Ranged Options for All Classes

[5ekyu]

Gold weight is rarely tracked in any game I've seen. You can always exchange for gems or get a pack mule. I have a rogue character I haven't run yet and I just added a bunch of typical gear. He even has an extra set of armor because I forgot to remove a set. He's not encumbered yet.

I don't remember ever seeing an issue unless the PC wears medium armor.

and yet again, we see more info on your game which helps show how little strength matters there due to campaign specific parameters.

My first level halfling has like 90lbs of get off the bat and thats before moving to decent (heavier) armor or weapons.

After so many ways to devalue strength being chosen by your group, its not surprising it seems underbalanced.

 

[Oofta]

and yet again, we see more info on your game which helps show how little strength matters there due to campaign specific parameters.

My first level halfling has like 90lbs of get off the bat and thats before moving to decent (heavier) armor or weapons.

After so many ways to devalue strength being chosen by your group, its not surprising it seems underbalanced.

Again ... I have a PC in Dnd beyond. Gave him studded leather, climbing gear, so on and so forth. So I created a character and added a bunch of standard gear. Even with an 8 strength. In addition, I play a fair amount of AL.

I've seen encumbrance come up, but only with a PC that wore medium armor. As far as obstacles, if it's game stopping there will be work-arounds if you follow standard advice.

 

[5ekyu]

Again ... I have a PC in Dnd beyond. Gave him studded leather, climbing gear, so on and so forth. So I created a character and added a bunch of standard gear. Even with an 8 strength. In addition, I play a fair amount of AL.

I've seen encumbrance come up, but only with a PC that wore medium armor. As far as obstacles, if it's game stopping there will be work-arounds if you follow standard advice.

"As far as obstacles, if it's game stopping there will be work-arounds if you follow standard advice."

Does this also apply to cases where the obstacles put high strength guys out of play, to whatever degree you see them too far put down?

I mean, if this is a valid dismissal of the need for strength to overcome obstacles or whatever reason you put it in for, seems it would cut both ways.

I am sure you can create a character in DDB where an 8 str foesnt cause encumbrance issues, in play tho, characters tend to get a bit more messy - tho that varies by campaign obviously.

Which brings back to the point I have made many times now...

In a campaign with all those devaluing to strength parameters set to "yep" (add now that strength obstacles will have workarounds thing) a house rule of some type may be a good solution if it has risen to problem.

Heck as another option for rules - add guns. Add guns that require strength scores so that instead of the universal archer campaign you end up with muscle-bound heavy weapon dragons and lighter nimbler archer types.

To me that sounds like more fun and diverse than oprah putting bows under everybody Christmas tree but it's just yet another house ruled in option to offset the campaign parameter induced imbalances.

 

[Oofta]

"As far as obstacles, if it's game stopping there will be work-arounds if you follow standard advice."

Does this also apply to cases where the obstacles put high strength guys out of play, to whatever degree you see them too far put down?

You would seriously stop a campaign dead in it's tracks because the party wasn't able to overcome a single obstacle? In addition, you don't see the difference between a one time obstacle and an ongoing penalty that makes certain build practically useless? Besides, the answer is obvious. I house rule so that this isn't an issue.

But like I said, there are a lot of ways around the strength issue. For the occasional check, an uncommon potion does the trick. Or have the druid transform into an animal with strength. Hook up a pulley system with that intelliegence check. I know the response is going to be "aha! teamwork FTW!" Except that it's the druid casting the spell for themselves or the rogue who bought the potion, the wizard that took the background/skills that gave him knowledge of construction. Not the BDF (big dumb fighter) playing mother-may-I asking for assistance to be useful.

There's no work-around (without house rules) for lack of dexterity for many situations.

Blah, blah, blah. This is getting boring, we're just on endless repeat cycle. Have a good one.

 

[5ekyu]

You would seriously stop a campaign dead in it's tracks because the party wasn't able to overcome a single obstacle? In addition, you don't see the difference between a one time obstacle and an ongoing penalty that makes certain build practically useless? Besides, the answer is obvious. I house rule so that this isn't an issue.

But like I said, there are a lot of ways around the strength issue. For the occasional check, an uncommon potion does the trick. Or have the druid transform into an animal with strength. Hook up a pulley system with that intelliegence check. I know the response is going to be "aha! teamwork FTW!" Except that it's the druid casting the spell for themselves or the rogue who bought the potion, the wizard that took the background/skills that gave him knowledge of construction. Not the BDF (big dumb fighter) playing mother-may-I asking for assistance to be useful.

There's no work-around (without house rules) for lack of dexterity for many situations.

Blah, blah, blah. This is getting boring, we're just on endless repeat cycle. Have a good one.

Well, i suppose i could answer your question by saying "no, i never said that. I asked you a question about the seeming one-sided nature of that claim you made when you brought obstacles of that type into the discussion."

I am just amazed that you bring these game-stopping obstacles into the discussion if you feel that they wont ever play a role. It seemed like you were using them to dismiss strength obstacles but if they never occur then hey, they dont affect strength or dex guys either, right?

But, other obstacles might.

Again, as i have said many times, for a game with all those strength-devaluing parameters in effect as your game has chosen to implement, one or more of the many house rules that have been suggested in this thread may well be the best solutions for your game.

I hope you find one that suits your campaign's "dials" to borrow a term from other systems.

May all your obstacles be ones with easy workarounds!

 

[Mistwell]

You would seriously stop a campaign dead in it's tracks because the party wasn't able to overcome a single obstacle? In addition, you don't see the difference between a one time obstacle and an ongoing penalty that makes certain build practically useless? Besides, the answer is obvious. I house rule so that this isn't an issue.

But like I said, there are a lot of ways around the strength issue. For the occasional check, an uncommon potion does the trick. Or have the druid transform into an animal with strength. Hook up a pulley system with that intelliegence check. I know the response is going to be "aha! teamwork FTW!" Except that it's the druid casting the spell for themselves or the rogue who bought the potion, the wizard that took the background/skills that gave him knowledge of construction. Not the BDF (big dumb fighter) playing mother-may-I asking for assistance to be useful.

There's no work-around (without house rules) for lack of dexterity for many situations.

Blah, blah, blah. This is getting boring, we're just on endless repeat cycle. Have a good one.

The only part I disagree with is there being no work around for lacking dexterity. I don't know what you mean by that. We've had an entire campaign where we worked around it. Why can't you work around Dex? Spells can pretty easily make up for lack of Dex in specific situations.

 

[Oofta]

Well, i suppose i could answer your question by saying "no, i never said that. I asked you a question about the seeming one-sided nature of that claim you made when you brought obstacles of that type into the discussion."

I am just amazed that you bring these game-stopping obstacles into the discussion if you feel that they wont ever play a role. It seemed like you were using them to dismiss strength obstacles but if they never occur then hey, they dont affect strength or dex guys either, right?

But, other obstacles might.

Again, as i have said many times, for a game with all those strength-devaluing parameters in effect as your game has chosen to implement, one or more of the many house rules that have been suggested in this thread may well be the best solutions for your game.

I hope you find one that suits your campaign's "dials" to borrow a term from other systems.

May all your obstacles be ones with easy workarounds!

I've stated my position dozens of times, and I think I've been quite clear. You keep nattering away, asking slight variations of the same questions, no matter what I answer. It seems to me that you're just doing it so that when I don't fully answer you can accuse me of dodging the question.

It's boring. I had a longer response, but short version: in most games dex based characters suffer virtually no penalty, melee or ranged and get other benefits. Strength based characters fall far behind on distances over 30 feet or above level 4.

You don't have a problem with that, I think it's one of the flaws of 5E. Fortunately one I easily fix in my home game.

 

[Oofta]

The only part I disagree with is there being no work around for lacking dexterity. I don't know what you mean by that. We've had an entire campaign where we worked around it. Why can't you work around Dex? Spells can pretty easily make up for lack of Dex in specific situations.

Not always in the campaigns I've played/DMed. Then again we normally go 5-10 rounds between long rests and we can't always rely on the spellcasters thinking tactically/what's best for the group. It also depend greatly on type of campaign an types of encounters*; if the encounters are tailored to the PCs vs tailored to the enemy etc so YMMV.

*I will note that there aren't many flying creatures with ranged attacks at lower levels in the DMG. In addition, if you only run traditional dungeon crawls in constrained spaces it may not be as much of an issue.

 

[5ekyu]

I've stated my position dozens of times, and I think I've been quite clear. You keep nattering away, asking slight variations of the same questions, no matter what I answer. It seems to me that you're just doing it so that when I don't fully answer you can accuse me of dodging the question.

It's boring. I had a longer response, but short version: in most games dex based characters suffer virtually no penalty, melee or ranged and get other benefits. Strength based characters fall far behind on distances over 30 feet or above level 4.

You don't have a problem with that, I think it's one of the flaws of 5E. Fortunately one I easily fix in my home game.

Wait... are you now shifting away from what happens in *your gsmes* where grapples dont happen but once a decade and all those other strength devaluing parameters are in vogue to this being "in most games"?
I mean, I would have to go back snd look but I am pretty sure a lot of your data points have been challenged by more than have supported them on this very thread. I dont think on this thread there are even evidences points to suggest these exist as issues or realities for "most games."

When you kept it narrowed in on an issue that arises in your games where these parameters you keep claiming apply are actually in play, hey, even I was on board with you thinking house rules are the way to go. After all, we certainly dont know your games better than you.

But if you now want to take your campaign parameters and issues from them and somehow ignore the other posters and jump to this bring true for "in most games", that is where you and I will have to part company and start disagreeing.

 

[Oofta]

Wait... are you now shifting away from what happens in *your gsmes* where grapples dont happen but once a decade and all those other strength devaluing parameters are in vogue to this being "in most games"?
I mean, I would have to go back snd look but I am pretty sure a lot of your data points have been challenged by more than have supported them on this very thread. I dont think on this thread there are even evidences points to suggest these exist as issues or realities for "most games."

When you kept it narrowed in on an issue that arises in your games where these parameters you keep claiming apply are actually in play, hey, even I was on board with you thinking house rules are the way to go. After all, we certainly dont know your games better than you.

But if you now want to take your campaign parameters and issues from them and somehow ignore the other posters and jump to this bring true for "in most games", that is where you and I will have to part company and start disagreeing.

Thanks for confirming that nothing I say will ever be good enough. Games differ, I'm just relaying what I've seen after playing with hundreds of different people (not all in 5E) ever since Living City was a thing.