D&D 5E Rethinking weapons categories and proficiencies: Using strength as requirement instead of class proficiencies.

[Cap'n Kobold]

Then you should learn to read beyond the distraction.

I try not to put words in people's mouths or make guesses or assumptions about what they mean, and just stick to what they actually said.
Now Dex-based damage will go down in this system, but dex will still contribute to damage.

Note that all weapons now can use dex to damage. So while a Str-dumped rapier-user would lose an average of 1 point of damage, they now have the option of using a two-handed weapon to make up the damage at the expense of AC if they were using a shield before.
And if the player didn't dump Str, they can use Dex to attack and damage with GWF.

Net results dex gets more SAD for fighting requirements and str not.

(OK. I am going to make a guess here: that you meant dex gets more MAD?)
That is the point of this change. Str builds are already fairly MAD because Initiative and dex saves are quite important, as well as some of the skills. Dex builds are currently rather SAD. These changes just make Dex builds a little MAD as well.

well, you will not see many wizards walking around with 16+ str.

So why would their syllabus include training with greataxes and glaives?

Also class features to damage aren't needed as they come from extra attack, smite, sneak attack, multi attack or similar class features.

My suggestion was to increase the effective Str to represent a Fighter being more trained in weaponry that a wizard of the same Str. In the same way that a wizard proficient in Arcana would be better at it than a Fighter with the same intelligence, but no training.

A question: Would this system make all weapons Finesse?

 

[Horwath]

My suggestion was to increase the effective Str to represent a Fighter being more trained in weaponry that a wizard of the same Str. In the same way that a wizard proficient in Arcana would be better at it than a Fighter with the same intelligence, but no training.

A question: Would this system make all weapons Finesse?

fighting style can be an analogue to arcana skill. If you have a style you are better fighter than someone who doesn't have it.

Yes, all weapons can use dex if higher than strength.

But if you have 20 str and you have higher dex than that...let's say that this rule is the least of your problems

 

[Blue]

What's the goal of this change? That's really the only way to evaluate it.

At my table:
Weapon damage used to be the gatekeeper for weapon damage in very early editions, but now it's number of attacks. So I'm fine with ore damaging weapons happening.
This may give more variation on weapons picked, instead of just the best. I like that.
It seems to kill melee with weapons that you could also throw, I expect to see two different types of weapons for people who throw. But that's not a huge thing in 5e anyway.
For me, giving everyone with a STR 10 access to reach weapons seems wonky.
This really puts a STR gatekeeper on a lot of non-traditional build concepts.

 

[LapBandit]

I would suggest leaving everything as is and creating Uncommon magical items that effect a similar change. I recently had this argument with a large number of people who balked at changing the damage dice. The second I made them Uncommon magic items (even though the weapon itself is not magical!) pretty much all resistance backed off. This thread is part and parcel of that argument.

People don't care if you shapechange into a dragon or cast a fireball, but do something that they can't in real life with a weapon and they freak out and impose all sorts of restrictions.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Yes, all weapons can use dex if higher than strength.

Just checking because Finesse as a weapon property has specific interactions (for example with Sneak Attack) that simply using Dex to attack and damage doesn't.

 

[Kobold Boots]

Couple of things.

1. (As another requested) What is the goal you're trying to hit by making this change?
2. Thinking about internal consistency - If you're going to use strength as a prerequisite you need to consider weapon speed factor or alternative initiative to use in concert.

The benefit of using proficiency is that it abstracts the ability to use the weapon such that the (also abstracted) initiative system can remain in place as written. Make one change and you have to think about the rest of the combat system.

Thanks,
KB

 

[Horwath]

Couple of things.

1. (As another requested) What is the goal you're trying to hit by making this change?
2. Thinking about internal consistency - If you're going to use strength as a prerequisite you need to consider weapon speed factor or alternative initiative to use in concert.

The benefit of using proficiency is that it abstracts the ability to use the weapon such that the (also abstracted) initiative system can remain in place as written. Make one change and you have to think about the rest of the combat system.

Thanks,
KB

1. To make all weapons available to anyone, but at a more organic cost and not a multiclass or feat cost. This way you can scale how much of a cost you want to pay for a category of weapons.

2. As a turn based game, you have to more or less remove the speed factor from weapons.
I don't want no player skipping every other turn for having too "slow" weapon or giving extra attack just because it's a "fast" weapon.

Also no alternative initiative. Game is too slow as it is. Changing and monitoring initiative from turn to turn is a huge waste of time for minimal gain.

By this system, you "buy" speed for heavier weapons with more strength. By removing penalties to attack you "gain" double speed as attacking with disadvantage will halve your hit rate.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

1. To make all weapons available to anyone, but at a more organic cost and not a multiclass or feat cost. This way you can scale how much of a cost you want to pay for a category of weapons.

If that's your primary goal, then I would strongly recommend a simpler method than the one presented. Off the top of my head:

• Light weapons require Strength 3
• Non-light weapons require Strength 8
• Heavy weapons require Strength 13
• Martial weapons increase the Strength requirement by +2

 

[g4m3kn1ght]

This is an interesting idea but I think finesse weapons would need a separate table. Also, I feel like this might end up overvaluing strength as the melee stat from a game play stand point, as you add your STR mod to damage, and attack, AND it determines the size of the dice you can use. What you have might be a little more simulationist than 5e is designed to be.

 

[Kobold Boots]

Got it.

1. To make all weapons available to anyone, but at a more organic cost and not a multiclass or feat cost. This way you can scale how much of a cost you want to pay for a category of weapons.

So are you using this with point buy attributes then or some other attribute determination mechanic? The first goal of making all weapons available to everyone is not met by the combination of demands of class plus normal attributes. Mechanically, people will still choose the weapons that they are able to wield, which for mages will still skew to smaller and lighter.

2. As a turn based game, you have to more or less remove the speed factor from weapons.
I don't want no player skipping every other turn for having too "slow" weapon or giving extra attack just because it's a "fast" weapon.

Also no alternative initiative. Game is too slow as it is. Changing and monitoring initiative from turn to turn is a huge waste of time for minimal gain.

I guess my reply to this would be: (and this is meant seriously, no snark at all)

1. If the game is too slow for your liking as is, then retooling the combat system isn't going to make it faster without creating some unintended problems down the line. Playing something else that's faster will. Part of any evaluation (obviously just my opinion) should be using other game systems before making core rules changes.

2. If everyone can use every weapon, with the difference in damage being related to strength, then it makes perfect sense for a declining return on those weapons. Mage with lower strength decides to use a great sword, then you're going to swing it more slowly for less damage.

Of course, I'm a simulationist, tried and true and I like mundane physics and hermetic magic to co-exist in my games. Where it makes sense it's magic's responsibility to explain why mundane physics doesn't work so to balance this I'd put something in place that allows magic weapons to be "faster" than mundane weapons.

By this system, you "buy" speed for heavier weapons with more strength. By removing penalties to attack you "gain" double speed as attacking with disadvantage will halve your hit rate.

I'm not a fan with it as written, but I see why you're aiming things the way you are. Good work to start with.

Be well
KB