Level Up (A5E) Strength vs Dexterity imbalance cannot be solved without addressing the Melee vs Ranged Imbalance.

[Stalker0]

Given that the vast majority of combats begin within 60 feet I don't see how reducing the range of bows makes much of a difference.

This may be my bias as I use a lot more "Open Air" encounters than dungeon crawls. As a result, a good portion of my combats start at greater ranges than that.

 

[NotAYakk]

The only melee weapon that has a feat comparable to XBE is PAM.

The only melee weapons that has a feat comparable to SS are great weapons.

XBE+SS and GWM+PAM are dominant weapon feats.

---

I agree that heavy armor could use an AC bump. My solution is that you can get Heavy Armor "custom fit" for you at the cost of 1/2 of its GP value. This gives it +1 AC.

So if you loot plate armor, it is 18 AC. You spend 750 gp and it becomes custom fit - 19 AC - for you only.

Magic armor can auto-fit itself.

---

A sword feat -- "Master of the Blade" -- that grants DPR on-par with PAM, and another for Hammers/Axes/etc, would help.

A one-handed feat corresponding to "GWM" in strength - shield master doesn't do it. It doesn't have to do raw damage, it just has to be powerful.

then we can start comparing a GS+MotB+GWM against HandX+XBE+SS and ensuring melee range benefits. We could take a page from existing melee monsters; they impose shoves and knockdowns a lot more than PCs do.

 

[Kinematics]

Nerf the -5/+10 feats all you have to do.

I'd say just add the limitation of: You can only use the -5/+10 adjustment a number of times per day equal to your Dex/Str modifier.

It's still overpowered in the 5 minute working day, but everything's overpowered then, so it actually kinda balances out. The more encounters you have, the more you have to ration your use of the ability, so it's actually more under the GM's control how much the ability influences combat.

 

[tetrasodium]

What I mean is that depending on your attack bonus, it is optimal to always use the power attack on some armour classes. However, sometimes it is more important to prevent a foe getting another turn, so a player accepts a mathematically less optimal power attack to have a chance to make that happen. Likewise, sometimes a foe has taken heavy damage and the power attack isn't needed, even if it would be mathematically optimal to use it... on average.

tl;dr what is optimal on average is sometimes not the best choice in particular

how often the exceptions come up are important to balance against though. 5e keeps them at powerlevels that made sense when they were feat chains that badly cut into your attack chain with a damage bump that made them great for overcoming DR but removed DR, collapsed the feat chain, & changed the system to null the attack chain impact the attack chain impact making them a thing where not using them was the unusual exception to the default

Compare GWM, Charger , & sharpshooter for example. Two are setup where they are too good to not use nearly every attack while the other modified how the charge action & AoOs worked so it wound up awful when they removed those two elements but didn't change the feat in a meaningful fashion

 

[Kozos]

We need the Charge action Back. Aka with a single action you move your speed in a straight line AND make a SINGLE attack. With your move action this means you can reach out and charge up to twice your movement.
Then charger feat can make it so that your FIRST attack can get a +5 bonus to dmg or can be switched for a shove and you also get to make ALL your attacks.

 

[tetrasodium]

We need the Charge action Back. Aka with a single action you move your speed in a straight line AND make a SINGLE attack. With your move action this means you can reach out and charge up to twice your movement.
Then charger feat can make it so that your FIRST attack can get a +5 bonus to dmg or can be switched for a shove and you also get to make ALL your attacks.

part of what made shove so useful in the past was the ability to break up & disrupt defensive lines 7 make a hole for allies o just walk through without AoOs rather than having to take 5 foot steps & being able to sometimes subject an enemy to a similar quagmire. 5e got rid of those movement risks by shifting AoOs to only trigger if you run away entirely without disengage. In 5e PCs can just wander around freely while ignoring baddies that should be some form of obstacle even if not physically locking an entire passage
[/spoiler="like so"]

[/spoiler]
Back in 3.5 or 4e blithely walking past those guards to smash the bbeg at the altar would be an unthinkable risk so a shove made a big difference with that

 

[Horwath]

The only melee weapon that has a feat comparable to XBE is PAM.

The only melee weapons that has a feat comparable to SS are great weapons.

XBE+SS and GWM+PAM are dominant weapon feats.

---

I agree that heavy armor could use an AC bump. My solution is that you can get Heavy Armor "custom fit" for you at the cost of 1/2 of its GP value. This gives it +1 AC.

So if you loot plate armor, it is 18 AC. You spend 750 gp and it becomes custom fit - 19 AC - for you only.

Magic armor can auto-fit itself.

---

A sword feat -- "Master of the Blade" -- that grants DPR on-par with PAM, and another for Hammers/Axes/etc, would help.

A one-handed feat corresponding to "GWM" in strength - shield master doesn't do it. It doesn't have to do raw damage, it just has to be powerful.

then we can start comparing a GS+MotB+GWM against HandX+XBE+SS and ensuring melee range benefits. We could take a page from existing melee monsters; they impose shoves and knockdowns a lot more than PCs do.

Feat for "sword&board" stybe:

Shield basher: requires proficiency with shields.
+1 str or con
When you make melee weapon attack as a part of your Action, you can make one attack with your shield as a Bonus action.
Attack uses your STR and deals 1d6 bludgeoning damage.
If you add shield spikes it deals B&P damage type.
Any enhancement bonus that shield has for AC, adds to attack and damage bonus also.

 

[NotAYakk]

Shield baseline rule:

Shield Block: When you are able to take actions and reactions and you take non-psychic damage while wielding a shield in 1 hand, you can choose to shield block. You gain resistance against that damage and your shield loses 1 AC. If it is reduced to 0 AC, it is destroyed, but still takes up your hand until you doff it. Magic shields who are not destroyed regain their lost AC during a short rest. Artifact and similar power shields which are reduced to 0 AC by this method also recover during a short rest. Damaged and destroyed mundane shields can be repaired by a smith using smith's tools and a forge over a long rest with materials costing half the price of a shield.

That is an example of a rule that makes using a shield a strong option, even at the cost of offense, without increasing the damage output. You'll note that it isn't a feat.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

I really think that's unnecessary. Honestly bows still have way too great a range. Even with modern bows, an accurate shot becomes exceedingly difficult past ~160 feet. When you consider that dnd archers are attacking moving targets constantly weaving in and out, and trying to avoid friendlies, and trying to avoid getting pasted themselves....ranges of 300-600 feet are LUDICROUS.

That is a very good point. Hunters using even modern compound bows with sights, against stationary, unarmoured targets won't take a shot past about 100ft.

Admittedly, these are real-life people rather than PCs, so maybe only +3 to hit. (Although maybe more considering equipment.)

 

[CapnZapp]

Or just don't blindly add them to your game without sanity checking them for balance across all of your other options first. There's only so much blame you can put on the designers, when you aren't using the rules as intended.

No, that's the designers' job.