D&D 5E Finesse rebalance

[Fenris-77]

Sacred cows are what things should be designed around, they shouldn't be upstaged by the new kid on the block. The rapier at d8 makes a whole range of sacred cows completely useless. STR based combat in general other than 2H being prime amongst the casualties.

Taking away DEX damage reduces things by more than a small amount IMO, but that's the reason you'd get less DEX-based melee characters (so we mostly agree, I think). If finesse weapons capped at d6 it would have a in-between impact that's maybe more what I'm looking for.

I don't have any problems with the damages mods listed above either.

 

[Charlaquin]

Sacred cows are what things should be designed around, they shouldn't be upstaged by the new kid on the block.

 

[Fenris-77]

Yeah, yeah, GIF it it laughing boy. You can either design around sacred cows or, gasp, change them. What you really shouldn't do is leave them and then design other rules that make them even sillier. The Rapier and finesse are example three on that list.

 

[Doug McCrae]

Rapiers need buffed so you can two-weapon fight with a rapier and a dagger. Do you want to look like a teenage mutant ninja tortle wielding two identical weapons, or an Errol Flynn-style sex god carving your initials into your foes and swinging from chandeliers?

 

[Guest 6801328]

The paladin also loses half that damage (for around 12.5) if he misses one attack, whereas the rogue only loses 1d6 (for around 18 damage).

I think this is a key point about the rogue's effectiveness. And also, as others have noted, that if stuck at range the rogue can just use his bow (often hiding as a bonus action) at full effectiveness.

As a general design thing, I really wish both Dex and Str were somehow used in all attacks. Not only is it logical that a character with 16 Str and 16 Dex should always be more dangerous than somebody with 16 in one and 10 in the other, but it would encourage more variety in point distributions.

 

[Xeviat]

As a general design thing, I really wish both Dex and Str were somehow used in all attacks. Not only is it logical that a character with 16 Str and 16 Dex should always be more dangerous than somebody with 16 in one and 10 in the other, but it would encourage more variety in point distributions.

I'd agree with you if spellcasting followed a similar trend.

 

[Xeviat]

Rapiers need buffed so you can two-weapon fight with a rapier and a dagger. Do you want to look like a teenage mutant ninja tortle wielding two identical weapons, or an Errol Flynn-style sex god carving your initials into your foes and swinging from chandeliers?

Since 1d8+1d4 is the same as 1d6+1d6, I'd say this could be a feature of the dagger (though, since the dagger has throwing, I tend to consider the dagger to be on par with the shortsword in balance calculation, and thus it's too powerful as a simple weapon but is okay as a martial weapon; since simple weapon users rarely use their weapons anyway, it doesn't matter).

 

[Guest 6801328]

I'd agree with you if spellcasting followed a similar trend.

Well, yeah, that too.

The one thing I dislike most about 5e is the bland interchangeability of ability scores.

 

[Charlaquin]

As a general design thing, I really wish both Dex and Str were somehow used in all attacks. Not only is it logical that a character with 16 Str and 16 Dex should always be more dangerous than somebody with 16 in one and 10 in the other, but it would encourage more variety in point distributions.

I've long thought that Dex should be used to hit and Str for damage with all weapons. It makes sense - with all weapons, skill, speed, and precision are key to landing your strikes, and stronger people's strikes hit harder (or can use bows with higher draw weights). Although, I think to make this work you'd want a more granular armor table. If martial characters need Dex to hit anyway, heavy armor just ends up offering the same AC they can get with light for a lot more gold and carry weight. So, I think more variety of Dex caps and Str minimums would be necessary to keep this balanced.

I'd agree with you if spellcasting followed a similar trend.

I don't think that'd be a bad idea at all. Int to hit, Cha to damage maybe? While we're at it, have Wis add to AC instead of Dex so you don't have to mess with the armor table and every ability has a direct combat application (Str adds to weapon damage, Dex to weapon attacks, Con adds to HP, Wis adds to AC, Int adds to spell attacks/save DCs, and Cha adds to spell damage.)

 

[Charlaquin]

Since 1d8+1d4 is the same as 1d6+1d6, I'd say this could be a feature of the dagger (though, since the dagger has throwing, I tend to consider the dagger to be on par with the shortsword in balance calculation, and thus it's too powerful as a simple weapon but is okay as a martial weapon; since simple weapon users rarely use their weapons anyway, it doesn't matter).

Deja Vu. I think I've made this exact post before.

Worth noting though, as per the improvised weapon rules, you can throw any melee weapon for 1d4 damage at 20ft/60ft ranges. And since the dagger's damage die is already 1d4, the thrown property on it doesn't actually change its functionality at all.

You could make a martial "Main Gauche" weapon that does 1d4, finesse, light, and has the special property of being able to be dual-wielded with a non-light weapon in the other hand. Or, if calling it "Main Gauche" feels too specific, call it a dagger, and change the current dagger's name to knife. Or put the special property of being able to dual-wield with a dagger on the Rapier, I guess.