D&D 5E Is Tasha's More or Less The Universal Standard?

[Zardnaar]

Pretty much every class want a 14 or so dex. The rate exception is heavy two handed weapons.

Barbarian probably the only class that need a high strength and certain builds of paladin and fighter.

Otherwise dex is better

Only one class and one archetype uses int as well and unless it's a mind flayer themed adventure int saves barely matter unless the DM is going out of their way to target them.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Paladin? Heavily armored cleric or fighter? Artificer (where DEX would probably be tertiary)?

Str-based Paladins, and Str-based clerics were why I said generally. Paladin Aura is a good reason to have Charisma as an ability secondary to Str or Dex. Likewise Clerics that concentrate on Str-based melee combat.
I'd generally regard Dex as often secondary to Int for Artificers? What would you put there instead? Con?

I was responding to just that argument. The claim was the DEX is universally and objectively better than INT, and that each of the benefits of a high DEX modifier are significant (not small factors in the comparative analysis). My answer to that was: no, the value of DEX depends on class, class choices, and the distribution of ability scores overall. The value to a PC of those benefits of high DEX are not all significant.

It's not universal or objective.

I have not seen that claim.

 

[Irlo]

Str-based Paladins, and Str-based clerics were why I said generally. Paladin Aura is a good reason to have Charisma as an ability secondary to Str or Dex. Likewise Clerics that concentrate on Str-based melee combat.
I'd generally regard Dex as often secondary to Int for Artificers? What would you put there instead? Con?

Actually, I'm not fully up on the Artificer, so I can't justify that. I would consider DEX as tertiary due to the medium armor proficiency. A +2 modifier seems enough. Strike my comment.

I have not seen that claim.

I am fully in agreement that generally DEX has many advantages and that as a secondary or tertiary ability, every class can be played to gain some (or even many) benefits from it.

DEX is not always the best choice for an ASI, either racial or based on level.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't want to derail the thread, but for you and @doctorbadwolf and any others:

Its not so much that the game "broke", per se (probably a bit overdramatic on my part). It was more a combination of multiple small things:
1) Pacing: I wasn't running a 6-8 encounter day, the party was able to "nova" just about every BBEG, and most enemies, unless super deadly (which then I had to walk back from TPKs) were cakewalks.
2) Characters:
Thief/Warlock multi (I understand multi is usually suboptimal), but the combination of thief subclass (Swashbuckler) movement, sneak attack, plus Warlock Chain Pact, Imp (fly, invisibility, ability to see in darkness), Genie Patron (ring to hop into to escape combat and invisible flying homunculus flies away with it) alongside devilsight and darkness, plus Eldritch Blast spam.
Evoker, which was pretty basic, but the ability to throw AOEs into any situation and avoid other players while hanging out in the back, plus spammed cantrips for damage was powerful.
Arcane Archer (not super helpful, but the occasional grasping arrow and tracking arrow were situationally good),
Cleric (standard - spiritual hammer, sacred flame, spirit guardians, healing word) and
Cleric/sorcerer (Twilight Cleric, plus sorcerer which wasn't that noticeable, but twilight was great).

It was a huge range of abilities, even without any kind of front line fighter, that could spam cantrips and not use resources against low level threats, and could nuke 12+ level NPC casters and other big monsters in one to two rounds. And that was with utilizing spellcasters with hold person, and attempts at counterspell, yugoloths when the campaign area dictated it, mixed groups of smaller and tougher., etc.

Honestly I'm seeing a lot of PHB and very little of Tasha's in there. The only two things I see of Tasha's are the Twilight regenerating temp hp nonsense and the ability for the warlock to use a 1/day ability to hide and be carried around. Oh, and one thing I believe doesn't actually work; Sneak Attack requires a finesse or a ranged weapon and eldritch blast is no form of weapon therefore can't get sneak attack.

What I am seeing on the other hand is a lot of 5e being 5e, especially in a sandbox campaign where the players get to nova a lot of the time. For anything that sandboxy I tend to turn on the "gritty rest" rules for a short rest being an overnight sleep and a long rest being a long lazy weekends somewhere safe.

And in trying to utilize environment to change things up worked to an extent, but spammable light (not to mention Darkvision, Twilight ability to share 300' darkvision, devil sight, etc.) all removed environmental impacts (and I am aware of the disadvantage to Perception checks around Darkvision, etc.), easy ability to create food, Leomund's Hut, etc. all made it feel like I was wrestling against the system, rather than playing the game and it was more and more difficult to keep things interesting.

Happy to discuss via messages so as to not clog up the thread.

Again this all feels like 5e being 5e. Yes, Twilight's ability to share darkvision can be annoying - but far too many races in 5e have darkvision and for those that don't Darkvision is a second level spell in the PHB on four separate spell lists (plus artificer and the shadow monk). With two clerics and a wizard in that party (plus the warlock having devil's sight) everyone having darkvision all through the night and other periods of darkness was inevitable.

I have absolute and complete sympathy with you for finding that you were wrestling against the system. My only point of disagreement is in your blaming Tasha's when almost everything you mention you had to wrestle against other than the warlock hopping into their ring was in the PHB. It's one of the many reasons I consider 5e a bad game for DMs.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Dexterity Paladin is more versatile, being good with ranged weapons. They have better initiative (which you may find valuable), Dexterity saves are much more common than Strength saves, and taking less damage is always nice. Dexterity Skills vs. Strength skills is a preference, I find they are both nice. Dexterity Paladin doesn't have to wait as long to get their best armor. Dexterity Paladin is better at Stealth.

There are tradeoffs to both approaches, but Dexterity Paladin gets a bit more upside, if those things are important to you. Hence, one can say Dexterity seems like a better attribute to have than Strength.

But on the other hand, if you want more damage per hit, and you plan on using Great Weapon Master, the advantages of Dexterity over Strength are irrelevant. You can't make that choice, so even if Dexterity is the better attribute on paper, it makes no difference.

Reinforcing your point you're overstating two dexterity advantages and missing a major advantage for strength:

• You might not have to wait as long to get your best armour for a dex based paladin - but it will not reach its potential until at least level 8 because that is the lowest level you can max out dex. At level 1 the Str Paladin probably has AC 16 Chain; the Dex Paladin can choose between AC 15 Studded Leather and AC 16 Scale that provides stealth disadvantages. And the STR paladin is likely to collect 200 GP worth of armour before level 4 and 1500 GP before level 8 (and honestly before level 4) meaning that the Dexadin is likely to frequently be 2 AC not one behind
• The paladin can not use Divine Smite with a ranged weapon so a paladin being better with ranged weapons should be a minor consideration. Your other main abilities mean that you're a melee guy (who can still throw javelins); focusing on range gives up your main strengths for something you can only ever be second rate at.
• The best melee damage feat for a paladin isn't Great Weapon Master. It's Polearm Master. Paladins don't have massive to hit buffs or easy access to advantage to enable their power strikes and don't have much use for their bonus actions. And spear/staff + shield + duelist style is awesome (great weapon style, of course, doesn't do much for a 2 handed polearm).

What this means in practice is that the highest damage paladins are all strength based (and most other paladins) whether one handed or two handed, and whether large or small. All else being equal dexterity is normally a better stat than strength - but it isn't all equal. The rest of the class and what they can do matters.

 

[ECMO3]

Ok, look at it like this. I can build a Paladin to use Strength or Dexterity. What does this actually mean?

-Strength Paladin can use heavy weapons. Strength Paladin can, after spending a lot of money, get a little more AC. Strength Paladin can lug around more gear, and is better at Strength saves (which generally only apply to effects that push you around or knock you prone). Strength Paladin is good at Strength skills.

-Dexterity Paladin has to use weapons with the finesse quality. They are better at using ranged weapons. Dexterity Paladin has to spend a lot less money on armor. Dexterity Paladin is better at Dexterity saves (which generally apply to effects that cause hit point damage or hinder movement in some way). Dexterity Paladin is good at Dexterity skills. Dexterity Paladin has better initiative. Dexterity Paladin is far better at Stealth.

The takeaway here is that the main advantage of Strength Paladin is more damage and being good at Strength skills. Strength saves don't come up often and the penalty for failing them is far less of an issue with other saves.

Dexterity Paladin is more versatile, being good with ranged weapons. They have better initiative (which you may find valuable), Dexterity saves are much more common than Strength saves, and taking less damage is always nice. Dexterity Skills vs. Strength skills is a preference, I find they are both nice. Dexterity Paladin doesn't have to wait as long to get their best armor. Dexterity Paladin is better at Stealth.

There are tradeoffs to both approaches, but Dexterity Paladin gets a bit more upside, if those things are important to you. Hence, one can say Dexterity seems like a better attribute to have than Strength.

But on the other hand, if you want more damage per hit, and you plan on using Great Weapon Master, the advantages of Dexterity over Strength are irrelevant. You can't make that choice, so even if Dexterity is the better attribute on paper, it makes no difference.

Paladins also need strength to multiclass which is a major disadvantage for a dex based Paladin. I would argue a dex Paladin would lose a lot of versatility due to a low athletics score (athletics is used far more than acrobatics and about as much as stealth). Better Stealth with better Acrobatics would make up for this, but if you are going to be close to a strength Paladin in AC you are going to be in disadvantage on stealth, making the higher stealth not very usable. So you are not just giving up damage, you are giving up AC too and if you are not giving up significant AC then you are not getting stealth and are still losing athletics.

Second to stay close to a strength Paladin in AC you are going to have to use a shield, which brings two problems. First your higher dexterity makes you better with ranged weapons but the only ranged weapons you can use with a shield are thrown weapons so this benefit will be mostly irrelevant. Second you will have an issue casting spells which require somatic components. This is not a big deal on a Paladin, but you are talking about versatility and in terms of versatility it is a consideration.

Finally when it comes to versatility you can't use nearly as many melee weapons and you need to use melee weapons for smite. A strength-based Paladin can use 28 different melee weapons effectively. Dex based Paladin can use 5 (dagger, shorts sword, scimitar, whip, Rapier). It terms of versatility this is a big difference. When you are getting to level 6-7-8 instead of being able to use whatever magic weapon you find, you are going to have to wait for one of these 5 to come around. This is even worst at higher levels when you find Wave or a Hammer of Thunderbolts. This criticism is true on a strength based build that gets PAM or GWM too, but the lack of versatility is the biggest problem with those feats. A regular strength-based Paladin that relies on ASIs has no problem with this. Find a dragontooth dagger or scimitar of speed and a strength based can use it just fine with strength.

On the flip side, if you have a race with medium armor you can play a strength-based Rogue easy and I would argue that is more viable than as a dex-based Paladin is.

 

[Parmandur]

if those things are important to you.

Yes, because the value is subjective and situational, not objective and general.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Actually, I'm not fully up on the Artificer, so I can't justify that. I would consider DEX as tertiary due to the medium armor proficiency. A +2 modifier seems enough. Strike my comment.

In my experience, a +2 bonus is secondary stat territory, not tertiary generally.

Starting with two 16s really reduces your options for the other stats, and ASIs are generally going to go on raising primary score and feats rather than secondary ability score. You might have a couple of secondary stats at 14 for a character.

I am fully in agreement that generally DEX has many advantages and that as a secondary or tertiary ability, every class can be played to gain some (or even many) benefits from it.

Indeed. The claim that is being made is I believe that no other stat is as universally useful. Other stats can be picked out as being better for this class, or that build, but no other ability score offers as significant bonuses for every character.

On the flip side, I have played a strength-based Rogue and I would argue that is more viable than as a dex-based Paladin is.

There is a powerful build idea using Elven Accuracy and dual-wielding finesse weapons in order to get crits to smite with for example. Dex-based Paladins may not be common, but they are viable.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Some of these arguments about Int being as valuable as Dex remind me of the argument about seatbelts: it’s possible to get trapped in a burning car by your seatbelt, therefore it’s a toss-up of whether or not they are safe.

 

[Guest 7034872]

If we're talking about maximizing one's character per the mechanics, Maxperson is surely right that DEX is huge and INT can't touch it (even CON doesn't come close, I'd say: would you rather survive a punch or just not get hit in the first place?). But if we're talking about putting roles above rolls, then the whole thing becomes fiercely situational, doesn't it?