Will D&D make strength matter again?

[Remathilis]

Yep because 5E designers have devalued strength as a valid stat choice. I blame 3E for opening the door and crack with finesse feat to hit and 4E for burning down the house with any stat being used for melee attack rolls.

I know. Its been a blessing that my rogues from 3e on haven't need to be fighter/thieves just so that I can hit someone in melee.

 

[Yardiff]

Question: what is dex to damage? Is it accuracy/precision is the reason for adding dex to damage?

 

[Zardnaar]

Meh, other than the Rogue, DEX-melee is pretty weak. DEX-melee can't rock feats like Shield Master, Polearm Master, Great Weapon Master, etc. DEX-melee can't grapple and/or shove you prone, either. STR is still easily the superior melee stat.

Try playing a game without feats. Dex is uber feats are about the only thing keeping strength above water and even then SS+CBE.

 

[Zardnaar]

In our games, which I've played since the beta test, strength has never been a lesser ability to dex.

We play in a lot of dungeons, mostly published adventures but some homebrew.

We:

1) have never once found a magic rapier, and
2) very rarely find a magic ranged weapon, and
3) find a LOT of magic longswords and the occasional magic greataxe, and the occasional magic shield and heavy armor,
4) find ourselves in a lot of rooms which are so tight that staying at range is often not easily done, and
5) we seem to find a need to grapple and/or shove someone every third session or so.

This combination of factors makes strength as important as dex in our games. Someone wants to use the magic longsword or greataxe. Someone wants to be tromping around in magic heavy armor and with a shield. And given the lack of magic item shops, if we were to pass up the opportunity to use these items it would seem foolish versus all those creatures with resistance to non-magic attacks. And then, it's fun to grapple and shove people sometimes

Bottom line, we've never found dex to outshine str. It does so on paper maybe or in white room theorycrafting, but when the theory hits the published adventures it just doesn't work out as well.

Magic hand crossbows and great weapons seem rare in my games for some reason.

 

[Ancalagon]

I'm not overly concerned but if you were happy with 3e then perhaps use 3e as a model. Finesse weapons can use Dexterity to hit but damage is still based on Strength.

Pretty much.

The only issue that I can think of is crossbows.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Adjust your DM'ing style.

The "problem" that I have/see with many a TTRPG campaign, is that the DM (and Players) never think of just how hard it is to maintain muscle mass/tone, as well as how fast muscles get tired. Of course, if you and your group are into nothing really more than "episodic adventure", where the focus is on action/combat, then this won't work well. I'm always amazed when playing a video game (like Skyrim), where I can be carrying 250lb of equipment and I can literally jog around for HOURS without passing out. Video game logic, amiright?

Anyway, when I DM I try and keep a mental note about particularly stressful situations/actions. Strength is one of those things that will quickly 'wear out' from heavy use...which will impact Str, Dex and Con rather severely. Jumping, climbing, swimming, running...all rather dependent on Strength. If your campaign isn't seeing Strength be "useful", do more non-combat stuff and don't just make it a "one success and you're golden". Swimming across a river should take more than one check. Say, one to get to half way, another to get to the other shore. If it's rapids or icy-cold, make them at Disadvantage, or make more of them (say, four checks). What does this do? It lets the beefcakes look/be impressive. It also lets the wimps realize how much they need the beefcakes around (I'm looking at you Wizards with Str as a dump stat...!).

If Strength is only really coming up in combat...it's not that Str is 'weak', its' that the campaign is too combat-focused. IMHO, of course.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Lost Soul]

I know. Its been a blessing that my rogues from 3e on haven't need to be fighter/thieves just so that I can hit someone in melee.

Why should rogues be so blessed? Why not just go the 4E route and make any attack & damage roll melee or ranged be defined by whatever attribute the characters desire? Why should rogues receive special treatment?

 

[Lost Soul]

Yet you keep mentioning Defensive Duelist. If you're bringing feats into the discussion for one build, then I get to for another build.


Shield Master says hi. And it's a much better feat than Defensive Duelist. Shoving prone = all the advantage for you and all the disadvantage for them, so it's great on both offense AND defense. And only a STR-based character will use it effectively.


Your math is way off on the Fighter/Rogue. He would have 2d8+14+3d6. You added an extra +7 for a third attack he doesn't have. Also if you're going to include Fighting Style for the Fighter/Rogue, then you have to for the Great Weapon Fighter, as well, so the GW Fighter is 6d6r1&2+15.

So your Fighter/Rogue tops out at 33.5 in a round. The GW Fighter tops out at 40, and I humored you and didn't include GWM in that.

Your Fighter/Rogue is also going to add only 2d8+14 to an Action Surge, since you can't Sneak Attack twice on your turn, even on an Action Surge. So your Fighter/Rogue is topping out at only 56.5 on an Action Surge. The GW Fighter, on the other hand, gets to multiply his entire base round damage, so his Action Surge is topping out at 80 points. Again, I humored you without GWM, but even without it, the GW Fighter is coming out well on top.

No, you don't get to add a feat into the discussion and call it even if I say the feat is not part of the discussion. Using shield master loses its effective rather quickly once you fight monsters bigger than you. Try using shield master in a campaign like against the giants. Completely worthless feat. Where as using a reaction to pump your AC is a big deal especially since the feat improves as you level.

 

[Lost Soul]

Except that's not really true, either. STR sword-and-board can wear plate. That's 18 base AC, better than what DEX will ever get with studded leather + DEX 20.

STR-based can drop their shield and grapple if they need to, while DEX-based cannot.

And finally, the Shield Master feat is a significant damage boost for sword-and-board (shoving prone = lots of advantage), and only STR-based will be able to use that effectively.

You can take medium armor and have 1 less point of AC then a fighter in full plate. If you take medium armor mastery you equal a fighter in full plate, can stealth and do not have strength requirements for wearing armor. Grappling in this edition is worthless. If you grapple both you and the opponent grappled have disadvantage on attack rolls and opponents have advantage on attacks rolls against both of you. It doesn't prevent you from using any type of weapon and just reduces your movement to zero. Hardly an optimal position to be in.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I actually stated in my thread that Great Weapon Master is not part of the discussion. Secondly, it would be better for Conan to be fighter 5/rogue 6 with a rapier than fighter 11 with a great sword. He would have 2D8+21 +3D6 compared to 6D6+15 for great sword plus having a +2 bonus to his AC for using a shield vs no shield. It should not require a feat to make Heavy Weapons viable and there is no equivalent one handed strength weapon feats that compare to defensive duelist.

Where is that number coming from?

As far as I can tell, the sword and board fighter would still be beating the fighter/rogue with rapier setup. Narrowly, but definitely, and including subclass capabilities in the calculation is going to push that much further towards the full fighter in general.
Pure strength-based fighter will also probably beat the fighter/rogue in AC.

Question: what is dex to damage? Is it accuracy/precision is the reason for adding dex to damage?

That is the most commonly accepted justification I think.