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

[ThatGuySteve]

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.

So the idea is you need X value of STR to load a crossbow by hand? You could preload a heavy crossbow with a windlass, but after the first shot need to switch to hand/light, assuming you didn't have the STR required for heavy?

With an extra bump to heavy crossbow damage (2d8), I could see something like that working.

I'd be inclined to see a similar minimum STR to draw a bow, while still adding Dex to damage, over adding STR to damage.

Basically boils down to STR determined the size of damage dice, add Dex to damage.

 

[Horwath]

So the idea is you need X value of STR to load a crossbow by hand? You could preload a heavy crossbow with a windlass, but after the first shot need to switch to hand/light, assuming you didn't have the STR required for heavy?

With an extra bump to heavy crossbow damage (2d8), I could see something like that working.

I'd be inclined to see a similar minimum STR to draw a bow, while still adding Dex to damage, over adding STR to damage.

Basically boils down to STR determined the size of damage dice, add Dex to damage.

yes, more or less that.

You could add that you must spend one additional round per STR mod missing on loading crossbows.

Bows that you shoot without sufficient strength suffer disadvantage on attack roll and deal only minimum damage.

 

[CapnZapp]

Did I miss a statement that this project is being developed under the assumption that every single optional rule in the PHB will definitely be in effect, as written, and without the DM oversight that the game was intended to operate under?

If you think a project explicitly about increasing player-side build-crunch is going to skip feats, one of us is going to become severely disappointed.

 

[CapnZapp]

The weakness of ranged weapons is supposed to be that you are lack a weapon to party with in melee as your weapon is not made for melee.

Melee Weapon Attackers should get a bonus to AC.

Only Fighters and Rangers should be making close range and PB shots with ranged weapons.

Fantasy is supposed to enable melee combat. You can't have that without nerfing ranged combat.

The ONLY thing making warriors rush into close combat is because ranged fire doesn't kill your first fast enough.

Everything about the fantasy genre (as expressed in ttrpgs) is because of that: levels, hit points, etc.

Put otherwise, the second ranged fire isnt nerfed, and nerfed severely, characters like Conan or Gimli cease to exist...

5E is borderline forgetting this very fundamental fact.

 

[Horwath]

Fantasy is supposed to enable melee combat. You can't have that without nerfing ranged combat.

The ONLY thing making warriors rush into close combat is because ranged fire doesn't kill your first fast enough.

Everything about the fantasy genre (as expressed in ttrpgs) is because of that: levels, hit points, etc.

Put otherwise, the second ranged fire isnt nerfed, and nerfed severely, characters like Conan or Gimli cease to exist...

5E is borderline forgetting this very fundamental fact.

AoO should return with the rate on 1/opponents turn for free 4E style.

If you use Dash action and only move on your turn, ranged attacks suffer disadvantage vs. you. Sharpshooter negates this.

If you have shield and take Dodge action, double your shield bonus to AC vs ranged attacks.

attacking with ranged weapon gives -2 AC until the start of your next turn. new feat: close combat shooter, removes this

attacking with ranged weapon should provoke AoO. new feat: close combat shooter, removes this

new feat:
combat reflexes: +1 str or dex. You have advantage on AoO and deal max damage.

 

[CubicsRube]

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

Yes that'd be the easy way to do it

 

[ThatGuySteve]

Put otherwise, the second ranged fire isnt nerfed, and nerfed severely, characters like Conan or Gimli cease to exist...

5e has been out for years and I don't see Conan and Gimli disappearing. Perfectly balanced or not, people are still playing melee characters. Let's not blow the issue out of proportion.

If you have shield and take Dodge action, double your shield bonus to AC vs ranged attacks.

I'm all for bumping up the effectiveness of shields, in melee as well as vs ranged. A bonus action Raise Shield to add half your proficiency bonus, or a reaction to Hunker Down and give Disadvantage to a single attack?

Using Dodge for extra AC against range means you are not using your action to Dash and close with the target.

 

[Lylandra]

Umm, one way to slightly nerf DEX would be to make INT (already the red-headed stepchild of 5e) apply to Initiative instead of DEX.
Then, just uncouple a few skills from DEX to make them more fluid in the default assumption (Y'know, the way skills were originally advertised back in the 5e development).

Other ideas: Bows need STR to draw, to reach a certain distance or add STR as damage. I really hate the "STR 8/DEX18" build with a bow as it wouldn't work realistically unless you had an elaborate composite sports bow (same as with rapiers, really. long 1H weapons need a LOT of strength). Crossbows, okay, you can always use a drawer/lever, but bows are off limit.

 

[Horwath]

5e has been out for years and I don't see Conan and Gimli disappearing. Perfectly balanced or not, people are still playing melee characters. Let's not blow the issue out of proportion.

I'm all for bumping up the effectiveness of shields, in melee as well as vs ranged. A bonus action Raise Shield to add half your proficiency bonus, or a reaction to Hunker Down and give Disadvantage to a single attack?

Using Dodge for extra AC against range means you are not using your action to Dash and close with the target.

if you have low AC, use Dash
if you have high AC, use Dodge

 

[tetrasodium]

Level 5 wizard using firebolt @60% chance to hit
7.15 DPR

Level 5 fighter with longbow and no dex mod to damage @70% to hit (archer style)
6.75 DPR

Level 5 warlock with EB and agonizing blast
11.95 DPR

You can't make archery be the lowest DPR character and expect anyone to ever use archery. If ranged is too strong (something I dispute) you've got to find a solution that addresses all ranged abilities and not just bows.

Your the one who specifically chose to claim that firebolt has better dpr than a fighter with a bow.. Your going to need to explain your math to come up with less dpr from this (1d10+MOD)+( d10+MOD) at up to 150 feet of range

than this

2d10+nothing no second attack/second bolt.

Listing dpR numbers is meaningless if they are so obviously wrong that they fail to include things like a fighter's extra attack but are comparing a fighter to a wizard. What you excellently raise however is how bad 5e's cantrips are for full casters because cantrips have all of their scaling built into the cantrip by character level rather than meaningful class abilities like the extra attack feature sneak attack & so on. It's a situation that favors a gishy build & prevents casters from developing that on their own in a way notably different from a gish

as to your bizarre inclusion of warlock & attempt to jump from wizard to warlock, you'll get no argument that eldritch blast is anything but broken on ways thst complicate other areas so don't waste everyone's time when it was raised all the way back on page 1 where I agreed in detail. Otherwise... don't waste everyone's time with damage per round comparisons between a fighter who takes archery style with a 10 in their relevant stat or stats that doesn't bother with extra attack.