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

[jasper]

Over the years I have seen I have no idea how many arguments about Dex being the god stat. I don't disagree.
There are also umpteen arguments about stats/abilities/what not tied to Str or Dex.

I propose something, that will infuriate most players, for all kinds of reasons.

Some weapon attacks require both a modicum of Strength AND Dexterity. In the real world, a top swordsman (not talking fencers), or archer, needs both.
So what happens if I said to my players:

"OK, when you use your Long Bow, you use your Dex and Prof to Hit, but you add (or subtract) your Str modifier for damage."
This concept can be applied to a myriad of the published weapons, though not all.
Anybody who has wielded a sledgehammer in the real world, or tried splitting wood, understands it not all about Strength.

Now, the cons to such an idea are not limited to the following:
1. More complexity for the players and DM, and we know that new age players hate complexity.
2. Dex, or Str, is no longer a dump stat, which will irritate most martial class players.
3. Martial class chars are taking the hit, while this has no impact on casters.

But...this is far more realistic, and the arguments about creating optimized chars loses some of its value.
Does this also mean that the base damage value of martial weapons has to be altered, to compensate for the inherent nerf to martial chars? Yes.
There are multiple cascade effects.

In the real world does New York City have a job opening for dragon pooper scooper? OR a dragon hunting license? And when is wererat season in NYC?
1. Yea I am 58 and now new age.
2. no comment
3. no comment.
How about this. Add another two columns to the weapon chart, Min str Min dex. If the pc don't qualify they can't use the weapon.

 

[Undrave]

That's a fun idea. However, only directly offensive spells (damage/debuff) are based on attributes at all. All utility, buffing, support, healing, and the like gain no modifiers based on ability scores. How would we want to incorporate those?

Give them prerequisites then. You need this much INT/WIS/CHA to use this spell.

 

[Cadence]

Give them prerequisites then. You need this much INT/WIS/CHA to use this spell.

Older editions had requirements for different levels of spells, didn't they?

 

[Blue]

Give them prerequisites then. You need this much INT/WIS/CHA to use this spell.

I had thought about that. But for the spells to be low enough for half-casters (and 1/3 casters for INT) to be able to cast them, then we also have issues where full casters can pump up off ability scores just a bit and get a much wider selection of spells.

Which also brings up that part of the Wizard's class balance is that it doesn't have a lot of power from features but has the widest spell list. I wouldn't want others to be able to grab that just for a moderate investment in INT. But subclasses like Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight still need to get access to spells without a crazy INT investment.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

I had thought about that. But for the spells to be low enough for half-casters (and 1/3 casters for INT) to be able to cast them, then we also have issues where full casters can pump up off ability scores just a bit and get a much wider selection of spells.

Which also brings up that part of the Wizard's class balance is that it doesn't have a lot of power from features but has the widest spell list. I wouldn't want others to be able to grab that just for a moderate investment in INT. But subclasses like Arcane Trickster and Eldritch Knight still need to get access to spells without a crazy INT investment.

There is no reason that particular spells are off-limits to all but the most dedicated/smart/devout/wise of their class. I would say that 1/2 and 1/3 casters would not qualify for a number of spells. I have zero issue with saying "an Arcane Trickster at 13th level does not have access to Fireball", though at 13th level, a Rogue would not care.

 

[Blue]

There is no reason that particular spells are off-limits to all but the most dedicated/smart/devout/wise of their class. I would say that 1/2 and 1/3 casters would not qualify for a number of spells. I have zero issue with saying "an Arcane Trickster at 13th level does not have access to Fireball", though at 13th level, a Rogue would not care.

This particular discussion is that non-directly offensive spells don't have an ability aspect and we were brainstorming the gating on those. So we're never talking about fireball. We are talking about utility, support and buff spells, which is exactly the type of spells we want half-casters and 1/3 casters to be able to access -- that's among their primary spell usage.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Over the years I have seen I have no idea how many arguments about Dex being the god stat. I don't disagree.
There are also umpteen arguments about stats/abilities/what not tied to Str or Dex.

I propose something, that will infuriate most players, for all kinds of reasons.

Some weapon attacks require both a modicum of Strength AND Dexterity. In the real world, a top swordsman (not talking fencers), or archer, needs both.
So what happens if I said to my players:

"OK, when you use your Long Bow, you use your Dex and Prof to Hit, but you add (or subtract) your Str modifier for damage."
This concept can be applied to a myriad of the published weapons, though not all.
Anybody who has wielded a sledgehammer in the real world, or tried splitting wood, understands it not all about Strength.

Now, the cons to such an idea are not limited to the following:
1. More complexity for the players and DM, and we know that new age players hate complexity.
2. Dex, or Str, is no longer a dump stat, which will irritate most martial class players.
3. Martial class chars are taking the hit, while this has no impact on casters.

But...this is far more realistic, and the arguments about creating optimized chars loses some of its value.
Does this also mean that the base damage value of martial weapons has to be altered, to compensate for the inherent nerf to martial chars? Yes.
There are multiple cascade effects.

I just gave bows the Finesse property. That way both realism (Str contributing to hit and damage) and common media concepts (the archer of the group often being relatively weak physically) are catered for.

I assume that when obtaining bows, characters get one suitable for their strength, and magic bows adjust automatically.

If you would rather separate out abilities, as your suggestion, you could do the same to spellcasters: Int contributes to spell attack rolls and number of spells known. Charisma grants a bonus on spell damage rolls, and Wisdom increases spell DCs.

 

[Vince_Snetterton]

I just gave bows the Finesse property. That way both realism (Str contributing to hit and damage) and common media concepts (the archer of the group often being relatively weak physically) are catered for.

I assume that when obtaining bows, characters get one suitable for their strength, and magic bows adjust automatically.

If you would rather separate out abilities, as your suggestion, you could do the same to spellcasters: Int contributes to spell attack rolls and number of spells known. Charisma grants a bonus on spell damage rolls, and Wisdom increases spell DCs.

Now, though I realize that adding the Finesse property to Bows is pretty innocuous, it is another example of Power Creep. It is simply an addition, without any tradeoff required.

As for the whole Int/ Wis/Cha thing for spells, all options are on the table there.

 

[Oofta]

Now, though I realize that adding the Finesse property to Bows is pretty innocuous, it is another example of Power Creep. It is simply an addition, without any tradeoff required.

As for the whole Int/ Wis/Cha thing for spells, all options are on the table there.

It's power creep to give strength based PCs a decent option for ranged attacks?

 

[Scars Unseen]

It's power creep to give strength based PCs a decent option for ranged attacks?

Isn't this the opposite of that? Adding finesse does nothing for strength based characters; it just makes dex generally more useful.