D&D 5E Is Tasha's More or Less The Universal Standard?

[Irlo]

I said class, not character.

I could give the fighter as an example of the class, and you could point to a fighter character that could get a helluva lot of benefit from DEX, and I could point to an equally valid fighter character that gets very little benefit from DEX, and we'd go 'round and 'round.

Dex is objectively the more universally useful stat of the two for all classes.

More universally? Okay, then. There are now degrees of universality.

You can't just say that it's not universal?

 

[Irlo]

Do you think that number will be the same or as high as those who do get a better AC from a dex bonus? Because I think that while there are "many"(in quotes because that number is small relative to the number that do get AC) characters who don't get a better AC out of dex, the vast majority of characters do get a bonus from it.

No matter how many or how few, and in no matter what proportion, it's not universal.

 

[Maxperson]

I could give the fighter as an example of the class, and you could point to a fighter character that could get a helluva lot of benefit from DEX, and I could point to an equally valid fighter character that gets very little benefit from DEX, and we'd go 'round and 'round.

Well, no. You couldn't point to the fighter as an example of a class that gets no AC benefit from dex. You can point to a subset of individual fighter characters that use heavy armor, but those aren't the class.

More universally? Okay, then. There are now degrees of universality.

Apparently there can be more infinite, so why not more universal.

 

[Irlo]

Well, no. You couldn't point to the fighter as an example of a class that gets no AC benefit from dex. You can point to a subset of individual fighter characters that use heavy armor, but those aren't the class.

Right. And you can only point to a subset of individual fighter characters that get an AC benefit from DEX. In fact, the very same character can sometimes get a benefit and sometimes get no benefit, depending on what they're wearing.

As I said, 'round and 'round. I'm getting off the carousel.

 

[Maxperson]

Right. And you can only point to a subset of individual fighter characters that get an AC benefit from DEX. In fact, the very same character can sometimes get a benefit and sometimes get no benefit, depending on what they're wearing.

As I said, 'round and 'round. I'm getting off the carousel.

Thing is, even fighters that don't get AC bonuses still get a save bonus vs. the most common save in the game and with initiative.

 

[James Gasik]

Second most common, nearly tied with Wisdom, I think, based on MM monsters, I believe it was.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

In general, the only times that Dex isn't at least tied for best secondary stat, is when it is the primary stat.

I think that comparing Dex to the primary ability score of a class is rather missing the point. Primary ability scores are different depending on the class. I don't believe that anyone is arguing that Dex is better than Int for most Wizards, so I don't think that stating that it is is constructive.

There are many characters who will not get a better AC out of dexterity.

This does not disprove what they said.

Moreover this logic is true for any stat.

I feel the point at which people start to suggest that the situation of fighters making untrained Investigation checks meaning that Dex isn't generally better than Int for them, taking a breath could be beneficial.

I could give the fighter as an example of the class, and you could point to a fighter character that could get a helluva lot of benefit from DEX, and I could point to an equally valid fighter character that gets very little benefit from DEX, and we'd go 'round and 'round.

Indeed. And you could give the same argument for how Dex isn't as useful as Int for Wizards. Or how there are builds of Rogues, Rangers and Monks where Dex does not have to be the highest stat.
However what you are dancing around is that you are having to change the stat that you are comparing with each time.

 

[Helldritch]

If you want Dex to be less of a power house. Use side initiative. It removes it from initiative equation entirely. It also neuter the feat Alert unless you wish to go with "exceptions". But side initiative works great. Dexterity will still be very good, but it will be less of a "must have" second best for some classes.

 

[Irlo]

In general, the only times that Dex isn't at least tied for best secondary stat, is when it is the primary stat.

Paladin? Heavily armored cleric or fighter? Artificer (where DEX would probably be tertiary)?

I think that comparing Dex to the primary ability score of a class is rather missing the point. Primary ability scores are different depending on the class. I don't believe that anyone is arguing that Dex is better than Int for most Wizards, so I don't think that stating that it is is constructive.

I was responding to just that argument. The claim was the DEX is universally and objectively better than INT, and that each of the benefits of a high DEX modifier are significant (not small factors in the comparative analysis). My answer to that was: no, the value of DEX depends on class, class choices, and the distribution of ability scores overall. The value to a PC of those benefits of high DEX are not all significant.

It's not universal or objective.

 

[James Gasik]

Ok, look at it like this. I can build a Paladin to use Strength or Dexterity. What does this actually mean?

-Strength Paladin can use heavy weapons. Strength Paladin can, after spending a lot of money, get a little more AC. Strength Paladin can lug around more gear, and is better at Strength saves (which generally only apply to effects that push you around or knock you prone). Strength Paladin is good at Strength skills.

-Dexterity Paladin has to use weapons with the finesse quality. They are better at using ranged weapons. Dexterity Paladin has to spend a lot less money on armor. Dexterity Paladin is better at Dexterity saves (which generally apply to effects that cause hit point damage or hinder movement in some way). Dexterity Paladin is good at Dexterity skills. Dexterity Paladin has better initiative. Dexterity Paladin is far better at Stealth.

The takeaway here is that the main advantage of Strength Paladin is more damage and being good at Strength skills. Strength saves don't come up often and the penalty for failing them is far less of an issue with other saves.

Dexterity Paladin is more versatile, being good with ranged weapons. They have better initiative (which you may find valuable), Dexterity saves are much more common than Strength saves, and taking less damage is always nice. Dexterity Skills vs. Strength skills is a preference, I find they are both nice. Dexterity Paladin doesn't have to wait as long to get their best armor. Dexterity Paladin is better at Stealth.

There are tradeoffs to both approaches, but Dexterity Paladin gets a bit more upside, if those things are important to you. Hence, one can say Dexterity seems like a better attribute to have than Strength.

But on the other hand, if you want more damage per hit, and you plan on using Great Weapon Master, the advantages of Dexterity over Strength are irrelevant. You can't make that choice, so even if Dexterity is the better attribute on paper, it makes no difference.