D&D (2024) Rogue's Been in an Awkward Place, And This Survey Might Be Our Last Chance to Let WotC Know.

[Pauln6]

Flavor is one thing. Mechanics is an other.

In order to actualize agility − feats of jumping, climbing, running, etcetera − one must mechanically use Strength only.

Strength is the base. I think you should be able to use both Athletics and Acrobatics to increase the distance jumped e.g. roll Athletics and add 1inch to the distance jumped for every point rolled. Roll Acrobatics and add 2 inches to the distance for each number rolled. Not both at the same time obviously and work out the distance before applying modifications for type of jump (half or divide by ten). With a lack of investment you would only add 1-2 feet. But a 10 strength 20 dex acrobat could add increase their long jumping distance by half at low levels, or double at higher levels, even more with expertise and there would be benefits if a high strength character still wanted to be an acrobat.

 

[Yaarel]

Strength is the base. I think you should be able to use both Athletics and Acrobatics to increase the distance jumped e.g. roll Athletics and add 1inch to the distance jumped for every point rolled. Roll Acrobatics and add 2 inches to the distance for each number rolled. Not both at the same time obviously and work out the distance before applying modifications for type of jump (half or divide by ten). With a lack of investment you would only add 1-2 feet. But a 10 strength 20 dex acrobat could add increase their long jumping distance by half at low levels, or double at higher levels, even more with expertise and there would be benefits if a high strength character still wanted to be an acrobat.

The thing is, using Dexterity for mobility checks is tortured design, in the first place.

And even if one wanted to force Dexterity to handle all Strength agility checks, Dexterity is already a far too overpowered ability, so it is poor design for this reason too.

It is better to delete the use the Dexterity for "agility". (Except for Monk class specific rules overruling general rules.)

Agility is pure Strength.

 

[Pauln6]

The thing is, using Dexterity for mobility checks is tortured design, in the first place.

And even if one wanted to force Dexterity to handle all Strength agility checks, Dexterity is already a far too overpowered ability, so it is poor design for this reason too.

It is better to delete the use the Dexterity for "agility". (Except for Monk class specific rules overruling general rules.)

Agility is pure Strength.

I don't see that as a help. It only leaves balance, which by the same token is half strength and half ear fluid, reaction time and hand-eye co-ordination/accuracy, which are all to do with brain communication i.e. intelligence.

What you end up with is fewer abilities and more skills to differentiate and there are already plenty of other games doing that.

The simplist fix is to only apply strength to damage and fix the damage defecit for fighters through fighting style available to fighters and rangers e.g. average strength and dex bonuses, round up, and add that to dex damage.

 

[Yaarel]

I don't see that as a help. It only leaves balance, which by the same token is half strength and half ear fluid, reaction time and hand-eye co-ordination/accuracy, which are all to do with brain communication i.e. intelligence.

What you end up with is fewer abilities and more skills to differentiate and there are already plenty of other games doing that.

The simplist fix is to only apply strength to damage and fix the damage defecit for fighters through fighting style available to fighters and rangers e.g. average strength and dex bonuses, round up, and add that to dex damage.

Bodily balance is part of mobility, climbing, jumping, and so on.

If Dexterity does almost everything, that in itself makes the other abilities more dumpable, thus effectively fewer.

Even so, in principle, Dexterity can deal more damage, such as by aiming more precisely with a bow. Certain weapons rely more on manual dexterity than on body swings, so I am ok with the concept of finesse weapons.

If the Heavy weapon property is instead a Strength prereq, then only Strength would access the higher damage weapons. Even a longbow might require a Strength prereq to draw its string properly, even if using the steady hand of Dexterity to aim it.

But the sense of balance should never have been split off into manual Dexterity.

 

[Pauln6]

Bodily balance is part of mobility, climbing, jumping, and so on.

If Dexterity does almost everything, that in itself makes the other abilities more dumpable, thus effectively fewer.

Even so, in principle, Dexterity can deal more damage, such as by aiming more precisely with a bow. Certain weapons rely more on manual dexterity than on body swings, so I am ok with the concept of finesse weapons.

If the Heavy weapon property is instead a Strength prereq, then only Strength would access the higher damage weapons. Even a longbow might require a Strength prereq to draw its string properly, even if using the steady hand of Dexterity to aim it.

But the sense of balance should never have been split off into manual Dexterity.

The argument that increased accuracy does more damage only really holds up if you reduce the damage die for the missile weapons. A sword can be accurate AND forceful and rip you open while breaking your bones. An arrow just zips right through you, so it's really only the accuracy that does the damage in the first place, while the force piercing the armour is your attack roll. Accuracy increasing damage can also be replicated with critical hits.

Nobody denies that an arrow in the right place can kill. But is the maximum damage potential of an arrow really the same as a longsword? More to the point (literally) is the maximum damage potential of a rapier the same as a longsword?

Maybe the best way to do it is:

• Strength bonus to hit and damage, Strength and Dexterity bonus to damage on a critical hit
• Dexterity bonus to hit, Strength and Dexterity bonus to damage on a critical hit.
• Finesse Fighting Style (Fighters and Rangers): When wielding a finesse weapon in melee, add one half your Dexterity bonus rounded up to damage.
• Base damage bonus to crossbows +1 per size category.

 

[Maxperson]

Flavor is one thing. Mechanics is an other.

No. First, flavor and mechanics must match or there is a disconnect in the game. Second, it's mechanical. AC bonuses from dex come from agility.

In order to actualize agility − feats of jumping, climbing, running, etcetera − one must mechanically use Strength only.

Jumping is not agility in any sense of the word. Climbing should use both, but that would overcomplicate 5e, so strength was chosen. Movement(running) doesn't use any stat in 5e.

Edit: Intelligence is how fast you can reason, how quickly you can remember, etc. speed=agility. Agility=strength. Intelligence=strength!!!

You're trying to vastly overcomplicate things with your argument, which leads to the above. Even here in the real world we have two different words(agility and strength) to represent what the body does. Trying to overcomplicate and confuse the game by removing agility from dex where it belongs and put it into strength is doomed to failure. It will never, ever happen outside of a DM house ruling the game to be that way.

 

[Pauln6]

My 10 year old grand-niece is a champion twirler. She is very limber and very agile with great hand-eye co-ordination but I can assure you that she isn't that strong.

 

[Vikingkingq]

Jumping is not agility in any sense of the word. Climbing should use both, but that would overcomplicate 5e, so strength was chosen. Movement(running) doesn't use any stat in 5e.

Yeah, if we're talking about feats of agility, we're talking about Acrobatics, Stealth, and Sleight of Hand.

I do get that there is a "pain point" when it comes to jumping, but I think the issue is actually one of semantic confusion. In D&D, Jumping refers really specifically to long jumping and high jumping in the olympian sense, which make sense as Strength skills as they do involve raw muscle power to go "faster, higher, stronger."

However, that's not the same thing as flipping or handspringing or somersaulting over someone, even though both are "jumping" in the broadest sense. In game terms, those are Acrobatics checks and it makes sense that very agile/Dextrous characters would be good at them.

To be honest, I think the only rules change I would make in this space is to operationalize Acrobatics a bit more by making it work a bit more like Tumbling in 3.X when it comes to moving "through" hostile enemies or avoiding AOOs or negating difficult terrain, that kind of thing. To that effect, I kind of like the idea of replacing the Monk's Step of the Wind jump distance feature (which I agree is a bit mechanically awkward given the Monk's core stat being Dex) with something that lets them do a free Acrobatics check as part of their movement.

 

[Pauln6]

To be honest, I think the only rules change I would make in this space is to operationalize Acrobatics a bit more by making it work a bit more like Tumbling in 3.X when it comes to moving "through" hostile enemies or avoiding AOOs or negating difficult terrain, that kind of thing. To that effect, I kind of like the idea of replacing the Monk's Step of the Wind jump distance feature (which I agree is a bit mechanically awkward given the Monk's core stat being Dex) with something that lets them do a free Acrobatics check as part of their movement.

I agree but what you describe is already in the rules as the Tumble manoeuvre, which is an action/bonus action from the DMG, and the Mobile feat. Plus subclass features for the Swashbuckler.

 

[Vikingkingq]

I agree but what you describe is already in the rules as the Tumble manoeuvre, which is an action/bonus action from the DMG, and the Mobile feat. Plus subclass features for the Swashbuckler.

Ah I am less familiar with the dmg. Should probably be moved to the PHB.