The Shadow
Hero
Depends on where you hit them. Slicing an artery doesn't take much strength.
Making each ability score count (Ideas)
- Thread starter mkill
- Start date
Depends on where you hit them. Slicing an artery doesn't take much strength.
greyhaze
First Post
*sigh* BUT, these guys have TRAINED to use their wis or dex to gain bonuses to their to hit or damage.
I would agree if you want to use a stat to use some other stat then the base stat (str for melee, dex for ranged) then having to "burn" a feat to do it makes sense.
Otherwise why bother having 6 different stats? Just pick the highest bonus from your highest stat, make any excuse you like and apply that to your to hit and damage.
Szatany
First Post
Also staying awake when a passenger on the next seat in carriage is telling his life's story.
Okay here is where I agree and disagree
Conversation:
To me this conversational checks should aways be
Active character's Charisma vs Defending character's Wisdom.
The other stats could be used to boost different approaches to get a bonus.
Bluff/Deception-Dex to control body movements. Int to craft good lies.
Diplomacy/Negotiations- Con to hold in laughter/frustration
Intimidation/browbeat- Str to look stronger. Con to look tougher
Weapons Combat:
As 5e will have a lower range of ability scores, I don't think we need to tag a class's primary stat to their weapon stat. Multiclassing is ruined that way. Instead give each ability a basic attack.
Melee weapon: Str vs AC. Str damage
Light weapon: Dex vs AC. Dex damage
Projectile weapon: Dex vs AC. Dex damage
Thrown weapon: Dex vs AC. Str damage
Feint: Int vs AC: Str damage
Smite: Cha vs AC. Cha damage
Sneak Attack: Dex vs AC. Int damage + Sneak Attack Damage
Cantrip: Int vs Touch AC (10+Dex mod)
Ray spell: Dex vs Touch AC
Grapple: Defender makes Str or Dex check vs Attacker's Str score
Knock down: Defender makes Str or Con check vs Attacker's Str score
Bull rush: Defender makes Str or Dex check vs Attacker's Str score
Disarm: Defender makes Dex or Int check vs Attacker's Dex score
Demoralize: Defender makes Wis check vs Attacker's Cha score
Poison: Defender makes Con check vs the source's Con score
Coop de Grace: Defender makes Con check vs Attacker's Str score
Conversation:
To me this conversational checks should aways be
Active character's Charisma vs Defending character's Wisdom.
The other stats could be used to boost different approaches to get a bonus.
Bluff/Deception-Dex to control body movements. Int to craft good lies.
Diplomacy/Negotiations- Con to hold in laughter/frustration
Intimidation/browbeat- Str to look stronger. Con to look tougher
Weapons Combat:
As 5e will have a lower range of ability scores, I don't think we need to tag a class's primary stat to their weapon stat. Multiclassing is ruined that way. Instead give each ability a basic attack.
Melee weapon: Str vs AC. Str damage
Light weapon: Dex vs AC. Dex damage
Projectile weapon: Dex vs AC. Dex damage
Thrown weapon: Dex vs AC. Str damage
Feint: Int vs AC: Str damage
Smite: Cha vs AC. Cha damage
Sneak Attack: Dex vs AC. Int damage + Sneak Attack Damage
Cantrip: Int vs Touch AC (10+Dex mod)
Ray spell: Dex vs Touch AC
Grapple: Defender makes Str or Dex check vs Attacker's Str score
Knock down: Defender makes Str or Con check vs Attacker's Str score
Bull rush: Defender makes Str or Dex check vs Attacker's Str score
Disarm: Defender makes Dex or Int check vs Attacker's Dex score
Demoralize: Defender makes Wis check vs Attacker's Cha score
Poison: Defender makes Con check vs the source's Con score
Coop de Grace: Defender makes Con check vs Attacker's Str score
I see what you're saying and I do not disagree, but it could easily be a "feature" of a class that the character is training or trained to use their <insert attribute> instead of strength to hit and damage. If you want to use an attribute that is not supported by the default rules or the class you have chosen, burning a feat to achieve this seems acceptable to me.
Frostmarrow
First Post
And to avoid being picked last at soccer practise.
Excuse is such a negative word. Replace it with "describe the way your character fights" and I'm sold.
To describe a character's strengths and weaknesses.
Izumi
First Post
I think the only thing important is the moment. Timing in your mind and timing on your weapon is key to all. The one that reaches velocity in the fastest time and puts all the strength in the right place tends to win because their weapon comes out on top. Kinda a bad idea to think overmuch as he approaches. You judge the distance, select a posture that nullifies expected motion, and then pull your deception in order to provoke an attack opposite to his original intended one. If a good gap in his mental sphere is achieved, the fight is over pretty fast. You don't have to be as strong as the other guy, but you have to be strong enough to pull off your strategy.
The Kendo no Kata are really put together well! I agree, you watch out for old Sensei, sometimes they aren't really pulling feints, they are checking to see if you can spot suki and achieve sen. His/Her fluid motions from long practice, and good tactics from experience, can even the odds a lot. This is especially true if you over-rely on youthful strength and mobility.
Aikido is indeed a good example of an art that utilizes opponents motion to their disadvantage. If they push you pull, if they pull you push. If they twist, you spin. All its forms are said to come from a sword art, and I think it's pretty obvious.
A sumo follows rules and specializes his body for those, of course. A few events from history seem to show them as incompetent swordsmen despite being allowed by law to wear the daisho. (Serizawa Kamo in 1863 Osaka Altercation, for example). Heavy and strong doesn't always equate success, and they shouldn't always get a bonus to attack in D&D either, I think.
Anyone who has ever been in a knife fight might disagree with you a bit. Strikes made with precision are more deadly and damaging than putting your muscle behind a poorly placed strike. With the light blades, it's not going to be effective to try and muscle your way through it. For axes and clubs its a vastly different story, however.
A more accurate model would be to improve damage dependent upon both the strength behind it and the degree of lethal accuracy of the strike. Although I could envision a more complex system using str, dex, int and even wis.
I still think it's better to keep the system simple and assume that a clever rogue is placing intelligent and lethal strikes on an opponent, the strong fighter is putting muscle behind those overpowering hits, the agile swashbuckler is flashing steel with deadly accuracy, and the wise monk's discipline allows her to use her opponent's strength against them.
Concerning knives, it's always better to put the tanto on the victim and and push or pull. Thrusts are useful to vital areas, only when the foe has been compromised. The foe can be stabbed multiple times in non-vital areas, and keep attacking you. If you cut muscles and tendons he'll be less a threat though, and more easily dispatched. The body kinda suctions deep stabs, and you don't get a lot of time to twist it to allow air entry. Stronger men with a lot of experience are much more dangerous than weaker men with a lot of experience in my opinion.
I would think attack roll bonuses should be WIS based. It's one thing to know what to do (INT), and it's wholly another to be able to pull it off under duress. I think there should be both STR & DEX bonuses to damage due to both being effective tactics in smart fighters, but I also have the caveat as before that, the stronger fighter tends to win if equal to or more experienced than his foe.
Anyways, Just my thoughts.
Last edited:
Your point about causing more damage after penetrating with a blade is excellent. The other points you brought up about how different attributes affect combat to simulate higher level of detail are very thoughtful as well. My point in responding above was to describe that effectiveness in placing a hit and damaging your opponent need not be soley based on strength. You could just as easily be more accurate or smarter, and are able to put whatever strength you have to good use, regardless whether you are superior in raw strength. If all other attributes being equal, I agree that the stronger combatant should have the advantage. But I think it just as advantageous for the smarter combatant, all other things being equal.
I personally think using simplified mechanics that allow a combatant to use another attribute other than strength is perfectly reasonable for quick combat resolution.
Izumi
First Post
I personally think using simplified mechanics that allow a combatant to use another attribute other than strength is perfectly reasonable for quick combat resolution.
Hmm, it's something to consider carefully. Making a realistic system seems to cause massive slowing or massive choice paralysis. Using other attributes has to be balanced for plausibility in such a way as it can be understood by all and rationalized to avoid those who'd naysay it.
