your point about the jewler is what I am talking about. In D&D, he would have a high Dex - would he have a dodge bonus? Mind you, my characters are both Dex/Int - a Wizard and a Rogue. So I ain't complaining.
Stev Beren 11-20-06, 09:54 PM	Ever been punched by a female gymnast? Having said that, you are quite right: in the real world, females are not as strong as equivalent males. Your point about the jewler is what I am talking about. In D&D, he would have a high Dex - would he have a dodge bonus? Mind you, my characters are both Dex/Int - a Wizard and a Rogue. So I ain't complaining. THe point is, you said Atheleticism is represented by strength, when it seems pretty obvious it is represented by both. Or rather, by the combination of Strength, COnstitution and Dexterity. THe categories of Power, COntrol, and resistance. Strength, Dexterity, COnstitution. In my mind accuracy of combat belongs to dexterity, or the Accuracy component rather than the 'power' component, save in weapons that rely on crude power to do damage.
calvinNhobbes 11-20-06, 11:09 PM	In my mind accuracy of combat belongs to dexterity, or the Accuracy component rather than the 'power' component, save in weapons that rely on crude power to do damage. And as I have pointed out, you can't control a weapon unless you are strong enough to neglect it's weight.
pmurray@bigpond.com 11-20-06, 11:34 PM	And as I have pointed out, you can't control a weapon unless you are strong enough to neglect it's weight. Exactly. You can use dex to hit, but only for weapons so light that their weight can be ignored by ordinary folk. It's a feat named "Weapon Finesse". How about this: Anyone can add their Dex and their Str modifier to hit, but weapons impose a max dex and max strength bonus - and this overlaps with the max dex penalty associated with armour. So if you are wearing chain, you can apply at most 3 points (?) of dex to your to-hit. If you are using a greatsword, the max dex bonus is zero. Rapiers have a max str bonus of 2, spiked chain max str 1, and heavy daggers have a max str bonus of 4, surprisingly, because the blade is heavy enough to make strength-driven stabbing useful. All you have to do, then, is go through all the sourcebooks and assign reasonable max str and max dex bonuses to-hit to all the weapons.
Stev Beren 11-21-06, 06:52 PM	And as I have pointed out, you can't control a weapon unless you are strong enough to neglect it's weight. ANd even if you hasve the strength to neglect its weight, you can't control it if you don't have any control. ]You can say you can't steer a car well without a powerful engine and be right, but you also can't steer a car without a steering wheel.
calvinNhobbes 11-21-06, 07:14 PM	So we have concluded that both dexterity and strength alone are inadequate to describe the manipulation of an item. Therefore, since it is a game and for simplicity we must choose only one attribute for modifying melee attacks, then the logical reason is to choose the ability which is most balancing. Since dexterity already affects AC, reflex saves, to hit with range weapons, and a prereq for many feats, my vote is for strength. Oh look, that's what the actual rule is! Fantastic! ANd even if you hasve the strength to neglect its weight, you can't control it if you don't have any control. Also define control? How much control do you need to swing a bat at a person? You can't quantify control. Give an example of someone who is so clumsy they would be incapable of controling the swing of a bat. Better yet, give an example of a strong person so clumsy they are completely incapable of swinging a bat.
Stev Beren 11-21-06, 07:33 PM	So we have concluded that both dexterity and strength alone are inadequate to describe the manipulation of an item. Therefore, since it is a game and for simplicity we must choose only one attribute for modifying melee attacks, then the logical reason is to choose the ability which is most balancing. Since dexterity already affects AC, reflex saves, to hit with range weapons, and a prereq for many feats, my vote is for strength. Oh look, that's what the actual rule is! Fantastic! Also define control? How much control do you need to swing a bat at a person? You can't quantify control. Give an example of someone who is so clumsy they would be incapable of controling the swing of a bat. Better yet, give an example of a strong person so clumsy they are completely incapable of swinging a bat. I can give plenty who have problems swinging the bat and HITTING something. I've watched plenty play, for example,. baseball.
calvinNhobbes 11-22-06, 06:10 PM	I can give plenty who have problems swinging the bat and HITTING something. I've watched plenty play, for example,. baseball. I'm unfamiliar with any people 4 inches tall who can fly around at 90+ mph.
Saytr 11-22-06, 09:33 PM	I always thought there should be 3. Strength- Damage rolls and skills Dexterity- All attack rolls and skills like Slight of Hand Agility- Init, Reflex saves, AC and skills like Tumble Breaking up STR and DEX from 2 to 3 also puts them on par with all the other abilities. As it stands, STR and DEX are the two most powerful/important ability scores. I can understand the reasons not to do this though. If you start adding new ability scores, where do you stop? CON can be broken up into toughness and stamina. CHA into comliness and force of personality (or whatever word best defines that). I don't know why Wisdom would affect Listen checks AND Cleric spells (you can hear your god better?) I like it the way it is. But if I had to make one change, it would be breaking up STR and DEX.
Stev Beren 11-23-06, 09:10 AM	I'm unfamiliar with any people 4 inches tall who can fly around at 90+ mph. . . .huh?
calvinNhobbes 11-26-06, 11:16 PM	. . .huh? Apparently you failed your intelligence check vs. my sarcastic reply.
Kursk 11-27-06, 05:45 PM	I was thinking about ruling (in my next game) that your Dexterity modifier is used for all attack rolls, and your Strength modifier is used for all damage rolls, what do you think? I know it makes fighters a little more MAD, but I feel it kinda makes abit more sense. Good or bad idea? i'm curious to know how others feel about the matter. Let's see. I carry a Warhammer. I attack s/o in Full Plate. Strength doesn't help me land a hit that damages??? But, if I have a high dex and a Str of 3 I'm more likely to land a hit that damages???
windscar18 11-27-06, 06:17 PM	There is one simple solution to that problem: use Dex to attack, Str to damage, and simply switch to an Armor = dmg reduction system. That fighter can sure land that hit, not like its going to do any damage anyway. Of course, that's hardly satisfying and that's because coordination can be bled slightly into skill or even superseded by skill. Therefore, Base Attack Bonus does represent the coordination that a powerful warrior gains from swinging his sword a lot. Unfortunately, that also implies that rogues have crap coordination compared to a warrior, which isn't always the case. In addition, there is the problem that some people are just plain more talented in the coordination field anyway, so ability scores naturally have some say in attacks.
Rhialto 11-28-06, 03:22 AM	I think dex to hit str for damage, COMBINED with minimum stat attributes for weapons (vaguely similar to the computer game Diablo) would work. Every example cited about how teh rules break down gives us a weapon which is obviously optimised for characters of a particular physique, being wielded by a character obviously not of that physique.
SlinkyTWF 11-28-06, 02:32 PM	I'm currently working on a skill-based variant that eliminates class and levels. I am also looking at making a revision to the AC rules that has some similarities to the Waking Lands variant linked earlier, so it seems worth mentioning here. The difference is that I am toying with the idea of making melee and ranged accuracy two different formulae (mainly just a shift in the base "DC" between melee AC and ranged AC). In the current notes, melee attacks would work with STR affecting damage (but not attack rolls) and Armor bonus acting as damage reduction. But I want to retain the DEX modifier as a ranged combat variable to keep the stat relevant to combat (I am disinclined to use it as a base determining modifier for melee attacks, lest it become too important). So what I am thinking is for melee, I use my modified "waking" variant, but for ranged, instead of assigning a base AC of 10, I assign a base AC determined by the size of the target. My working numbers are around Large=10, Medium=15, Small =18, etc. until you get to Fine at about 30. DEX mods would still apply (which is why I set the base Medium DC at 15 instead of 10). I'm posting on break, so don't have time to elaborate too much, but that should be enough to add another point to the discussion.
Daxen 11-28-06, 09:56 PM	Calvin, the problem with your arguments is that you're using greatswords and sledges for your examples. There are also weapons like shortswords, rapiers, quarterstaves, daggers--heck, the majority of the D&D weapon list--that don't rely upon strength to do their damage. As I mentioned, a child could run you through with a rapier. A shortsword depends more upon hitting someone at all than hitting them hard, because it's light and fast. Being supremely buff won't help you with that weapon nearly as much as being nimble and fast. So, yes--strength is vitally important for bludgeoning or extremely large weapons, but dexterity is of greater importance for the smaller, sharper ones. Oh, and personally, I'd rather have a sword-fight with a male body-builder who could bench two hundred pounds than a fit female gymnast--I know I can hit the seven foot, mostly immobile target, and, small as I am, avoid his attacks. The hundred-pound athlete, I'm not quite so sure about. Firstly, a quarterstaff relies almost entirely on strength to do it's damage. It is a mass/impact weapon. I know this because I fight with one. Secondly, if you think body builders are immobile, you don't know many body builders. Bludgeoning weapons and slashing weapons do damage through application of force i.e. Strength. Piercing weapons do the same thing though they require less force to do damage in the first place. Sure a child can pierce your skin with a rapier, but a full grown man can run you through with it. The child's swing will be pitifully easy to knock away, an aspect of combat that is not being discussed here. Strength allows you to bring the weapon to bear in a manner that can cause damage. Dexterity can only do that if the weapon is light enough and you have the training in those maneuvers. There are weapons that benefit greatly from the application of dextrous hands and qucik movements, though this manner of fighting requires specific practice and training. Thus the feat. Furthermore, fighting in this way causes you to sacrifice some of the power in your swing. To go along with the baseball bat discussion. There are "hitters" and there are "ball placers". The hitter uses his strength to swing the bat hard and crush the ball hopefully over the fence. Strength based warrior. The ball placer uses fine manipulations in his swing to aim for the open spots in the defense. Finesse base warrior. Are both Dex and STR used in determining whether or not you hit IRL? Of course. Should Dex in D&D be any more cool? No.
AesirRaven 11-28-06, 11:02 PM	I too have had a problem with this issue for years. The simple fact is, if you can't hit the broad side of a barn, it doesn't matter how strong you are, you're still not going to do damage because you didn't make the impact in the first place. All this talk about power-hitters versus ball-placers ignores the fact that power-hitters have both high Str and Dex, not one or the other. It's a bad example. A high-Str, low-Dex batter would simply not be able to hit the ball at all, let alone "crush" it at the right angle for a home run rather than a fast grounder. Str does not factor into the ability to make contact except through the minimum needed to hold the bat -- any excess does not increase the ability to make contact, only to drive the ball farther when contact is made. Damage, not to-hit. However, in the interest of perhaps helping to achieve a consensus between those who do not believe Strength is the proper Ability Score to modifty "to-hit" rolls and those who do, I present to you the argument I have given myself many times over the years to make this all easier to bear: A d20 Ability Score is not just raw potential. It also represents the ability to apply what the score represents. Thus, a high Strength includes the ability to properly apply one's physical power in tasks where it is important -- which is why it, and not Dex, factors into athletic skills in d20 where Dex or similar stats are used in other games. I've never been a big fan of the "balance" argument for justifying illogical applications of Ability Scores; anybody who recognizes my name probably knows my feelings about that argument with regard to Charisma. This different look at things has helped me to stomach illogical design that I otherwise probably wouldn't be able to tolerate. Hope it helps somebody.
TheDarkLord 11-29-06, 02:05 AM	Ever been punched by a female gymnast? Yes. I laughed. Her boyfriend hit me. I flinched. I hit him. We fought. 240 lb HS Defensive Tackle (me) vs. 130lb (if he was Soaking wet) Gymnast. I won.
Kursk 11-29-06, 12:05 PM	Ever been punched by a female gymnast? Having said that, you are quite right: in the real world, females are not as strong as equivalent males. No, but when I doing karate at age20 I used to coach women. I protected my "soft spots" but never worried otherwise. They couldn't strike hard enough to "damage" me.
Draz74 11-30-06, 04:00 PM	It seems like a lot of the opinions on this thread (just not the extreme pro-Dex end of them) could be settled by a compromise of making Weapon Finesse an automatic rule instead of a feat. Anyone whose Dex is higher than their Strength can use Dexterity to hit -- IF they're using a light weapon (or rapier/spiked chain/whip). Not too game-breaking? It's not a perfect solution. For one thing, it still means you CAN use Strength with finesse-able weapons (which might make sense with a rapier, and definitely makes sense with a hand axe or light mace, but doesn't really make sense with a dagger, at least against unarmored opponents). But for the low amount of rules-baggage, it adds a fair amount of realism. Of course, now we need to come up with some other purpose for the Weapon Finesse feat. Someone (who wanted to do this same change, but not optionally) suggested adding Dexterity to damage ... I guess that would be OK as long as you can't combine it with the Swashbuckler's Int-to-damage ability.
calvinNhobbes 11-30-06, 04:05 PM	I guess that would be OK as long as you can't combine it with the Swashbuckler's Int-to-damage ability. Why not? More love for the DEX and INT based melee fighters!
Lethanic 11-30-06, 04:45 PM	It seems like a lot of the opinions on this thread (just not the extreme pro-Dex end of them) could be settled by a compromise of making Weapon Finesse an automatic rule instead of a feat. Anyone whose Dex is higher than their Strength can use Dexterity to hit -- IF they're using a light weapon (or rapier/spiked chain/whip). Not too game-breaking? It's not a perfect solution. For one thing, it still means you CAN use Strength with finesse-able weapons (which might make sense with a rapier, and definitely makes sense with a hand axe or light mace, but doesn't really make sense with a dagger, at least against unarmored opponents). But for the low amount of rules-baggage, it adds a fair amount of realism. Of course, now we need to come up with some other purpose for the Weapon Finesse feat. Someone (who wanted to do this same change, but not optionally) suggested adding Dexterity to damage ... I guess that would be OK as long as you can't combine it with the Swashbuckler's Int-to-damage ability. Or its an additional bonus to hit that requires a minimum dexterity to have.
Deity 11-30-06, 05:21 PM	Personally, the way I like it is that all light weapons use only Dex for to hit, and Str for damage. Rapiers and spiked chains can be either or, players choice, for to hit, Str for damage. The weapon finesse feat allows the player to use Dex instead of Str on all one handed weapons to hit, still Str for Damage. Two-handed weapons always use Str for to hit and damage. however, even if the weapon uses Str for to hit, if that character has a Dex penalty, that penalty applies for to hit, as well as Str. Also, for weapons that use Dex for to hit, this Dex bonus is limited by the Max Dex bonus of any armor the character is wearing (but not load).
bruiserdeck 12-02-06, 01:24 AM	A d20 Ability Score is not just raw potential. It also represents the ability to apply what the score represents. Thus, a high Strength includes the ability to properly apply one's physical power in tasks where it is important -- which is why it, and not Dex, factors into athletic skills in d20 where Dex or similar stats are used in other games. abso-freaking-lutly correct. when that is added to the idea that all stats in D&D are a general term for simplicity of game play rather than scientificly aplicable measures of ability It makes things much easier to under stand in D&D Think about it. Why does dex = reaction speed? dex has nothing to do with a persons ability to move quickly. the only reason dex effects a characters initiative is because of the steriotypical concept that dex = quick and agile while STR = sluggish brute force. The point is every one has to at some point realize that the stats are simply a tool for playing the game not a direct relation to reality. the argument can be made either way in the str vs dex for to hit bonus in the same way that the argument can be made that wisdom can substitute for charisma
ShinoAburame 12-03-06, 11:44 PM	I say go for it. It makes sense. Archery? Sure dex helps you aim, but it depends on how much preassure you apply to the arrow how hard it hits. Thus, strength is important. Melee weapons/Throwing? Obvious. The only example where str couldn't apply is firearms, and this is only if you're playing steampunk D&D. Then again I'd make firearms deal wholly more damage then anything else. (Also more expensive.)
Lethanic 12-04-06, 05:39 PM	I say go for it. It makes sense. Archery? Sure dex helps you aim, but it depends on how much preassure you apply to the arrow how hard it hits. Thus, strength is important. Melee weapons/Throwing? Obvious. The only example where str couldn't apply is firearms, and this is only if you're playing steampunk D&D. Then again I'd make firearms deal wholly more damage then anything else. (Also more expensive.) Crossbow. It is cranked mechanically, and strength has nothing to do with it. Aim has everything to do with it.
ShinoAburame 12-04-06, 08:07 PM	Crossbow. It is cranked mechanically, and strength has nothing to do with it. Aim has everything to do with it. Well then it'd be alongside the other exception firearms. Seeing as a crossbow is sortof like a primitive firearm.
Lethanic 12-04-06, 10:02 PM	And really, minus the minimum strength needed to make a bow WORK Whether or not an arrow actually HITS> . . .
Aurotuli 12-05-06, 01:23 AM	Higher Strength allows you to swing your weapon faster and harder, making your attacks harder to dodge and more easily penetrate armor.This is, as I understand it, the basis of Power Attack. They swing with more power, but in exchange they are less likely to hit. Personally, I think that all light weapons should automatically use Dex as strength will be of little aid in guiding them in a strike. Similarly, all heavy weapons should use Str, as their weight and often ungainly size will be little affected by one's dexterity and a notable bit of Strength is needed to lift, direct, and otherwise wield them. This leaves those weapons that are inbetween, and I tend to feel that whichever is better - Dex or Str - should be used in such a situation, as both contribute to the use of the weapon. Or perhaps instead . . . Maybe each weapon - by its weight - should have a minimum Str needed for it to be wielded. Thus Str is still important, as it determines how heavy a weapon can be wielded, but if the Str is met and the Dex is greater, than the Dex is used - but only to the degree that a difference exists. Weapons requiring two hands even further limit the use of Dexterity. For example: Suppose we have a weapon of such weight that it requires a Str 12 to use. It turns out that the fellow using it has a Str 14 and so can use it. He also has a Dex 16. He can use his Dex rather than his Str for better results, but due to the Str 12 needed to wield it, he can only apply the difference - 4 pts instead of 6 pts, resulting in a bonus of +2. In this instance the bonus from Dex is no better than the bonus from Str. If his Str had been 16 then it would have been better to use his Str rather than this Dex, as it would grant a bonus of +3 rather than a bonus if +2. However, if the weapon had required two hands (due to size, not weight, as the min Str sets the weight for use with one hand), it would have been treated as if the Str were +2 higher for the purpose of the benefit gained from Dex (in this case, +1, making Str by far the better of the two). So, to reiterate: Every weapon has a minimum Str required to properly wield it in one hand. Unusually large weapons require two hands. When determining what is added to the BAB, Dex is the default. However, the benefit from Dex is limited by the difference from the minimum Str needed to properly wield the weapon. Furthermore, the benefit from Dex to BAB is decreased by one point if the weapon requires two hands. Str is not decreased due to size or unwieldiness, and thus it is the usual default for larger and heavier weapons. Thus a two handed weapon with a Str 16 requirement would rarely gain any benefit from using Dex unless the Dex was significantly higher than Str (24+, to gain even +1 point over Str, in this instance). A light weapon having a requirement of Str 8 or 10, on the other hand, would almost always benefit from using Dex instead (unless Dex was <8). Finally, while critical hits can occur whenever a chance lucky hit deals notable damage, precision based damage would require the use of Dex rather than Str - thus making heavier weapons less likely for such and in fact slightly decreasing their usefulness as the benefit to BAB possibly would be lessened (as in the second example, for instance, the character would need a Dex of 22 to equal the benefit to BAB that would be gained from Str 16, and would need a Dex of at least 24 to have even one point more from Str than from Dex. Limited to Dex, the character would have a +0 to BAB even with a Dex 16, due to the strength requirements for using the weapon proficiently.) Hmm, this has become an interesting idea that I will have to further consider. As for assigning Strength Requirements for Proficient Use of Melee Weapons, I suggest considering Encumbrance. Perhaps a quarter of the weight needed for a Light Load for any given Str score could set the limit? Then compare these weights to the weights of weapons to determine the necessary Str score for proficient use? For Str 10 that would suggest 8#s. That would mean that virtually all non-exotic one-handed weapons (excluding the heavy mace, heavy crossbow, and long spear) could use either Dex or Str as all would have a minimum Str of 10. Hmm, perhaps it should be further adjusted. Using a fifth of a maximum Light Load for Str 10 results in 6#s - which would add the Heavy Pick, Battle Axe, Spear, and Morning Star to the list of items requiring Str 11 (or 12). Further adjusting (to one-sixth) reduces this to 5#s and adds the Flail and War Hammer to the list of those requiring Str 11 (or 12). One problem, however, is that under this system odd and even Str scores would matter, rather than pure modifiers. While some see no issue with that, I have long preferred situations that use pre modifiers whenever possible. I will have to further consider this, I think. It is an odd and likely overly complicated idea, I admit.
StarFyre 12-07-06, 02:02 PM	The real question is hit vs penetration. You could hit something, but not penetrate. Something we will experiment with at the next large encounter in my campaign (unless players do something that causes them to skip that entire boss area), is experiment with the optional weapon vs armour penetration from 2E. This is how it worked. A slashing weapon vs full plate had a -4 thaco adjustment (ie. -4 to hit). So here is scenario: Now, I will reverse the #s to make it apply to d20..AC goes up... your AC (via official D&D book is 18 with full plate (i forgot what the bonus for full plate is, asume it's +8). Now, a person attacking me has a slashing weapon. Normally, his roll+bonuses need to be 18+ to hit me/hurt me. However, this is what the modified system would do: His effective AC vs the slashing weapon is 22. (4 penalty). So now, if attacker rolls 1 to 17 (with bonuses)..he/she misses completely!! A roll + bonuses from 18 to 21 means they hit the armour but did not penetrate. then 22+ means they hit AND penetrated. Then if hit he armour, you check for armour damage. Now, combine this with the initial hit roll being dex based, but the bonuses for damage/armour damage being str based. (we aren't going to use the dex hit thing...but we are going to use the weapon vs armour modifiers/armour damage/penetration and see how it goes). We also use the 2E combat and tactics detailed crit hit system instead. (ie. losing limbs, bleeding, organ damage, stat loss due to massive damage to skull, etc) It makes game world much more detailed but also very brutal and DMs have to accomodate treasure a bit differently (ie. spells can be used to heal organ damage/bone damage instead of HP back...so now playes need a lot more potions/scrolls). Sanjay
Lethanic 12-08-06, 09:29 PM	Really, if armour just worked by being "Damage resistance' then you coudl give the hit part to dexterity and the problem woudl at least partially go away. Dex woudl purely determine contact - Strength, penetration. THus, for example, a touch attack would use the same ac as a normal attack. .. etcetera.