Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Satyrn" data-source="post: 6970908" data-attributes="member: 6801204">I don't see this helping at all. Indeed, it would irritate me if I was your player.I choose to play a melee character because I like playing a guy in melee. I far prefer doing so over playing a ranged combatant (whether martial or spellcaster).5th Edition has, for the first time in D&amp;D's history made it a snap for me to play a lightly armoured swashbuckler with a good Dex and low Strength. Right out of the PH, my concept can be realized, both in flavour and mechanics. But it relies on finesse weapons to feel effective. Your proposed rule, although it boosts Strength based weapons rather than actually penalizing Dex based melee weapons, still feels like a punishment to me, to my swashbuckler. When your goal is to make melee more attractive, why are you only boosting some melee?Anyway, from my experience, I find that the people who play ranged combatants do so because they value not getting hit well over big damage. And I believe you would have to boost melee damage dramatically in order to sway many players into choosing melee.Me, I play melee combatants because I value scrapping by a bloody mess over avoiding damage. There is nothing you could do to get me to favor ranged combat (unless maybe creating a sort of aggro mechanic I could use to draw fire towards me)See, I believe you're issue is related to your players' preference and your own far more than anything mechanical. If your players are avoiding melee as much as possible it's probably because that's what they want to do, what they find fun. Warping the mechanics to get them to do something else is likely to create some irritation.&nbsp; You might accidentally make one of player's character concepts less appealing, as you did mine.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Satyrn, post: 6970908, member: 6801204"] I don't see this helping at all. Indeed, it would irritate me if I was your player. I choose to play a melee character because I like playing a guy in melee. I far prefer doing so over playing a ranged combatant (whether martial or spellcaster). 5th Edition has, for the first time in D&D's history made it a snap for me to play a lightly armoured swashbuckler with a good Dex and low Strength. Right out of the PH, my concept can be realized, both in flavour and mechanics. But it relies on finesse weapons to feel effective. Your proposed rule, although it boosts Strength based weapons rather than actually penalizing Dex based melee weapons, still feels like a punishment to me, to my swashbuckler. When your goal is to make melee more attractive, why are you only boosting some melee? Anyway, from my experience, I find that the people who play ranged combatants do so because they value not getting hit well over big damage. And I believe you would have to boost melee damage dramatically in order to sway many players into choosing melee. Me, I play melee combatants because I value scrapping by a bloody mess over avoiding damage. There is nothing you could do to get me to favor ranged combat (unless maybe creating a sort of aggro mechanic I could use to draw fire towards me) See, I believe you're issue is related to your players' preference and your own far more than anything mechanical. If your players are avoiding melee as much as possible it's probably because that's what they want to do, what they find fun. Warping the mechanics to get them to do something else is likely to create some irritation. You might accidentally make one of player's character concepts less appealing, as you did mine. [/QUOTE]

Verification