D&D 5E Convince me that the Ranger is a necessary Class.

As I said to @Remathilis, if going by raw strength only, Arnold twists Bruce into a pretzel. Remalathis is conflating skill with strength. Bruce Lee has tremendous skill at leveraging his raw strength into lots of damage. In D&D terms he's a monk and does increased unarmed damage over Arnold. Arnold is still tons stronger than Bruce, but he does less damage because 1-2+5 is less than 1d8+2 x 4(flurry of blows).
Don't ability score checks use the same formula for skill checks? It's not @Remathilis conflating skill with strength, it's the people who designed this particular formula for D&D. They devised a rather simple formula that could be used for ability score checks, skill checks, attack rolls and saving throws. So in a way, there will be times when an ability score like Strength is treated as a skill.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Don't ability score checks use the same formula for skill checks? It's not @Remathilis conflating skill with strength, it's the people who designed this particular formula for D&D. They devised a rather simple formula that could be used for ability score checks, skill checks, attack rolls and saving throws. So in a way, there will be times when an ability score like Strength is treated as a skill.
I'm not talking about D&D with that. He absolutely is conflating Bruce Lee's skill with martial arts with strength when he implies that Bruce Lee is Stronger than Arnold. Bruce Lee was muscled, but it was wiry muscle. He probably had a 14 or 15 at most for strength. Arnold at his peak was in the 18-20 range.

Looking at muscle only, Arnold whips Bruce's rear. When you add in martial arts, Bruce's monk levels make it so that Arnold is likely to lose. Bruce knows how to leverage his lesser strength to do as much or more damage. That's skill.

Now to your point about ability score checks and skill checks for 5e. They are one and the same. A skill check IS an ability check in which everyone has some natural ability(or lack thereof) with. That's not skill, or at least not learned skill. That's just natural ability. Proficiency bonus is the learned skill portion of skill checks.

I think the system leans too heavily into stat bonuses and not enough into skill, but I can see why they simplified it to that level.
 

I'm not talking about D&D with that. He absolutely is conflating Bruce Lee's skill with martial arts with strength when he implies that Bruce Lee is Stronger than Arnold. Bruce Lee was muscled, but it was wiry muscle. He probably had a 14 or 15 at most for strength. Arnold at his peak was in the 18-20 range.

Looking at muscle only, Arnold whips Bruce's rear. When you add in martial arts, Bruce's monk levels make it so that Arnold is likely to lose. Bruce knows how to leverage his lesser strength to do as much or more damage. That's skill.
Bruce Lee's muscles are different than Arnolds. Bruce trained for short, powerful bursts of energy, while Arnorld for Physique and lifting. Ask anyone familiar with physical fitness, and they will argue the two have very different types of strength. Of course, D&D is nowhere granular enough to account for a wiry lean muscle and a hulking, carved muscle, so it all gets lumped in. But if you were to measure all the different measurements that are attributed to D&D strength scores (striking, athletics, lifting, carrying, etc) and objectively measure Bruce and Arnold's records, I think their strength scores would be more evenly matched in the average. (Bruce would probably have greater athleticism, Arnold greater weightlifting capacity). However, since D&D is too simple to reflect that, you end up with what you just said: assuming equal proficiency bonus, Arnold is a better athlete than Bruce because he has a higher perceived Strength Score.

I'm suggesting that Strength scores should be divorced from the notion of muscle mass or weightlifting. Those can be influenced by strength, but they should not be based on it. That way, you get a lanky but wiry Bruce with a 16 strength and a muscular Arnold at a 17 or 18 and you don't have to let your head explode how a 5′ 8″, 141 lbs, guy could almost match a 6' 2",: 235 lb guy.

Take a look at Goliaths, Firbolgs and Loxodons and see if you can find the common denominator for the Powerful Build ability. See also POWERFUL BUILD. It's in the name. ;)
The common denominator is that it is a species trait, not a function of actual height and weight. Put another way, Halflings get a trait where they can hide behind a creature of one size larger and move freely in their space; this is not a feature of being 3ft or else gnomes and goblins would be able to do the same.
Yes it is, but the game isn't supposed to mirror real life exactly. That said, throwing any semblance of sense out the window and not giving the orcs a strength bonus is very bad.
Citation needed.
As I said to @Remathilis, if going by raw strength only, Arnold twists Bruce into a pretzel. Remalathis is conflating skill with strength. Bruce Lee has tremendous skill at leveraging his raw strength into lots of damage. In D&D terms he's a monk and does increased unarmed damage over Arnold. Arnold is still tons stronger than Bruce, but he does less damage because 1-2+5 is less than 1d8+2 x 4(flurry of blows).
Of course, D&D math makes that an issue by, as you said, making Proficiency bonus (+2 +6) as important as ability mod (-5 to +5, but realistically -1 to +5). Thus, even if AArnoldhas no martial training, his raw strength ability mod can equal out a large amount of Bruce's proficiency bonus. (and I was not trying to get into class functions, I just assume both have the Actor class).
 

Bruce Lee's muscles are different than Arnolds. Bruce trained for short, powerful bursts of energy, while Arnorld for Physique and lifting.
Correct. Arnold was built for strength and Bruce for dexterity. Being fast(dexterous) doesn't make him as strong(strength) as Arnold.
Ask anyone familiar with physical fitness, and they will argue the two have very different types of strength. Of course, D&D is nowhere granular enough to account for a wiry lean muscle and a hulking, carved muscle, so it all gets lumped in.
No it doesn't all get lumped in. The muscles used for speed are put into dex.
But if you were to measure all the different measurements that are attributed to D&D strength scores (striking, athletics, lifting, carrying, etc) and objectively measure Bruce and Arnold's records, I think their strength scores would be more evenly matched in the average. (Bruce would probably have greater athleticism, Arnold greater weightlifting capacity). However, since D&D is too simple to reflect that, you end up with what you just said: assuming equal proficiency bonus, Arnold is a better athlete than Bruce because he has a higher perceived Strength Score.
That depends on the athletic effort. Many are dex based where Bruce is far and away superior, or con based where Bruce also has the advantage. 5e put athletics into the strength category, but has the optional rule to use alternative stats when appropriate. I wish they'd remove the optional portion of that rule.
I'm suggesting that Strength scores should be divorced from the notion of muscle mass or weightlifting. Those can be influenced by strength, but they should not be based on it. That way, you get a lanky but wiry Bruce with a 16 strength and a muscular Arnold at a 17 or 18 and you don't have to let your head explode how a 5′ 8″, 141 lbs, guy could almost match a 6' 2",: 235 lb guy.
I think the wiry speed muscles should just remain with dex.
The common denominator is that it is a species trait, not a function of actual height and weight. Put another way, Halflings get a trait where they can hide behind a creature of one size larger and move freely in their space; this is not a feature of being 3ft or else gnomes and goblins would be able to do the same.
Every one of them is very big 7-8 feet tall and heavy. You know, a Powerful Build. It's clear that the trait comes with that size range.
Citation needed.
You want a citation for the claim that the game isn't supposed to mirror the real world exactly?!
 

Correct. Arnold was built for strength and Bruce for dexterity. Being fast(dexterous) doesn't make him as strong(strength) as Arnold.

No it doesn't all get lumped in. The muscles used for speed are put into dex.

That depends on the athletic effort. Many are dex based where Bruce is far and away superior, or con based where Bruce also has the advantage. 5e put athletics into the strength category, but has the optional rule to use alternative stats when appropriate. I wish they'd remove the optional portion of that rule.

I think the wiry speed muscles should just remain with dex.

Every one of them is very big 7-8 feet tall and heavy. You know, a Powerful Build. It's clear that the trait comes with that size range.

You want a citation for the claim that the game isn't supposed to mirror the real world exactly?!
No, they want a citation that not giving orcs a strength bonus is very bad. Like that isn't obviously an opinion.
 


I'm not talking about D&D with that. He absolutely is conflating Bruce Lee's skill with martial arts with strength when he implies that Bruce Lee is Stronger than Arnold. Bruce Lee was muscled, but it was wiry muscle. He probably had a 14 or 15 at most for strength. Arnold at his peak was in the 18-20 range.

Looking at muscle only, Arnold whips Bruce's rear. When you add in martial arts, Bruce's monk levels make it so that Arnold is likely to lose. Bruce knows how to leverage his lesser strength to do as much or more damage. That's skill.

Now to your point about ability score checks and skill checks for 5e. They are one and the same. A skill check IS an ability check in which everyone has some natural ability(or lack thereof) with. That's not skill, or at least not learned skill. That's just natural ability. Proficiency bonus is the learned skill portion of skill checks.

I think the system leans too heavily into stat bonuses and not enough into skill, but I can see why they simplified it to that level.

Big muscles don't correlate directly to strength. Gymnasts in particular are super strong but with relatively small muscles compared to Body Builders.
 

It it really?
Yes.

1717019676683.png


First listed, first method, and the default. Optionally, you can ust the standard array as an "offical option". Point-buy is a variant option for people who want super-customization.

how fairs well your rolled up character in official games?
Fine, I guess... 🤷‍♂️
 

But I really don't get what you think the point of ability scores is. If you think they're just arbitrary numbers that do not inform us about the fiction, what purpose do they serve?
They're atavisms that remain in the game because people have built narratives in their mind canon that make them workable, and their familiarity is comfortable.

The fact that people build contradictory narratives around them that make them argue is proof of their flexibility.
 

Big muscles don't correlate directly to strength. Gymnasts in particular are super strong but with relatively small muscles compared to Body Builders.
We've been through that. They are not stronger than body builders by the definitions of strength commonly used. Google the strongest person and you get body builders, not gymnasts.
 

Remove ads

Top