Why does STR affect Attack Bonus?

[Shin Okada]

And it is much harder to parry a blow from stronger attacker.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I 3rd Sejs for what it is worth and I'll go out on a limb and add:

D&D combat was originally designed around a concept of heavy mail clad knights hacking clumps from a dragon. AC was either steel plates or dragon hide and powering through it all required strength - 18% strength to be sure. There were no defensive rolls, improving AC with skill or anything like that, nup, just AC & HPs.

Is there a case for dex to hit?

Well, Andy Collins would probably say no because that would make null and void the concept of different, viable, fighting builds. Every fighting type would have to have good str, dex & con - just like in previous editions.

 

[Stalker0]

I think the standard archetype is that the big strong guy swings slow while the little guy because a dervish of speed....which isn't always true.

Strength equals force...and power applied to your limps makes them move faster as well as hit harder.

From a mechanics perspective....it would make strength too weak of a stat, and all big monsters would become utter chump.

 

[Ottergame]

Being stronger makes you faster, more able to control your strikes, and more likely to push through whatever defense or resistance your opponent is offering.

The whole "small quicker guy beats a big strong guy" is kind of a joke. A strong fighter is almost always going to win over a quicker one. David and Golliath myth be damned.

 

[DM_Matt]

David and Golliath myth be damned.

Nah, that one is "Little guy shoots big guy before he's close enough to hit him." That works just fine.

 

[Jdvn1]

It's also a balance issue. If it was Dex, then the only stat you'd need to be a good fighter is Dex.

 

[Bernardus]

Being stronger makes you faster, more able to control your strikes, and more likely to push through whatever defense or resistance your opponent is offering.

The whole "small quicker guy beats a big strong guy" is kind of a joke. A strong fighter is almost always going to win over a quicker one. David and Golliath myth be damned.

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.
A stronger guy isn't faster, because he/she is strong.
The strong person can do more damage and able to wield heavier weapons, which do more damage when they hit.
But a nimble person, a person with high dex can beat the strong person.
This works of course when the nimble guy uses his ability wisely.
The nimble guy will most likely use the hit and run tactics, so go in for a strike and then move away (Spring Attack feat).
I'm not saying the nimble guy always wins, because when the strong guy hits he does a lot of damage and that could prove desasterous for the nimble guy.

If you look to real life and take a bodybuilder who's pumping iron to make him stronger, if he hits it really hurts, becuase he is strong.
But he also is much slower than a nible person, so the nimble person wil go in for a strike, if possible to a point wher it hurts the most and temporarily disables a limb, then he moves away. So in fact the nimble guy is wearing the stronger one down and will most likely win the fight.
So saying thet a stronger guy almost always wins, is not really true.
this is my opion about it all.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree.
A stronger guy isn't faster, because he/she is strong.
The strong person can do more damage and able to wield heavier weapons, which do more damage when they hit.
But a nimble person, a person with high dex can beat the strong person.
This works of course when the nimble guy uses his ability wisely.
The nimble guy will most likely use the hit and run tactics, so go in for a strike and then move away (Spring Attack feat).
I'm not saying the nimble guy always wins, because when the strong guy hits he does a lot of damage and that could prove desasterous for the nimble guy.

I'm telling you from my personal experience this isn't true. Perhaps in an extreme case where you're comparing a Str 100 guy against a Dex 100 guy. But in every swordfight I've seen and participated in, strength is key. Strength is speed in swordfighting.

If you look to real life and take a bodybuilder who's pumping iron to make him stronger, if he hits it really hurts, becuase he is strong.
But he also is much slower than a nible person, so the nimble person wil go in for a strike, if possible to a point wher it hurts the most and temporarily disables a limb, then he moves away. So in fact the nimble guy is wearing the stronger one down and will most likely win the fight.

Have you ever watched the Ultimate Fighter? It was a TV show for a while that pitted various fighters in a cage match, any style goes. Not sure if it's still on. It was an amazing thing to watch. Basically, the big strong guy always won. The fancy martial arts guy would try and kick or punch the muscle brute, who would take the blow (or blows), rush up to the martial artist, grab him, throw him to the ground, and beat the living crud out of him. That show shattered a lot of illusions about real hand-to-hand combat.

So saying thet a stronger guy almost always wins, is not really true.

I'm afraid it is true, regardless of your opinion. :\

 

[Testament]

As a two-year practioner of kendo, this is absolutely true, in my experience. Strength is by far the most important attribute in swordfighting (or my experience of kendo, at least, it may be different for fencers or other types of bladed combat.)

The greater your strength, the faster and more accurate your blows. Dexterity is most useful for avoiding your opponent's blows. Which is excellently modeled by Dex to AC.

100% in agreement here, which is why I know a lot of people who competetively practice Kendo practice their swings with a Bokken (but no partner, of course). It weighs quite a bit more than the shinai (which doesn't even crack a kilo), and that's just emphasised when you pick it up afterwards. I can't see this being different for any other form of weapons-based fighting, even 'traditional' fencing, the sabre and epee aren't exactly "light", mainly since the epee is so long.

Strength = control = MUCH greater accuracy. Control is EVERYTHING when wielding a weapon.

And as for unarmed combat, UFC summed it up. I can't remember watching a single match that didn't end in a grapple of some kind, where technique counts for a lot, but sheer brute strength also does. It was incredible to watch, sure the little guys used martial arts (usually Muay Thai or Pencak Silat it seemed) to try and compensate, but when the 250 lbs tank also knows Muay Thai and BJJ (how common is that combo?!), it doesn't help you a whole lot. Especially when he's got you in a hold, try darting away now!

 

[reanjr]

Basically, the big strong guy always won. The fancy martial arts guy would try and kick or punch the muscle brute, who would take the blow (or blows), rush up to the martial artist, grab him, throw him to the ground, and beat the living crud out of him. That show shattered a lot of illusions about real hand-to-hand combat.
I'm afraid it is true, regardless of your opinion. :\

Nah, it just goes to show that primary use of oriental martial arts is dancing.