Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Piratecat" data-source="post: 782707" data-attributes="member: 2">Azlan,D&amp;D uses strength instead of dexterity to determine melee attack rolls for several reasons:1. It provides differentiation between melee and ranged attacks, assuring that one or the other will tend to be preferred by any character2. It reinforces D&amp;D's tradition of having effective front-line warriors depend on their muscles instead of their reaction time3. As written, strength is considered the most valuable stat. With default melee attack adjustments modified by dexterity, it was concluded that dex would become the most valuable stat above and beyond the degree to which strength already occupied that position.&nbsp; In other words, dex would suddenly become the uber-stat in a way that strength never was.Make no mistake, using strength for melee attacks is a sacred cow and one of the things that defines D&amp;D. Don't interpret that fact to mean that it's &quot;simply a carryover from 1st Edition D&amp;D.&quot; It's a conscious design decision.I am left with the impression that the style of combat mechanics that you're looking for in a game falls more towards the &quot;simulation&quot; than the abstraction. D&amp;D combat is definitely an abstraction that's tweaked towards fast, fun combat. Back during playtesting I yammered for a parrying mechanice to be added to the rules. The designers decided not to, because that was a simulation already covered by other abstract mechanics such as expertise. There's a general guideline mentioned in this month's Dragon that if a house rule doesn't improve the game, there's no point in having it. Other than a nebulous assurance that using dex to hit is more realistic, I can't come up with any significant advantages to that system.. although I can easily think of quite a few disadvantages. It seems to me to be change for the sake of change, and not for a concrete improvement in gameplay.Hey, on a moderator-y level, it's a fine thing to encourage discussion. It's less cool to approach it with an agenda or an unwillingness to understand other peoples' points of view. When someone like Hong starts saying &quot;Welcome to the club,&quot; it's time to make sure that you're trying to keep an open mind.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Piratecat, post: 782707, member: 2"] Azlan, D&D uses strength instead of dexterity to determine melee attack rolls for several reasons: 1. It provides differentiation between melee and ranged attacks, assuring that one or the other will tend to be preferred by any character 2. It reinforces D&D's tradition of having effective front-line warriors depend on their muscles instead of their reaction time 3. As written, strength is considered the most valuable stat. With default melee attack adjustments modified by dexterity, it was concluded that dex would become the most valuable stat [i]above and beyond the degree to which strength already occupied that position.[/i] In other words, dex would suddenly become the uber-stat in a way that strength never was. Make no mistake, using strength for melee attacks is a sacred cow and one of the things that defines D&D. Don't interpret that fact to mean that it's "simply a carryover from 1st Edition D&D." It's a conscious design decision. I am left with the impression that the style of combat mechanics that you're looking for in a game falls more towards the "simulation" than the abstraction. D&D combat is definitely an abstraction that's tweaked towards fast, fun combat. Back during playtesting I yammered for a parrying mechanice to be added to the rules. The designers decided not to, because that was a simulation already covered by other abstract mechanics such as expertise. There's a general guideline mentioned in this month's Dragon that if a house rule doesn't improve the game, there's no point in having it. Other than a nebulous assurance that using dex to hit is more realistic, I can't come up with any significant advantages to that system.. although I can easily think of quite a few disadvantages. It seems to me to be change for the sake of change, and not for a concrete improvement in gameplay. Hey, on a moderator-y level, it's a fine thing to encourage discussion. It's less cool to approach it with an agenda or an unwillingness to understand other peoples' points of view. When someone like Hong starts saying "Welcome to the club," it's time to make sure that you're trying to keep an open mind. :) [/QUOTE]

Verification