D&D 5E Idea that will most players will hate, but I think addresses a mechanical issue in game

[HammerMan]

I have played around with idea's like this all the way back. (in WoD rules you add dex to hit on all rolls and str to damage) but what i find is better is more options.

All melee weapons are str or dex, and all ranged weapons are Dex or wis and AC is Dex or Int... always take what is better.

does having a high dex help for all of them still... yes, but it allows for a str/int melee class or a wis/int ranged one

 

[abirdcall]

Dex isn't actually that much better than Str. Sometimes Dex is important in a challenge and sometimes Str is. If an entire party has 8 Str they're going to literally struggle to overcome some challenges.

If you still think Dex is too strong and should be better balanced just remove it from initiative.

 

[overgeeked]

They have been saying this in every edition since chainmail.

I have experience with Chainmail, OD&D, AD&D, the entirety of the Basic line, didn’t play 2E or 3E but was around for them, and have played WotC D&D since the launch of 4E. There was nothing to optimize until 2E sort of with kits then late 2E with Skills & Powers. The whole notion of builds and optimization didn't exist until then. At best you'd be able to pick a class that went well with your randomly generated stats...and try to convince the rest of the party to give you the magic items that worked best for your character...but that was the entirety of your "build". Optimization wasn't even really possible before that. It's a fact that the game has slid from challenging to utterly not challenging, just look at the proliferation of magic, hit point bloat, and superhero regeneration disguised as healing. It's a fact that the game has slid from vaguely sort of "realistic" in a few places here and there (encumbrance, reaction tables, slow healing, etc) to ignoring those few pockets of "realism" in favor of fantasy superhero play. So, while I get your need to be dismissive, you're also utterly wrong.

 

[Baron Opal II]

I think someone beat you to the punch on thresholds on drawing a bow back. It really comes down to abstraction versus realism. I created this thread based on the idea of introducing more realism into the game, as I am not satisfied with the level of abstraction in 5e. But how much abstraction is necessary to make the game playable? That becomes a philosophical question.

Well, I was approaching it from a realism angle.

If you want to look at the wreck of the Mary Rose (?) we know some longbows had a 120# pull. This is requires a monstrous amount of strength. There are plenty of power lifters that can jerk 300# over their heads*, but this is a sustained pull that the archer can still aim and take a considered shot, level or arced. Now, if you wanted to have a bow that did extra damage if you were really strong, that certainly has precedent in reality. It's just you have to be that strong to even use the bow properly.

Unless I misunderstand.

* Patton Oswalt has a funny anecdote about this, actually.

 

[Stormonu]

Adding an "Accuracy" stat and then detaching hit bonuses for Str/Dex (Str only applying to damage rolls - ranged or melee, Dex only applying to AC) might be an alternate way to go, but feels like adding Comliness to the ability array.

 

[Cadence]

Dex isn't actually that much better than Str. Sometimes Dex is important in a challenge and sometimes Str is. If an entire party has 8 Str they're going to literally struggle to overcome some challenges.

If you still think Dex is too strong and should be better balanced just remove it from initiative.

I kind of want Dex and Agility separated (akin to the old 2e skills and powers). Maybe Dex for aiming missile weapons and fine motor skills, Agility for athletics, dodging, and initiative.

 

[Baron Opal II]

If you still think Dex is too strong and should be better balanced just remove it from initiative.

I considered letting the player choose at character creation between INT or DEX for initiative. Reflexes or Perception kind of thing. Never considered what knock on effects there might be, however.

 

[payn]

I have experience with Chainmail, OD&D, AD&D, the entirety of the Basic line, didn’t play 2E or 3E but was around for them, and have played WotC D&D since the launch of 4E. There was nothing to optimize until 2E sort of with kits then late 2E with Skills & Powers. The whole notion of builds and optimization didn't exist until then. At best you'd be able to pick a class that went well with your randomly generated stats...and try to convince the rest of the party to give you the magic items that worked best for your character...but that was the entirety of your "build". Optimization wasn't even really possible before that. It's a fact that the game has slid from challenging to utterly not challenging, just look at the proliferation of magic, hit point bloat, and superhero regeneration disguised as healing. It's a fact that the game has slid from vaguely sort of "realistic" in a few places here and there (encumbrance, reaction tables, slow healing, etc) to ignoring those few pockets of "realism" in favor of fantasy superhero play. So, while I get your need to be dismissive, you're also utterly wrong.

You are right, this argument has 18/00 strength.

 

[abirdcall]

I considered letting the player choose at character creation between INT or DEX for initiative. Reflexes or Perception kind of thing. Never considered what knock on effects there might be, however.

I think the simplest thing to do is just to not have any stat add to it.

 

[Baron Opal II]

I think the simplest thing to do is just to not have any stat add to it.

Yeah, but at the time I was thinking of the intelligent tactical fighter type.