Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9228595" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Most of what you listed doesn't matter. Worse at using improvised weapons? Who uses those in the first place?! Better at fighting unarmed? Who wants to do that other than a monk?! In both instances just having a boot knife and being able to do 1d4+dex mod is as good or superior to those options.Switching between ranged and melee with a shield? Actually not that hard. Daggers can be thrown, slings and hand crossbows are one handed. If we move to looking at One DnD we have the 1d10 Pistol. Sure, the hand crossbow and Pistol have the loading property preventing multi-attack, but if we are just comparing to the Javelins and hand Axes, then daggers and slings are only a 1 pt difference. Meanwhile, in fully ranged builds, Dex is King, and the lack of a shield isn't usually a large detriment. Which leaves initiating grapples, trips and pushes. And I'll be honest, those can be negatives, but I've seen someone play a strength based fighter who wanted to grapple a lot... and they would have been better off just attacking. Tripping is only really useful if you have a lot of melee fighters. Pushing is only really useful if you have hazardous terrain. The VAST majority of the time... people just make attack rolls. Yes, these things can be boons for the character who can do them, but if you want to BUILD for them... open hand monk? Battle Master Fighter? Both can use dex for these purposes.Your clarification here does not make any sense to me. You seem to be saying that there are pros and cons to everything. Which yes, that is obvious. But you seem to think that I'm completely unaware of that. I am aware of there being cons to having a low strength. What I am pointing out is that, from my own perspective, the cons to low strength are incredibly mild compared to the cons of other scores. Yes, there are six attributes, but unless you roll dice and get high on all of them, you are FORCED to have lower scores in some attributes than others. You are FORCED to have cons based on a low score somewhere. So if you are weighing the pros and cons, and one set of cons is decidedly less severe... the other scores come out ahead.  Is this only from my own perspective? Of course it is. It is fundamentally impossible to speak from other people's perspectives in a complete manner. But I am also backing this up by looking at what other people have said in other places over my many years engaging digitally with the game, and from comparing those things to the systems and rules in the game. It is my perspective, but it is not arbitrary. And while I can accept other tables having other experiences, that does not mean necessarily that those experiences are more indicative of the average experience.</blockquote>

Verification