My first Homebrew attempt to fix the elven dex fighter/rapier and bow all too frequent build in my campaign: I need some advice!

[CleverNickName]

You may as well get rid of rapiers entirely if you remove the finesse property. It literally just becomes a longsword you can't two-hand.

That is certainly an option as well, quite a few people on this forum do. We just removed the finesse property (although [MENTION=6780961]Yunru[/MENTION] has a great idea for replacing it...I wish I had thought of that!) and nobody flinched.

 

[Xeviat]

Is the issue that you keep seeing Dex fighters and no Str fighters? Or is the issue that the rapier is the only melee weapon chosen by Dex fighters?

For the first issue, I think the solution is banning shield use when using finesse. The stance for wielding a rapier vs. a longsword is entirely shifted. When using a finesse weapon, you lead with your dominant hand. When using a strength based weapon, you lead with your off-hand. (I'm not in HEMA, but I've done a tiny bit of fencing and kendo).

Also for the first issue, tracking encumbrance really limits dex fighters. Using monsters that have lots of Str save effects also helps. A Dex fighter is far less tanky.

For the second issue, if I were designing the game from the ground up, I'd have "light" weapons have an attack bonus to make up for their smaller damage die. Then there would be a choice between shortswords and rapiers.

 

[Satyrn]

Oh. What if you upped the AC value of heavy armor by 1? Then plate would be 2 points better than any Dex option when it comes to AC.

 

[ClaytonCross]

..snip...

I’ve got some problems with this build because my most tactical – optimizer – min-max players tend to choose it not for flavour or narrative reasons, but because it’s the most convenient one, and I don’t like it, because I think that, for many aspects of the game, they are right.

..snip...

So here is the thing. your problem is not that Dex is good. It's not a problem for players to build with tactical optimized characters as you said the player is a min-max player.... so your punishing them for having a play style that is not "Narrative above all!" however, playing the "skilled hero" is a character arch architype. There are 3 ways you can fix this without homebrew.

1. Adjust your and the players prospective. I know this is not what your asking and please understand I don't mean it personal but to say your homebrew is targeting a symptom like cough medicine when you have the flew. It might stop the issue directly in front of you but its not curing your "Flu" this is simple but common fix for the actual problem though it will take time to adjust. A player wanting to be good at something as a hero in an RPG is well... to be expected. Your not playing the commoner NPCs of the story. That said, there is a big difference between min-max/optimizer and a power gamer. A min-max/optimizer is trying to make the most of their character to be as heroic as they can without waste which means they have mins you can use for story telling hooks. Being min-max/optimizer does not mean their characters can't have good back stories and narrative. Make sure that they have a back story and all class features like languages are tied into it, not just selections. If you require narrative support for those choices it gets in their mind and will often change their approach. If they don't and they find a justification they like then they have the narrative you want. That's win or win. However, if you have a power gamer (usually damage) trying to so good they steal the show from everyone else that can be a problem. I find one power game is not that big a deal but if you have two power gamers targeting the same skill (Damage per round (stealing kills), Face (stealing conversation narrative from other player story), or skill junkies taking all the skill so no other player has a skill that matters it becomes a problem. At that point no amount of homebrew will fix the issue. You need to talk to the player. They need to explain that each player deserves a roll in the party and a chance to shine and when another player is built for a function they need to step back. I also find party planning helps this a lot. If you ask for party roles instead of party classes, then you don't end up with a ranger and a rogue fighting to open all the doors you instead get ranger who is the survival guide in the woods, a rogue thief who is an expert in locks, disarming traps, and sneaking in, with a wizard who is skilled at investigating for hidden traps and secret doors but who differs to the rogue to disable them.

2. Don't make something mechanically suck so they don't choose it, make something mechanically good so they do. You want it for narrative so this might seem counter intuitive but the mechanical part of the game is not a throw away its their to support the Narrative. Your obviously aware of that or you would not be "nerfing" dexterity to convince players to use strength. Its not enough to say your strong you need to mechanical support that so players can use it narratively. Strength is useful. Why do players not want something useful? Do you use encumbrance or variant encumbrance? Encumbrance is a standard rule but if your hand waving it then players are carrying mountains on their backs with no issue. This makes strength less important where variant encumbrance makes strength more important. How often do you hand wave or call strength checks? I your calling dexterity checks all the time for stealth, thieves tools, slight of hand, and acrobatics but never calling for strength checks then what value does strength have? Even if you nerf Dex it will still be better than strength because you don't use it. So use it more... you can use any stat for a skill check.... disarm trap might sometimes be thieve tools (strength) check, maybe the door is not locked … its just stuck. Are you using the "shove action" it is a standard rule. Have an NPC push a character down with shove gaining advantage on attacks, have an NPC grapple PC reducing movement to 0, these actions require strength to use even though they can be avoided with dex athletics players (which will mean your not sticking it to your players if you suddenly introduce this) will get knocked down and grappled beaten once in a while with all the other NPCs in 5ft attacking one target with advantage when it takes breaking the grapple to stand back up.

3. So what Narrative reason are you giving them for strength? Maybe when you have a big strong NPC or PC trying to role play an attempt to intimidate are you using intimidate(Charisma) or … intimidate(strength)? By RAW you can substitute the attribute when rolling skill checks when appropriate. You can have moments when strength is recognized by mechanics, and you can have call out visible strength in as a narrative tool. If you have story hooks for being asked to fight have them over looked for being a bunch of skinny week guys and if they have a strong player in the party have mercenaries always assume that player is the leader and ignore the other puny party members. Perception is key. A skinny 8 strength player might have a belt of Storm Giant strength but if you don't know what that is or does they just look skinny and week despite the 27 strength override.


My point primarily is before your "fix dex" consider that it be that at your table Strength is weak or even useless. So no matter how much you nerf dex, your not going to convince them to take strength because its already way worse. You will not make get players to take strength unless its narratively significant and mechanically supported which you as GM control. I see a lot of people ignoring encumbrance and hand waving gear tracking because they don't think it is interesting in narrative then complaining because their PCs who can carry mountains with an 8 strength don't value the stat because narratively it doesn't matter. They don't have to decide what they can take because they can only carry so much and even though they are weak dex skeletons their is not story narrative downfall of being weak or benefit from being strong.

 

[ClaytonCross]

The Agile Fighter feat shouldn't be a thing. That's just overpowered. And defeats the purpose as noted above.

I would just remove +DEX to any and all weapon damage, and make STR the ONLY attribute to ever apply a modifier to weapon damage. That means finesse weapons AND ranged weapons, and that includes a negative STR modifier. Kill all 8 STR archers.

Also, crossbows shouldn't add any ability modifier to damage, period. Make a new weapon property called "mechanical" that prevents ability modifier to damage. And as small compensation, increase damage dice for all crossbows by one size.

One handed swords, cutting/slashing weapons should all be finesse. Cutting edge weapons are about control and only a few pounds of pleasure are required to be useful. However, they are virtually useless against strong armor that convers the damage into concussive force. Its not that it shouldn't be a thing, its that it should be more distinct from strength attacks. If slashing was dex -2 damage vs heavy armor, piercing was strength (melee) or dex (ranged) -2 to hit but critical on 19-20, and bludgeoning was strength no adjustment then players would have more interesting decisions.

THE REAL PROBLEM is not dexterity in combat (they are all about the same in combat attack and defense as strength allows plate it also adds to armor), its the out of combat functions that convince players to pick dexterity. A lot of the player at my table want to sneaky (stealth) as result they want dex, which makes strength being equal wasteful compared to more interesting alternatives like wisdom for better perception which is also important when trying to avoid guards.

Stealth is the #1 reason for dexterity player characters which is a narrative choice. Their is no amount of nerfing dex that will make players at my table not want to play a medieval batman. They are the darkKnight. Its fun, I get it. Also, the white knight gets shunned because the party is trying to sneak in and you have one guy in with shinny armor "playing the symbols" as the go in ruining every attempt at stealth. So when they make their second character they go stealthy to avoid "bringing the group down" or alt least Barbarian so they have good AC with disadvantage to stealth for armor.

No amount of nerfing dex with change that. Strength will never be the stat for stealth and players are more likely to go with a spellcasters stat and constitution. (Example: Shadow Sorcerer with CHA and CON so they can take subtle spell, greater invisibility, and shadowblade)

If you want to get a player to pick strength and not dex you have to make strength better and sell them on the idea. Watch Conan then offer to help them build a new character. I would not be surprised if the number of barbarians increases.

If you want to Fix something, give strength more utility.

Encumbrance (carrying heavy weight is a fundamental use of strength many GMs like to hand wave)
Javelin's can use strength for to hit and damage as a range weapon.
Having a 16 or higher strength negates the reload property on Crossbows
Intimidation skill can always use strength as the attribute
Ensure players know the Grapple and shove actions
Ensure their are as many strength tests as dexterity checks in a dungeon. (Climbing, stuck doors, rusty levers, weight bearing traps, push/pull puzzles, and requirements to move heavy object A to room 3)

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

In my next game, I am going to propose two changes to reduce the god stat a little (just a little, because I don't feel it is an enormous issue).

1. Initiative uses INT. The order actions get resolved is based on smarts, not reflexes.

2. Bows use DEX for Attack and Damage but have a minimum STR requirement. A STR 8 elf can't draw a longbow.

 

[Xeviat]

In my next game, I am going to propose two changes to reduce the god stat a little (just a little, because I don't feel it is an enormous issue).

1. Initiative uses INT. The order actions get resolved is based on smarts, not reflexes.

2. Bows use DEX for Attack and Damage but have a minimum STR requirement. A STR 8 elf can't draw a longbow.

I'm onboard with a Str requirement for longbows.

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I’ve got some problems with this build because my most tactical – optimizer – min-max players tend to choose it not for flavour or narrative reasons, but because it’s the most convenient one, and I don’t like it, because I think that, for many aspects of the game, they are right.

Before changing anything in your game (or creating house rules) for that reason, I believe you should keep in mind that they'll just find the next best thing and min-max it just the same. If you're not comfortable with players who min-max their characters, the permanent solutions you should consider are:

1) Talk to them and explain how you feel uncomfortable about that kind of play.
2) If "1" doesn't work, find some replacements. Personally, I don't care about min-maxing, but I know it can be annoying sometimes, and we're all here to have fun.

 

[cmad1977]

Before changing anything in your game (or creating house rules) for that reason, I believe you should keep in mind that they'll just find the next best thing and min-max it just the same. If you're not comfortable with players who min-max their characters, the permanent solutions you should consider are:

1) Talk to them and explain how you feel uncomfortable about that kind of play.
2) If "1" doesn't work, find some replacements. Personally, I don't care about min-maxing, but I know it can be annoying sometimes, and we're all here to have fun.

Yeah. This isn’t a system problem. It’s a player problem.

 

[ClaytonCross]

Yeah. This isn’t a system problem. It’s a player problem.

So GM never uses strength mechanics or role play, players stop using strength, GM blames it on player... got It. lol

I would submit the GM is also a player.

I think players are playing in the GMs world so there does need to be consent to that however I also think a GM has no game if there are no players. Mutual respect and understand works best in my opinion. Almost all characters have some level of min max or they would be the same character, the wizard is smarter than the barbarian and the barbarian is stronger than the wizard. If you want players to use strength make strength useful. I feel like people want to focus on getting cough drops for their cough but have no intent to get anti-biotics or shot for the flu. The cough drops might help but not getting sick or getting better is more effective than reducing a single symptom. This dislike of the use of dexterity is the result of having to deal with this "cough" of players leaning to dex or I really suspect leaning away from Strength. Strength is often diminished my GMs who don't want to wait for players manage inventory or who don't use strength for pretty much anything but combat. So when a GM complains about how strength is not used at their tables its usually for one of 2 reasons.

1. Lack of GM us of strength (ignoring rules like encumbrance, shove, and grapple "because they are annoying and time consuming"). If strength becomes an optimal choice the players will use it... proving they are optimizing but then the GM will have what he is asking for... though that will change if min/max optimizers are really the GMs concern since how they might min/max strength.

2. The players like stealth characters but since they are dex based and every player is stealth the GM feels they are optimizing. However, if the GM makes strength important even heavy handed important. These players are still going to play dexterity characters for stealth. At that point if the GM still doesn't like dex its not because it is not because it is optimal or that players are not doing things for narrative reasons. It is because they are successfully avoiding encounters the GM spent hours working on instead of fighting... At that point the GM can ether add NPC scouts with very high perception or talk to the players about the style of game the GM wants to run versus the they way they are playing. If it turns out the GM was a strait forward epic heroes fighting every fight they can still use stealth to gain advantage on fights they just need to know if enemies are there, they are there because the GM wants the players to fight them. If this style is not ok with some of the players then they need to find a GM/game that runs a campaign they agree with. This is often a hard conversation though because most groups are friends and want to play with them so the GM doesn't want to tell the players no stealth if they are going to leave and the players don't want to play a game where they have to fight everything and other means are off the table limiting the style of play. That said the GM will never be happy submitting to the players but most players can play in different games rotating GM so they can have different styles. The players have more flexibility here than a GM does. After all you want to run the game you want to run but you and play different types with different GMs as a player.