D&D 5E 5E's "Missed Opportunities?"

[Guest 6801328]

By the way, on the subject of Int as a dump stat, I've been watching the "Vikings" TV series, and while some of the warriors are clearly Fighters and a few could be Barbarians, there is also a role for Intelligence in the way some of them fight. But...not to start a fight here...not in a way that is modeled by the Warlord homebrews I've seen. It has nothing to do with action-granting or giving commands or battlefield charisma. It's more like Odysseus (which, although often held up as an example of a Warlord, is not actually modeled in the proposed mechanics) in that they are outsmarting their enemies, one-on-one.

I'd love to see an Int-based Fighter subclass that evoked that. Somehow.

 

[Guest 6801328]

This leads me to a suggestion that might make a good rule for this site: as 5e is intended to be kitbashable, no complaint regarding 5e design may be posted without also including a suggestion for how to fix said complaint in the same post.

Howzat?

I hope this was meant tongue in cheek.

There are lots of things I dislike about 5e for which I haven't come up with any great solutions. Does that mean I shouldn't say, "Hey, I don't like this aspect. Anybody have any ideas?"

For example, I've yet to see a flawless solution the the "problem" that whichever of your Dex or Str is higher renders the other one irrelevant. A character with 18 Dex and 17 Str does exactly as much damage as a character with 18 Dex and 8 Str. You don't want so much benefit that you feel you HAVE to have both, and certainly 18/14 should be as effective as 14/18, but both should be better than 18/dump. I've tinkered endless with various schemes, and so far they are all flawed.

Should I not mention this again until I have a solution?

 

[Oofta]

By the way, on the subject of Int as a dump stat, I've been watching the "Vikings" TV series, and while some of the warriors are clearly Fighters and a few could be Barbarians, there is also a role for Intelligence in the way some of them fight. But...not to start a fight here...not in a way that is modeled by the Warlord homebrews I've seen. It has nothing to do with action-granting or giving commands or battlefield charisma. It's more like Odysseus (which, although often held up as an example of a Warlord, is not actually modeled in the proposed mechanics) in that they are outsmarting their enemies, one-on-one.

I'd love to see an Int-based Fighter subclass that evoked that. Somehow.

In the Sherlock Holmes' books there are references to Sherlock being an excellent pugilist because he could out-think his opponents. I think the Robert Downey movie version also had this.

Sounds like an interesting home-brew but I wouldn't hold breath for anything official.

 

[LordEntrails]

For example, I've yet to see a flawless solution the the "problem" that whichever of your Dex or Str is higher renders the other one irrelevant. A character with 18 Dex and 17 Str does exactly as much damage as a character with 18 Dex and 8 Str. You don't want so much benefit that you feel you HAVE to have both, and certainly 18/14 should be as effective as 14/18, but both should be better than 18/dump. I've tinkered endless with various schemes, and so far they are all flawed.

This is only true if DPR is your only/primary concern. If you regularly require skill checks to overcome adversity, then it's easy to setup situations where you might need both Dex and Str, especially if you add complicated terrain to the combats.

 

[Lanefan]

I hope this was meant tongue in cheek.

Partly.

There are lots of things I dislike about 5e for which I haven't come up with any great solutions. Does that mean I shouldn't say, "Hey, I don't like this aspect. Anybody have any ideas?"

Fair enough. But at least showing that some thought has been put toward trying to fix it first comes across far better than simply complaining, as seems to happen here on occasion (not pointing at you in particular).

For example, I've yet to see a flawless solution the the "problem" that whichever of your Dex or Str is higher renders the other one irrelevant. A character with 18 Dex and 17 Str does exactly as much damage as a character with 18 Dex and 8 Str. You don't want so much benefit that you feel you HAVE to have both, and certainly 18/14 should be as effective as 14/18, but both should be better than 18/dump. I've tinkered endless with various schemes, and so far they are all flawed.

First off, what else do these stats have to offer beyond straight damage? Can something be tweaked there? Dex gives AC benefits, for example, which is already quite significant.

Failign that, hard-tie damage to just one of these (I suggest Str) and stick with it. Maybe then hard-tie to-hit to Dex to balance this off.

Should I not mention this again until I have a solution?

Tell us what your thoughts have been. Even if you think they're hopeless, any suggestion is better than none.

 

[Swarmkeeper]

A character with 18 Dex and 17 Str does exactly as much damage as a character with 18 Dex and 8 Str.

Sorry, busting out the nit-pick here....

You are assuming a DEX based/finesse weapon, of course

Low STR = less armor and weapon options, assuming you want to avoid the penalties

 

[Stalker0]

By the way, on the subject of Int as a dump stat, I've been watching the "Vikings" TV series, and while some of the warriors are clearly Fighters and a few could be Barbarians, there is also a role for Intelligence in the way some of them fight. But...not to start a fight here...not in a way that is modeled by the Warlord homebrews I've seen. It has nothing to do with action-granting or giving commands or battlefield charisma. It's more like Odysseus (which, although often held up as an example of a Warlord, is not actually modeled in the proposed mechanics) in that they are outsmarting their enemies, one-on-one.

I'd love to see an Int-based Fighter subclass that evoked that. Somehow.

The battle master was really their opportunity. It already has a tactical bent. Give it a few maneuvers that use int and your in like flynn

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I use the flanking variant rule from the DMG, and have never found the slightest reason not to.

Am I alone in this?

 

[Aldarc]

By the way, on the subject of Int as a dump stat, I've been watching the "Vikings" TV series, and while some of the warriors are clearly Fighters and a few could be Barbarians, there is also a role for Intelligence in the way some of them fight. But...not to start a fight here...not in a way that is modeled by the Warlord homebrews I've seen. It has nothing to do with action-granting or giving commands or battlefield charisma. It's more like Odysseus (which, although often held up as an example of a Warlord, is not actually modeled in the proposed mechanics) in that they are outsmarting their enemies, one-on-one.

I'd love to see an Int-based Fighter subclass that evoked that. Somehow.

I know you dislike the Warlord, but do you really want to start this debate again? Because them be fightin' words.

 

[Eltab]

Off-topic, but this phrase startled me. 4e is already "back when" and "years ago"? Amazing.

That's like "Those of us who remember the Obama administration..."

I like Ike. (top that!)