Dex vs. Str

[Darklone]

Dexterity is hand eye coordination and athleticism. Strength is brute strength. That is why giants and dragons are so strong, not because they have incredible muscle control. They are pure brutes.

Sure, every dragon is described as the epitome of elegance... pure brutes, right. Climb, Jump, check the other str based skills. But I guess that's just because the D&D designers are too stupid IYO to make it right...

Their interpretation of strength is the same as mine. They just use it for attack because it's a holdover from every edition of D&D kind of like the Lawful Good Paladin and level-based advancement.

Strange. You think you need to houserule something pretty basic in D&D but still claim their interpretation is different from yours which leads to that houserule?

What reason is that? Why don't you explain how such a modification is not possible using the d20 system? I use the rule of either Dex or Str as the primary modifier. I know with absolute certainty that it does not imbalance or have a negative effect on the game. It is very workable and doesn't penalize the already weaker dexterity based fighter. Even with this change, the Dex based fighter sorely lags behind the Great Cleaving, Power Attacking Str based Two-handed weapon using fighter.

If they decided to go to Dex for attack and Str for damage, it could easily be while maintaining balance with even greater verisimilitude. Easily.

Sorry to tell you, using that rule without a problem in one group does not mean it will not cause problems in many other groups. D&D has seen many houserules come and go, actually the 3rd edition was a nice summary of many apparently pretty common houserules (at least I found many on the net years before 3.0 came out). Your houserule above is old, but never had that many followers. For a good reason.

I used to be a quick lightweighted dex fighter. I was fast, nimble, dodging most hits... still going toe to toe with my fullplate buddies was a bad idea. Why? They are not slow. Their strikes are not slower than mine.

The dex fighters you want to see are best described by high strength and high dex in D&D. Wimps with strength 10 and dex 18 are goners on any battlefield with melee combat.

 

[Ranger REG]

I would never get rid of Str and Dex. I just wish D&D would change to the Dex based combat system just about every other major game system uses. Off the top of my head I think only D20 games use Str as the modifier for melee combat. Other game systems such as GURPS and Hero System use Dex for attacking and Str for damage, which is closer to the reality of physical combat.

For that I'm glad that d20 stick to the original rule. I mean in melee, it's not a question of precisely hitting it right. After all, you're already in melee range. It's a matter of hitting it well. Even if you change the armor rule to resist damage, the impact is felt right through the armor and reverberate to the target's flesh.

Thank goodness I'm an old-school wargamer, because I first learn tactics. In the case of high-Dex, low-Str fighters, I'd rather he be a ranged attacker first to soften his target before his target come into melee range much weaker than before combat. If not, I make him take advantage of his mobility. MOVE HIM AROUND.

Don't change the rules to cover up weakness. Exploit the advantage of high-Dex fighters. If need be, create feats.

 

[Lamoni]

Don't change the rules to cover up weakness. Exploit the advantage of high-Dex fighters. If need be, create feats.

I agree.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

3. It fit better with novel versions of fast fighters. It's obvious that warriors like Drizz't and Artemis Entreri rely on their dexterity for martial prowess, yet in the game they would be getting their collective asses handed to them by Strength based fighters. Alot of people complain about novelists not keeping up with the rules, but I sometimes feel the game designers aren't keeping up with the novels or utilizing game mechanics that fit the reality of combat.

In the stories I am familiar with the strong warrior usually does kick sand in face of his weaker foes. What about Arthur, Lancelot, Beowulf, Conan, Hercules, Hector, or Odysseus? What "reality of combat" are you referring to?

In an age of heavy armors and two-handed chopping weapons it is extremely realistic to reward Str over Dex.

The underlying issue is that D&D tends to favor offense over defense. It is practically a sacred cow and is intimately tied in to how the power levels scale. As a result there is very little room for lightly armored, nimble warriors that are hard to hit without breaking the AC system.

 

[Celtavian]

Sure, every dragon is described as the epitome of elegance... pure brutes, right. Climb, Jump, check the other str based skills. But I guess that's just because the D&D designers are too stupid IYO to make it right...

And giants, and ogres, and orcs, and gnolls, and bugbears?

Strange. You think you need to houserule something pretty basic in D&D but still claim their interpretation is different from yours which leads to that houserule?

I believe it is a holdover.

Sorry to tell you, using that rule without a problem in one group does not mean it will not cause problems in many other groups. D&D has seen many houserules come and go, actually the 3rd edition was a nice summary of many apparently pretty common houserules (at least I found many on the net years before 3.0 came out). Your houserule above is old, but never had that many followers. For a good reason.

What good reason might that be? Perhaps that many people don't like any changes. The only changes made are those with serious balance issues such as Harm, Haste and other such changes. It isn't like they made major changes.

I used to be a quick lightweighted dex fighter. I was fast, nimble, dodging most hits... still going toe to toe with my fullplate buddies was a bad idea. Why? They are not slow. Their strikes are not slower than mine.

It is still a bad idea. Were they that much stronger than you are? Sounds like they were equally dextrous, but were wearing better armor than you. Still leads to a better AC if you wear better armor.

Strength has very little to do with the type of armor you wear. Don't see how this applies. I bet you were just as able to land blows as they were. Did the stronger guy automatically hit more often? Did his strength allow him superior weapon skill?

The dex fighters you want to see are best described by high strength and high dex in D&D. Wimps with strength 10 and dex 18 are goners on any battlefield with melee combat.

Quite true. You still need a better strength. The primary advantage of the change to our rules is the following:
1. Don't need to take a feat to use Dexterity for attack modifier.

2. Can use weapons not normally finessable.

Still need to have a decent strength. All it does it allow a more viable Dex based fighter with greater weapon options. Strength based fighters still vastly outshine them.

You need to think about how the mechanics work and what using Dex as the primary attack modifier does. If you think it out, you will see that it only allows Dex based fighters to close the already wide gap with Str based fighters.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

In an age of heavy armors and two-handed chopping weapons it is extremely realistic to reward Str over Dex.

I only spent a little over a year practicing kendo, but I believe strength modifying melee attacks is perfectly realistic. Contrary to some beliefs, strength, not dex, modifies the speed of an attack.

 

[Celtavian]

In the stories I am familiar with the strong warrior usually does kick sand in face of his weaker foes. What about Arthur, Lancelot, Beowulf, Conan, Hercules, Hector, or Odysseus? What "reality of combat" are you referring to?

Everyone one of the fighters you mentioned were also extremely dextrous. They were the epitome of a fighter, quick and strong. Check their stats from previous editions of D&D. Very well rounded.

In an age of heavy armors and two-handed chopping weapons it is extremely realistic to reward Str over Dex.

If strong fighters were the best, then guys like Miyamato Musashi and Alexander the Great would not have been some of the best fighters of their age. Period.

It would have been some big, brutal fellow. They may have been intimidating to common soldiers, but not so much to trained fighters who knew how to deal with sizeable men.

The underlying issue is that D&D tends to favor offense over defense. It is practically a sacred cow and is intimately tied in to how the power levels scale. As a result there is very little room for lightly armored, nimble warriors that are hard to hit without breaking the AC system.

I agree. D&D is not a particularly interactive combat system.

 

[Celtavian]

re

I only spent a little over a year practicing kendo, but I believe strength modifying melee attacks is perfectly realistic. Contrary to some beliefs, strength, not dex, modifies the speed of an attack.

Strength + Speed = Power is the equation. Fast twitch muscle fibers account for some of your speed. Dexterity and Strength both rely upon muscular action, but in different ways.

If you look at the way D&D uses Strength, dexterity is a better example of muscular control. Just because a man can lift a tremendous amount of weight, doesn't mean he is the man with most athleticism or reflexes just as it doesn't mean he will lack athleticism or quick reflexes.

One of the reasons a person like Bruce Lee could strike harder than say Arnold Swartzenegger. Many martial artists rely on both for striking. A boxer does not do much strength training, but still needs a good natural strength to generate power. They do lots of speed and accuracy training training.

You also will never convince me that a man who can carry around 400 lbs at up to 20 feet per round while still fighting in hand to hand combat and such is a small man. A man with an 18 strength is a big, muscular person or preternaturally strong.

 

[Celtavian]

re

Well my point was that you cannot use both system. Using Dex based attack requires a change in the armor system in order to be consistent. Dex allow you to touch your opponent but that doesn't mean you go through the armor. If you use the AC system as is you must use STR as your primary to hit attributes. Another thing I don't like with that system is that it empowers rogues too much. In my group for example the rogue at first level would have been the best fighter of the group and usually rogues don't need a lot of STR to hit hard.

If you want to keep balance you need to decide wether you use a STR / AC system in which DEX based attack bonus requires an extra training "a feat". Or you use a DEX based system where a touch attack is enough to hit and DR for the armor.

Otherwise the thing becomes unbalanced. Even if the rogue is very dextrous and hit the warrior full plate all the time he needs to be able to penetrate it and without strengh a lot of training will be needed.

As for the best option being the strong armored two handed fighter, It is and it should be. Looking at history you quickly realised that the heavy armor didn't disapear because dextrous fighter wielding rapier overcame their armor. Projectile weapon made most armor almost useless on a battlefield, they were barely protecting you from guns and made you so much slower. Only Without the armor the dextrous fighter were able to shine.

And that is why the tank IMHO should still be the most valuable option.

Obviously if you don't care that much about balance then go ahead and house rule it.

Balance, boy people throw that word out alot and few can prove it. The system is not imbalanced. It gives the advantages I already stated.

I have played using this system. It does not empower rogues anymore than if they chose to obtain Weapon Finesse and use a rapier or shortsword save to allow them one more feat they would not normally have or allows them to use weapons they could not normally use. Neither advantage is a game breaker. Primary rogue damage comes from Sneak attack. If someone wants to build a rogue that does incredible damage, they can just as easily give them a high strength and forego using Weapon Finesse. That would create an even more powerful combination than the Dex based rogue. It completely depends on the dynamic of the group.

 

[Celtavian]

re

For that I'm glad that d20 stick to the original rule. I mean in melee, it's not a question of precisely hitting it right. After all, you're already in melee range. It's a matter of hitting it well. Even if you change the armor rule to resist damage, the impact is felt right through the armor and reverberate to the target's flesh.

Thank goodness I'm an old-school wargamer, because I first learn tactics. In the case of high-Dex, low-Str fighters, I'd rather he be a ranged attacker first to soften his target before his target come into melee range much weaker than before combat. If not, I make him take advantage of his mobility. MOVE HIM AROUND.

Don't change the rules to cover up weakness. Exploit the advantage of high-Dex fighters. If need be, create feats.

I change the rules to better simulate somewhat realistic combat. I make compromises because I like D&D and want to continue to use the system.

I have a huge house rules document that adds on rules here and there. We have given additional puncture power to crossbows. We have parry and dodge rules so that one on one combats can last longer. We have worked in fatigue rules based on Con. And so on and so on.

Its not everyones cup of tea to make such changes. Some are satisfied with the core system. That is fine, but all my rule changes are well-founded in either a fictional or real environment. I do know combat and I know it fairly well. Not the specifics such as all the different possible maneuvers, but the kinetics of it.

All these rule changes are made because I like to read and study extensively about combat: fictional and real. I want D&D combat to simulate fights like those in novels or history where two highly skilled combatants fight for extended periods of time because they are having trouble penetrating each others defenses. Where a warrior renowned for his dexterity can equal a fighter renowned for his brute strength. That better simulates the necessary physical attributes and skills that make up a great fighter.

If some don't want to take it as a far as I do, then no biggy. I'll offer my opinion and defend my position which I consider well-founded. If I didn't make these changes, the guys I play with probably wouldn't either. I don't expect many people to like the changes I made. I just do alot of tinkering to get the feel to combat that I want while trying to maintain game balance and usability.