Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Kobold Avenger" data-source="post: 7379724" data-attributes="member: 779">I probably should have had it say reaction, I settled on that though just copy and pasted.I don't want to nerf dex builds in terms of &quot;you have 20 dex but you can't use any of that +5 bonus&quot;.&nbsp; I think maybe having a strength of 12 or 13 should be reasonable for a high dex combatant, but in terms of punishing those who go with having weapon-using classes that have a strength of 8, actually being stricter on encumbrance might be one.&nbsp; Or maybe not even allowing dex on any attack or damage roll unless strength is at least 10 (and making light armour require at least a strength of 10, or the use of Stunning Fist to require a strength of 10).&nbsp; Possibly penalizing ability increases (and point buy at character creation) to dex might be another until they're forced to increase str.&nbsp; Though keep in mind pure spellcasters would probably ignore str, but they rarely get into combat with weapons.A lot of places in the thread suggest adding str to ranged attacks, but I wasn't much of fan of those.&nbsp; I don't think anyone should be able to pick up any bow (or crossbow or firearm) and be able to add strength to the damage roll.&nbsp; But I wasn't a fan of the idea of &quot;mighty&quot; bows in 3e and that murky place they occupied in terms of masterwork items and the fiddly-ness of having a Mighty +3 Longbow +2.&nbsp; I think the masterwork rules could probably be expanded a bit more though, even if they start falling more into the magic item rules.&nbsp; I actually liked the modular nature of magic weapons in 3e, even though it became something like &quot;we need to wait for the next loot drop for something with the right proc&quot; or whatever you get with certain video games.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Kobold Avenger, post: 7379724, member: 779"] I probably should have had it say reaction, I settled on that though just copy and pasted. I don't want to nerf dex builds in terms of "you have 20 dex but you can't use any of that +5 bonus". I think maybe having a strength of 12 or 13 should be reasonable for a high dex combatant, but in terms of punishing those who go with having weapon-using classes that have a strength of 8, actually being stricter on encumbrance might be one. Or maybe not even allowing dex on any attack or damage roll unless strength is at least 10 (and making light armour require at least a strength of 10, or the use of Stunning Fist to require a strength of 10). Possibly penalizing ability increases (and point buy at character creation) to dex might be another until they're forced to increase str. Though keep in mind pure spellcasters would probably ignore str, but they rarely get into combat with weapons. A lot of places in the thread suggest adding str to ranged attacks, but I wasn't much of fan of those. I don't think anyone should be able to pick up any bow (or crossbow or firearm) and be able to add strength to the damage roll. But I wasn't a fan of the idea of "mighty" bows in 3e and that murky place they occupied in terms of masterwork items and the fiddly-ness of having a Mighty +3 Longbow +2. I think the masterwork rules could probably be expanded a bit more though, even if they start falling more into the magic item rules. I actually liked the modular nature of magic weapons in 3e, even though it became something like "we need to wait for the next loot drop for something with the right proc" or whatever you get with certain video games. [/QUOTE]

Verification