Let's stop acting like strength can't be accurate

[Yaarel]

I've been seeing a lot of talk all over the place about wanting this or that weapon to be finesse often reflect some particular real-world combat style or experience. The pike in particular seems to come up a lot.

While some weapons obviously rely on pure unadulterated strength for their damage (looking at you maul), many other regular weapons can be a strong source of precise, accurate. While the long sword was often used to bash against armor causing deformation and eventual suffocation, the benefit of it compared to a mace was the extra control and precision that could pierce openings if needed.

The reason (in my head) for finesse weapons being specially called out (other than some game balance issues) isn't that they are inherently more accurate than a long sword, but because they don't necessarily need much strength to use. Whipping around a short sword or dagger just doesn't require a lot of strength to maneuver, it can be helpful but isn't required. A bigger weapon can often be just as precise, but you NEED to be fairly strong to exert that level of control of your big length of metal.

That said there is obviously nothing wrong with choosing to describe your weapon attacks as brutally bashing and slicing, but we shouldn't feel that just because a sword or spear isn't finesse doesn't mean it can't narratively be a whirling, flowing instrument of elegant death.

It does mean that you have to make tough choices with stat distribution, but I feel that is a feature, not a bug.

Dexterity is for slow cautious precision − like aiming a bow.

Strength is for accurate body coordination − like punching someone.



Punching, kicking, grappling, jump attacks, are all Strength attacks. Strength is athletic, gymnastic, accuracy.

 

[Ancalagon]

This video is a *superb* example of how swordfighting is about much more than strength (although it helps a lot)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn36Pb8z3yI

(it also illustrates quite well how *defensive* a longsword can be, especially when wielded two handed)

Dexterity is for slow cautious precision − like aiming a bow.

Strength is for accurate body coordination − like punching someone.



Punching, kicking, grappling, jump attacks, are all Strength attacks. Strength is athletic, gymnastic, accuracy.

And yet acrobatics is a dex skill, not strength... or reflex saves are dex based etc etc

 

[Yaarel]

This video is a *superb* example of how swordfighting is about much more than strength (although it helps a lot)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn36Pb8z3yI

(it also illustrates quite well how *defensive* a longsword can be, especially when wielded two handed)



And yet acrobatics is a dex skill, not strength... or reflex saves are dex based etc etc

‘Acrobatics’ is a nonsense accident of bad game design.

D&D 1e made a titanic mistake by assigning ‘balance’ to (manual) dexterity. When Gygax said this, he specifically meant walking across a tightrope. In other words, *SLOW* *CAUTIOUS* movements.

Unfortunately, this connection between Dexterity and global bodily coordination opened the door to all kinds of nonsense. ‘Balance’ degenerated to running full speed across branches, somersaulting dives, and all manner of actions and reactions than can only properly relate to athletic Strength. It is absurd to suggest someone learns how to jump and climb while remaining ignorant about how to fall. As if someone who gives a flying kick wouldnt know how to balance. And so on.

With this bad idea of leaping, somersaulting, (manual) Dexterity, suddenly thief rogues with 2 Strength are leaping 40-feet out of a fireball blast.

Dexterity devolved into an awkward mastery of ‘balance’ and ‘fall’. They tried to think about a skill name that could associate these two randomly juxtaposed concepts. So they thought ‘tightrope’, ‘falling’, hey! ‘acrobat’.

But reallife acrobats know how to *CLIMB ROPE*. Reallife acrobats know how to catch each other in mid air. Real acrobats are muscularly buff as hɛll. Reallife acrobats are all about STRENGTH.

The Dexterity tradition is a sprawling mess.



Strength is athletic grace and accuracy. Global motor skills, as opposed to fine motor skills.

 

[Jacob Lewis]

Obviously, there is only one way to solve this dilemma: we need more characteristics! I propose the following additions:

Brawn, muscle, might, mass, size, grip, girth, speed, coordination, agility, manuverability, flexibility, bendiness, alliteration, endurance, sweatable, hairiness, pH balance, odoress, sheen, tone, aerodynamic, and hotness. We'll get to mental attributes later.

 

[Yaarel]

Obviously, there is only one way to solve this dilemma: we need more characteristics! I propose the following additions:

Brawn, muscle, might, mass, size, grip, girth, speed, coordination, agility, manuverability, flexibility, bendiness, alliteration, endurance, sweatable, hairiness, pH balance, odoress, sheen, tone, aerodynamic, and hotness. We'll get to mental attributes later.

Or less.

Athletics.
Finetuning.
Perception.
Sociability.

Done.

 

[Ancalagon]

‘Acrobatics’ is a nonsense accident of bad game design.

D&D 1e made a titanic mistake by assigning ‘balance’ to (manual) dexterity. When Gygax said this, he specifically meant walking across a tightrope. In other words, *SLOW* *CAUTIOUS* movements.

Unfortunately, this connection between Dexterity and global bodily coordination opened the door to all kinds of nonsense. ‘Balance’ degenerated to running full speed across branches, somersaulting dives, and all manner of actions and reactions than can only properly relate to athletic Strength. It is absurd to suggest someone learns how to jump and climb while remaining ignorant about how to fall. As if someone who gives a flying kick wouldnt know how to balance. And so on.

With this bad idea of leaping, somersaulting, (manual) Dexterity, suddenly thief rogues with 2 Strength are leaping 40-feet out of a fireball blast.

Dexterity devolved into an awkward mastery of ‘balance’ and ‘fall’. They tried to think about a skill name that could associate these two randomly juxtaposed concepts. So they thought ‘tightrope’, ‘falling’, hey! ‘acrobat’.

But reallife acrobats know how to *CLIMB ROPE*. Reallife acrobats know how to catch each other in mid air. Real acrobats are muscularly buff as hɛll. Reallife acrobats are all about STRENGTH.

The Dexterity tradition is a sprawling mess.



Strength is athletic grace and accuracy. Global motor skills, as opposed to fine motor skills.

erm...

Is this man strong?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other...-world-record-weight-in-strongman-competition

Is he an acrobat?

Athleticism is born of a combination of strength *and* dexterity. There are people who are tremendously strong but not very coordinated or fast, and people who are very agile and have limited strength.

 

[Yaarel]

The phrase ‘very agile’ means running and jumping. In other words, Strength.

 

[Yaarel]

‘Weight training’ is a skill. Something that naturally strong people need to ‘train’ in.

Lifting weights benefits from a high Strength score, in the same way that history benefits from a high Intelligence score. But it would be better if lifting was made a separate skill, rather than correlating one-to-one with Strength.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Well, the other thread it just came up in was a homebrew, and the context was an objection to a weapon attack using just CHA or INT...

The context was also a class that proponents have always been kinda militant about keeping mundane, with no reality-bending magic. The concept of being able to swing your sword using sheer force of will, rather than requiring athleticism or dexterity skirts close to that.

So, people care about this level of realism when criticizing each others amateur designs. [/QUOTE]

This video is a *superb* example of how swordfighting is about much more than strength (although it helps a lot)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cn36Pb8z3yI

(it also illustrates quite well how *defensive* a longsword can be, especially when wielded two handed)

Indeed. The combatants are demonstrating athleticism, power, and good control and speed of weapon (Str) as well as reflexes, grace and balance (Dex). D&D's compromise of Strength for offensive attacks, and Dexterity for defence is a reasonable representation unless you want to start combining abilities into secondary stats.

erm...

Is this man strong?

https://www.stuff.co.nz/sport/other...-world-record-weight-in-strongman-competition

Is he an acrobat?

Athleticism is born of a combination of strength *and* dexterity. There are people who are tremendously strong but not very coordinated or fast, and people who are very agile and have limited strength.

Remember that in 5e, Strength is explicitly natural athleticism and power etc. That man might represent a high strength, but so would Bruce Lee (although Bruce would also have a high Dex. (and a decent Cha and maybe Con. He basically dumped Int and Wis. )).
A typical example of a high-dex, low str person is probably your stereotypical couch potato: overweight and has trouble running and climbing, but with the dexterity and precision honed by years of video games.

When trying to stuff the infinity of human variation into six numbers, there are always going to be edge cases, or those that don't fit quite right.
Each group, if not each person also draws the lines between realism, good/balanced game mechanics, and ability to express a fantasy character in different places.

 

[Coroc]

You cannot make the system more realistic than it is. That said, even with a dagger you need strength to penetrate your target, only hitting it in the right spot without even scratching it won't help you much.

A Maul also requires to take aim, and the timing is as complicated as in a perfect rapier/dagger duel, although in another way: once you begin a motion with a maul you got momentum.

And btw, a 16th century rapier is nearly as heavy as a longsword (Oh pardon, a two handed sword in D&D speech), heavier than an arming sword (A longsword in D&D speech) and has a reach which is better than the arming sword and equal to the two handed sword IRL.

You will never dangle plate armor with any sword, thats outright stupid. If caught in a combat with a heavy armored oponent, having only a backup weapon like a sword at Hand, you will try halfswording, grappling or maybe a mordhau (using the sword reverse gripping it by the blade and making an improvised warhammer out of the handle bar) The openings of late plate armor are few to nonexistent, so concussive damage might be your only chance so forget about stabbing also unless your oponent is prone and you got some misericord dagger to apply via the eye slits.

So forget about making the game more realistic in keying of weapons which you believe are profiting from super high dexterity in some way of dexterity, you only succeed in making the game more unrealistic.