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

[ThatGuySteve]

Flip it around... why would the players not take advantage of all their strengths when making a plan rather than vice versa. The ability to effectively conduct drone warfare from a quarter mile away is most certainly a strength. You also seem to be thinking it's "an" archer as if the rest of the party is in melee.

Lets not pretend that being able to attack from range iis not an advantage over melee attacking from melee & suggest that advantage should not be taken into accont when designing ranged combat. Adding penalties that make sense for ranged combat to have is not making it "worse", it's simply accepting that it should not be "better" I've yet to see someone make a plan that involves swinging a melee weapon 60-100 feet away from an ambush target let alone up to nearly a quarter ,mile from it. Finesse weapons don't require a feat & give +dex to damage so it's not like a ranged attacker would be crippled by MAD to be capable of hitting in melee if ranged weapons went back to sane range increments & that ranged attacker had to switch to melee.... It would even make all those flaming/shocking/etc weapons reasonably useful rather than silly since they'd be swapping +4/+5 damage from dex to +1/+2 from strength & a d6 of elemental damage.

Can't say I've ever seen an entire party of archers. But if players all make the same archer character to maximise effectiveness, that's fine by me for them to do well in open field ambush. I think it will be up to the DM to come up with challenging encounters for that party.

Adding penalties to something is making it worse, regardless of the reason. Raising up the alternatives would stop archery being better without the need for penalties.

I think outside of archery, there are also some good options suggested to tone down Dex. Making initiative skill based like PF2 sounds good to me in theory, although I've never played it so don't know how it works out in practice.

I'd also like to see skills not being set as default to one ability score, let each individual situation determine the ability check required, then add appropriate proficiency. Need to sit perfectly still for 3 hours waiting in ambush? Roll Con (stealth). Need to apply just the right amount of force with a crow bar? Str (thieves tools).

Ps, I'm still not sure how to explain adding Str to a crossbow or firearm attack?

 

[Horwath]

Ps, I'm still not sure how to explain adding Str to a crossbow or firearm attack?

you can only explain it via base damage die.

I.E. STR 6 bow would have 1d4 damage and STR 20 bow would be 2d6. then apply dex bonus if any as normal.

 

[Leatherhead]

These are two distinct problems.

You could delete all ranged weapons from the game, and DEX would still be better than STR.

Or

You could delete DEX from the game, and Ranged attacks would still be superior to melee combat.

 

[CubicsRube]

This is really obnoxious for theater of the mind combat. If we actually want something similar, halve the distance of close range on most ranged weapons.

Obnoxious is a strong word.

Most ranges are already in feet such as max ranges and spells. Don't see how this makes a difference.

 

[CubicsRube]

I’ve long thought that strength should add to damage with all weapons and Dex should add to attack bonus with all weapons. Not sure A5E is the right place for such a change though.

I agree.

In my IdealD&D(TM), Dex would be split into DEX and AGI, and CON would be combined with STR. It's always bothered me that a dextrous clockmaker would have a decent AC and saving throw to dodge.

Of course that would never happen

 

[CubicsRube]

you can only explain it via base damage die.

I.E. STR 6 bow would have 1d4 damage and STR 20 bow would be 2d6. then apply dex bonus if any as normal.

It's a hard one because it veers into simulation territory.

In reality, crossbows should deal a high amount of damage vs bows, but should only be able to be reloaded 1/round MAX for light crossbows and 1/minute for heavy/windlass crossbows.

 

[CubicsRube]

1. The biggest problems with the idea that bows are better is that the analysis doesn't value the threat of OA's - either for extra damage or for changing enemy behavior (influencing them to attack higher AC characters).

I agree with that.

Again heavily into homebrew, i wish the system had incorporated an AC bo us to melee weapons. It's not easy to close a gap on someone with a spear. Someone then with a ranged weapon wouldn't get this benefit and be comparably easy to hit.

 

[ThatGuySteve]

you can only explain it via base damage die.

I.E. STR 6 bow would have 1d4 damage and STR 20 bow would be 2d6. then apply dex bonus if any as normal.

I'm not sure what you're suggesting here? Does the crossbow have a STR rating or are you still taking about the STR of the firer?

If the first, hand, light and heavy already simulate different STR of crossbows.

If the second, why doors the users STR change the damage output? The power of a crossbow comes from energy stored in the mechanism.

You could limit the reload speed by STR, ie you can reload by hand if you are strong enough, otherwise you need to use a shower windlass.

 

[Horwath]

It's a hard one because it veers into simulation territory.

In reality, crossbows should deal a high amount of damage vs bows, but should only be able to be reloaded 1/round MAX for light crossbows and 1/minute for heavy/windlass crossbows.

if you remove any long time loading crossbows. 1+ round, all you have left is your strength to load the crossbow.

As a once-per-round "free" action, you dont have time to employ any complicated devices for cocking the crossbow.

It's more or less; put your foot in the stirrup and pull the string back with your leg and back muscles.

 

[Horwath]

I agree with that.

Again heavily into homebrew, i wish the system had incorporated an AC bo us to melee weapons. It's not easy to close a gap on someone with a spear. Someone then with a ranged weapon wouldn't get this benefit and be comparably easy to hit.

-2 to AC if you do not have melee weapon in hand or shield or improved unarmed strike/tavern brawler feat.