Strength.. Is it really the best statistic?

[MasterOfHeaven]

I was just considering the benefits and advantages each statistic has to offer, and I started to wonder why Strength is considered so important that races who get a bonus to Strength have to take two negative modifiers to make up for this.

I can understand that Strength is very important to a melee fighter, and controls many things, but is it really that much better than Dexterity? Dexterity controls your bonus to AC, your initiative, your Reflex save, several valuable skills and your to hit modifier with ranged weapons. I'd say Dexterity is at least equal to Strength.

Another thing that bothers me is Halflings and Gnomes, despite suffering a penalty to Strength, do not gain additional bonuses. Why do you have to have double penalties when gaining a bonus to Strength, when you do not have to have double bonuses when suffering a penalty?

I think that Half-Orcs, Wood Elves and so on should either have the extra penalty removed, or Halflings, Gnomes and so on should have a bonus added. Perhaps I'm wrong, however, and I'm open to other points of view, which is why I posted this here instead of in the House Rules forum.

Is Strength really better? If so, how? And should the races with Strength bonuses and penalties be changed? Like I said, I would like to hear other peoples opinions, so feel free to reply.

 

[Ravellion]

Strength isn't "better", Physical stats are more often useful than mental stats are. If the Half Orc would have had -2 con, that would have been fine. When your life is on the line, INT or CHA will hardly ever help you, unless you are a spellcaster with that score as your spellcasting characteristic.

Yes, the dwarf has slow movement and a -2 charisma as a balance, but then, Dwarves are the most powerful race anyway IMHO.

Rav

 

[nsruf]

Check the DMG. p.24. Str and Dex are valued equally (except that a racial bonus to Con can be offset by a Dex penalty but not Str). Con is in-between, and all three mental stats are worth half as much as Str or Dex.

The half-orc is the only race balancing a physical stat with mental stats*, that's why he looks strange. The halfling or gnome do not get too little as Dex is considered equally "expensive" to Str.

I agree with this logic, more or less (only that I would have valued all physical stats as being twice as "good" for simplicity). If you play a combat-heavy game, the physical stats are really more important, and if you are more into role-playing, at least it does not hurt (with game statistics becoming less important).

[Edit: * forgot about the dwarf, but as I said: Con is in-between; essentially a Con bonus is worth as much as a mental stat and a malus as much as Dex or Str]

 

[MasterOfHeaven]

Hmmm... true, but Strength/Dexterity/Constitution isn't going to help you when you're interrogating a prisoner, talking with the King or getting some information about the Dragon you're going after. Still, that isn't hardwired into the game like combat is, so I see your point.



PS

I definitely agree about Dwarves.

 

[Pale]

Hmmm... true, but Strength/Dexterity/Constitution isn't going to help you when you're interrogating a prisoner.

Where're the diamonds, Lefty? *SMACK* Stop shifting your head about! *SMACK* I can keep this up all day, you know?!?!? *SMICK, SMACK, SMICK, SMACK*

 

[pontus]

Hmmm... true, but Strength/Dexterity/Constitution isn't going to help you when you're interrogating a prisoner, talking with the King or getting some information about the Dragon you're going after.

But you only need one character to do that. On the other hand, you'll probably want more than one character in the party capable of fighting.

 

[Ravellion]

Or you just use a "zone of truth" spell or somesuch, basicaly giving you infinite sense motive.

Rav

 

[LightPhoenix]

First off, I don't believe Strength is the best stat, I think Dexterity is MUCH better.

Now, the problem is balancing mechanics with role-playing. A big no-no. Does not work. Do not try this at home. It's asking for problems.

Mechanics-wise, Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution provide simpler, more tangible benefits than Intelligence, Wisdom, and Charisma. The unfortunate thing with game design is that not all benefits are tangible or simple. Very rarely so.

For instance, a Monk gains his Wisdom modifier to his AC (albeit under certain conditions). So it a bonus to Wisdom equal to a bonus in Dexterity for Monks? How about Druids, who gain and rely on those extra spells gained by Wisdom to survive? Does the bonus to a Fighter's Will save stop him from being charmed and killing the whole party?

Note very carefully the absence of any race in the PHB with a benefit to a mental attribute. Why is this? I think that, while 3E has provided huge steps in many of the right directions, the design team simply did not spend enough time figuring how to balance the mental and physical attributes.

LightPhoenix

 

[BluWolf]

I think it depends on the typre of campaign you are running. In a traditional dungeon crawl, Hacknslash sort of campaign I would rate Dex & Str at tie.

If you are running an intrigue based game, Int & Cha far out way the others.

We were recently running a campaign based in a city were the party were all involved in the thieves guild.

1 player was playig a multiclass fighter rogue geared more towards combat. He was really outclassed by the rest of the party and most of his opponents.

He had a rough going as most of the time he felt he was being taken advantage of and would have to resort to violence.

So again, I think it depends on the campaign.

 

[EOL]

I think the 3E designers did a better job of balancing then they realize, sure charisma is a dump stat for many of the classes, but the Sorcerer I'm playing would gladly take a -2 to Strength for a +2 to Charisma and I think most wizards would make the same trade for a bump to their Intelligence.

In other words which stat is the most powerful really depends on which class you're playing.