Will D&D make strength matter again?

[Gladius Legis]

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.

You can shove up to one size larger than you. The vast majority of monsters in the MM are Large or smaller, which will get shoved down. And in the event you do fight Huge enemies, that's where an ally's Enlarge spell comes in.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

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.

Where are you getting the idea that grappling grants disadvantage/advantage to attack rolls of any kind? Or reduces your movement to zero?

Shoving someone prone gives you and all your friends in melee with them advantage to hit them, and gives them disadvantage to hit anyone. Was that what you were getting confused with?
You often follow up a shove with a grapple because then your opponent can't get back up without breaking your grapple.

 

[variant]

Rule that when using Strength non-light, non-heavy weapons, the damage increases by one die. Heavy weapons reroll 1s on damage.

 

[Gladius Legis]

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.

Wow. Wow. Everything you just said is absolutely wrong. Read over the Grappled condition in the PHB again, because you clearly do not know what grappled entails in 5e. Come to think of it, your lack of knowledge of the game as a whole has been quite visible in this entire thread.

 

[Mistwell]

Grappling in this edition is worthless.

EDIT - My first response was unkind for no reason. Sorry about that.

I think you've got the wrong impression of some of the grappling rules. It's understandable, as the grappling rules are not written very clearly in this edition and some of the ramifications are spread out throughout the rules.

I recommend you check out the 5e Grapplers Guide. It's a bit outdated at this point as some additional books came out since it was written (that make grappling even better) but it's still a pretty good guide. You can find it here.

But the Too Long Didn't Read version is grappling in 5e can be quite good.

 

[Remathilis]

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?

Because most other classes have this thing called "magic". Maybe you've heard of it? It is what makes wizards, clerics and druids viable in combat without resorting to melee. The rogue is expected to be in melee, so it needs something to help it without being MAD, and it's archetype appropriate for a class that is supposed to excel in small blades in the back.

 

[Yardiff]

That is the most commonly accepted justification I think.

Example: 2 1st lv character, one dex 18 and one dex 12, both attack an AC 17 opponent. Dex 12 rolls 19 on the die and Dex 18 rolls an 11 on the die. Both hit, why does Dex 18 do more damage?

If accuracy/precision is the reason we're adding dex bonus to damage, why are we not adding proficiency bonus to damage as well? Skill is just as important as natural ability, in my opinion anyways.

 

[Lost Soul]

Because most other classes have this thing called "magic". Maybe you've heard of it? It is what makes wizards, clerics and druids viable in combat without resorting to melee. The rogue is expected to be in melee, so it needs something to help it without being MAD, and it's archetype appropriate for a class that is supposed to excel in small blades in the back.

I have heard of magic. It does not allow wizards to make staff attacks with their staff using intelligence at will. Rogues were never meant to be in the thick of combat. That is a 3E invention. They were meant to be skirmishers and archers. Dex being reflected in range combat accurately represents that. Are you saying Tasslehoff Burfoot should do as much damage as Lord Soth with a melee weapon? I completely disagree.

 

[Lost Soul]

This is the sound of a lot of people rolling their eyes and completely dismissing everything you have to say further on the topic. It would appear like you've never even read the rules on grappling, much less used all the tricks you can do with it.

You should perhaps read the grappling guides out there, after reading the rules.

Umm..no dude. Grappling is a joke. It only workings on humanoid monsters approximately your size. If you are succeeding in grappling giants I would check your rolls. Either your players are cheating or you are handing out OP magic items

 

[Lost Soul]

Where are you getting the idea that grappling grants disadvantage/advantage to attack rolls of any kind? Or reduces your movement to zero?

Shoving someone prone gives you and all your friends in melee with them advantage to hit them, and gives them disadvantage to hit anyone. Was that what you were getting confused with?
You often follow up a shove with a grapple because then your opponent can't get back up without breaking your grapple.

Dude, being knocked down only affects the monster till it goes again. it stands up and prone condition vanishes. Its not that great . Also per the shove rules you can make a strength (athletics) check OR a dexterity (acrobatics) check to avoid the prone condition. So shield bashing a dexterity fighter is not got going to work as often as you think