D&D 5E So Is The Dex Based Fighter Just Strictly Better?

On a side note, I am yet to play a Dex fighter as I am in love with Polearm Mastery for fighters. Hit -> Spring Attack to disengage -> OA when they close again is just good fun. The enemy start ignoring you after a while, so you swap to knocking them prone etc. I hope that feat makes it into the PHB.

Sorry is this from the play test or somewhere?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Unwise

Adventurer
Sorry is this from the play test or somewhere?

Yes, from the latest playtest packet. Polearm Master in part reads "...While you are wielding a glaive, halberd, or pike, any creature provokes an opportunity attack from you when it enters your reach." So if you have a way of either disengaging, or shoving them away from you, you will get a free hit when they close again.
 


Zardnaar

Legend
There's the shortsword and scimitar.

They are only d6 so you are an idiot if yo use them. It will turn into Pathfinder and its ranged weapons which only has two. The composite longbow and everything else. Unless you are a halfling or a class without access to martial weapons the rapier will be the finesse weapon of choice.
 

Kobold Stew

Last Guy in the Airlock
Supporter
They are only d6 so you are an idiot if yo use them.

Nonsense -- it's a point of damage on average. For many players the option to use a light weapon, achieve a different type of damage, or even variation to achieve a particular concept easily outweigh the benefit offered by the rapier. Are all these people idiots? Please.

Either people complain because there is redundancy in the weapons table, or they whine that there is only one option available. If you're set on finding problems, sure, they're there. for many of us, though, this os not a problem that needs to be solved.
 


ZombieRoboNinja

First Post
So the problem is that right now, in Basic, one particular build of the fighter class that you would expect to be best with Strength is arguably best with Dex instead.

I agree this isn't ideal. But the PHB will add feats, maneuvers, and classes that may well tilt the balance back in favor of strength-based combatants. (For example, the great weapon feat in the playtest was incredibly powerful.) And the kind of people who worry about a couple DPR probably will be using the full set of "expert" rules. So this kind of minor imbalance in the basic rules probably isn't a huge deal.
 


FitzTheRuke

Legend
I would like to point out that your hypothetical sword-and-board dex fighter would have to spend an action to doff his shield to use his longbow. While strength dude just throws a hand axe (swtiching from his longsword is free) Kind of cuts dex's superiority in range weapons out a bit, no?

Dex fighter is more viable as a TWF, but then she trades her AC at a steeper rate.

(BTW I love dex fighters.)

Both are viable as TWF, though. Compare a dual hand-axe wielder strength guy to double-scimitar dex lady and we've got a viable comparison.
 

As the title says. This is assuming you are not using a two handed weapon and are using a 16 dex at level 1 PC and a rapier or a 16 strength 1d8 one handed weapon as the other. Both fighters are using shields as well.
i do think most DEX based builds are better
if you make a fighter with +5 DEX you get better initiative
also also, studded leather+shield gives you a 19 AC, if you take the Defensive fighting style you go up to 20
if you don't take Defensive and go for dueling then you have 1d8(rapier)+5+2 to damage (you can't take dueling when using a longsword with two hands)
and if you feel like multiclassing, your best bets are rogue for more damage output or ranger for a little bit more damage and a second fighting style... both of this classes are DEX based classes
 

Remove ads

Top