Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Corwin" data-source="post: 7714928" data-attributes="member: 1560">My problem with this argument is that, really, if you start trying to justify how a weapon is used (by referencing non-game construct examples), you might find yourself starting to justify all weapon attacks requiring &quot;dexterity&quot; to use with any real success in battle. Even a greataxe. Without well placed, accurate swings, you're never going to hit someone, with your greataxe, that doesn't want to be hit. That's why you see the occasional post about how someone wants to houserule all weapon attacks use Dex for to-hit bonus, and Strength for damage bonus. Because that's where the rabbit hole invariably leads. In truth, anyone generally good at melee fighting is likely going to be fit. Which generally means both dexterous, to at least some degree, and strong. Not Arnie strong, necessarily. But athletic enough that they are, again, &quot;fit&quot;. Because that's really what it takes, in general, to be a good melee combatant. 5e lets you tank one of those two aspects of &quot;fitness&quot;. Because of that, game mechanics should account for that and adapt accordingly.IMO, its important to recognize what &quot;finesse&quot; means, in the context of the rules of 5e. Not necessarily just as a general word in our language. Its application in 5e has a very specific purpose. I personally prefer to keep it that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Corwin, post: 7714928, member: 1560"] My problem with this argument is that, really, if you start trying to justify how a weapon is used (by referencing non-game construct examples), you might find yourself starting to justify all weapon attacks requiring "dexterity" to use with any real success in battle. Even a greataxe. Without well placed, accurate swings, you're never going to hit someone, with your greataxe, that doesn't want to be hit. That's why you see the occasional post about how someone wants to houserule all weapon attacks use Dex for to-hit bonus, and Strength for damage bonus. Because that's where the rabbit hole invariably leads. In truth, anyone generally good at melee fighting is likely going to be fit. Which generally means both dexterous, to at least some degree, and strong. Not Arnie strong, necessarily. But athletic enough that they are, again, "fit". Because that's really what it takes, in general, to be a good melee combatant. 5e lets you tank one of those two aspects of "fitness". Because of that, game mechanics should account for that and adapt accordingly. IMO, its important to recognize what "finesse" means, in the context of the rules of 5e. Not necessarily just as a general word in our language. Its application in 5e has a very specific purpose. I personally prefer to keep it that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification