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

[Irlo]

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.

I spoke to the particular arguments and the context of my comments earlier, and I don’t want to rehash them. I will, though, quote myself and then quietly leave this thread behind.

In threads like this, it's easy to lose the context of the conversation. I admit I might have lost that context. But, for clarity, here's the context in which I'm making my comments:

* We're talking about the relative value of racial ASIs in different ability scores and how floating ASIs in TCoE might affect balance. So, when I say that DEX is not objectively better than INT (or any other stat), I mean, specifically, that a racial DEX ASI is not inherently better than one in INT. It depends on character and the way that character is played. I also mean that it is not universally the case that it's better to have a higher DEX than INT.

* You made a list of the ways in which DEX was better than INT, and you stated that none of the advantages that you enumerated were small factors. I said, and I maintain, that for some characters, some of those advantages are small, and some of them are non-factors all together. You simply over-stated your case.

Plus, there are not degrees of universality. It’s universal, or it’s not.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

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.

There are at least 2 Int archetypes, 2 Int classes, and considering how popular fighter and Paladin are, strength is pretty important to the game.

 

[Zardnaar]

There are at least 2 Int archetypes, 2 Int classes, and considering how popular fighter and Paladin are, strength is pretty important to the game.

Unless you're using a great weapon though use a rapier.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Unless you're using a great weapon though use a rapier.

The game isn’t played in a white room. People aren’t generally going to do that, because it doesn’t fit the character, and they aren’t going to notice any actual difference in efficacy by using a longsword and heavy armor.

 

[Amrûnril]

Here's one way of thinking about how important dexterity is. In combat, a character's mechanical effectiveness depends on:

• Probability of hitting
• Probability of being hit
• Damage dealt
• Damage survived
• Turn order/number of turns

Every character relies on dexterity for one of the five (turn order), and the majority rely on it for a second as well (probability of being hit). Characters who specialize in dexterity can use it for 4 of these 5 combat statistics. In contrast, a character who specializes in intelligence will only use it for 2 of 5 statistics, and a character who doesn't specialize in intelligence won't use it at all for the overwhelming majority of combats.

Obviously, this is a simplification, and all ability scores have potentially important uses outside of combat. Still, the discrepency from a combat perspective is dramatic enough that, while one can argue about how important ability score imbalances are, the idea that they don't exist seems implausible.

 

[Parmandur]

Unless you're using a great weapon though use a rapier.

Yeah, never seen anyone actually do that who wasnplaying a Rogue.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Yeah, never seen anyone actually do that who wasnplaying a Rogue.

I've made some dex paladins, because the concept was more musketeer than jousting knight, but yeah most paladins and fighters I've seen have used strength.

 

[Parmandur]

I've made some dex paladins, because the concept was more musketeer than jousting knight, but yeah most paladins and fighters I've seen have used strength.

Oh, I'm sure it can work, but I don't think it is "superior" full on.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Oh, I'm sure it can work, but I don't think it is "superior" full on.

Absolutely. A heavy armor longsword and shield build would have been just as effective my light armor rapier and shield, and have the ability to drop the shield in exchange for more damage, while a glaive Paladin would have much more room to optimize than either.

My wife dual wields as a vengeance Paladin with a a houserule to allow two weapon fighting style, with a longsword and battleax, in plate. Middling Dex, max Strength.

Her magic sword just got upgraded “vestige of divergence” style so it can transform into a greatsword or a “great spear” which is just a glaive that she can throw and then teleport to the target.

She wrecks house, and has since we started at level 5.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I spoke to the particular arguments and the context of my comments earlier, and I don’t want to rehash them. I will, though, quote myself and then quietly leave this thread behind.

Plus, there are not degrees of universality. It’s universal, or it’s not.

I may have explained badly then. - You are correct in that technically all ability scores are universally useful: All else being equal, having a higher number is a score is better than a lower number.
However no other ability score is as universally useful across the entire gamut of character classes etc. Taken as a whole, Dex is more useful than any other single ability score.