|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:04AM
#81
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2007
|
Why do some assume Str can't be made to do more things beyond damage? That's what gets me. Why does Str have to be reduced to being the damage stat, an almost purely numerical change upon the world? I'm starting to agree with the people who want to make bonuses purely class/training based simply because the this-stat-to-this bonus thinking is limiting creativity so much.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:11AM
#82
|
Date Joined:
Apr 28, 2009
|
Why do some assume Str can't be made to do more things beyond damage? That's what gets me. Why does Str have to be reduced to being the damage stat, an almost purely numerical change upon the world? I'm starting to agree with the people who want to make bonuses purely class/training based simply because the this-stat-to-this bonus thinking is limiting creativity so much.
Hey, I would be all for Strength used for shield AC bonus, or taking the place of Dex for Reflex saves of the break-free/not-be-knocked down variety.
I just haven't seen a lot of that being suggested by the developers, unlike the removal of ability modifier from damage.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:16AM
#83
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
So would there be any bonus to damage, or just the base weapon damage and something like Expertise?
I can see what they mean with monsters, simply roll their damage, no modifiers (like pre-3rd Ed monsters).
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:23AM
#84
|
|
|
Dex does loose more. With mods 8.5 damage vs 9.5 damage = 15% more damage from Str. and without the mods. 3.5 damage vs 4.5 damage = 30% more damage from Str. (Not exact numers, i'm on my phone at the moment)
Just to point something out:
5/8.5 = 58.82% damage from Dexterity
5/9.5 = 52.63% damage from Strength
0/3.5 = 0% damage from Dexterity
0/4.5 = 0% damage from Strength
If it's a matter of pointing out who does more damage on average...
8.5 to 9.5 is 10.53% increase in damage (1 is 10.53% of 9.5), but that's still just 1 point increase
3.5 to 4.5 is 22.22% increase in damage, but that's still just 1 point increase
If that 1 point increase in average damage is amplified by lower creature HP to the point where it does become significant, only then would I'd say it matters. Also note: Even if we assume that Strength edges out in damage by 30%, that still doesn't compensate for the following:
- Most uses of Strength can be effectively replaced by Mighty Exertion
- Heavy armor is expensive and hard to acquire, and only very slightly goes ahead of light armor + high Dexterity
- Spells that initiate Strength-based saves don't exist yet
- Dexterity affects AC, most physical-based non-weapon attacks, initiative, and significant out-of-combat skills (Hide, Move Silently, Acrobatics (Tumble?), and if you're of the thieving bent, Lock Pick, Pick Pocket, etc.). Strength meanwhile, affects combat-specific skills and actions almost exclusively [notably Bull Rush and pushing/pulling/lifting/pressing things], as well as weight... at least while Bags of Holding aren't in the picture yet
Generally speaking, you're far more likely to be able to create an effective combatant as a Human with 12 STR + 14 CON + 17 DEX + 11 INT + 15 WIS + 13 CHA, than having 17 STR, 11 INT, and 12 DEX. Unless the DM explicitly creates situations wherein you need all the bonuses JUST to make the additional +2 modifier to Strength actually matter.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 7:26AM
#85
|
|
|
Why do some assume Str can't be made to do more things beyond damage? That's what gets me. Why does Str have to be reduced to being the damage stat, an almost purely numerical change upon the world? I'm starting to agree with the people who want to make bonuses purely class/training based simply because the this-stat-to-this bonus thinking is limiting creativity so much.
Except Strength as a non-damaging stat can be substituted by the following:
- For weight limit: Bag of Holding, cart with animal, other party members helping to carry out stuff
- For most Strength-related actions: Mighty Exertion
Any other ideas as to what makes Strength as a stat worthwhile?
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 8:07AM
#86
|
Date Joined:
Jan 10, 2012
|
Dex still edges out by the fact that it affects Initiative, AC, attack rolls (finesse weapons, most ranged weapons), "reflex" saves, and various Dex-based skills.
Like 2e, dex shouldn't improve initiative.
I do think that Stength should be the only stat that allows you to extra damage.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 9:24AM
#87
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2004
|
Rogue's sneak attack should be entirely based on Intelligence from the hit to the damage.
Strength score should impact character's wealth. Strong characters can carry more gold and more bags of holding…
"They are making it clear that when modern design and common sense come into conflict with tradition, tradition wins." - thecasualoblivion
"Vancian isn't broken, you just have to set your game to the wizard's clock!" - Oxybe
"In many ways, making a new edition of D&D is alot like trying to sell a car to the Amish." - Dwarfslayer
"Encounters are the heart of the AD&D game" - PHB AD&D 2nd edition.
"you shouldn't even bother trying to become like me." - Gary Gygax (Elfcrusher confirmed)
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 9:27AM
#88
|
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2008
|
Rogue's sneak attack should be entirely based on Intelligence from the hit to the damage.
How does knowing where to strike result in being able to actually strike with precision (dexterity)? The rogue isn't going to think the victim to death. It actually has to use his dex to strike the proper spot.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 9:44AM
#89
|
Date Joined:
Jun 12, 2012
|
I really think that alot of the problem is that they have an overly broad view on what "Dexterity" entails and an overly narrow view of what Strength entails. As a result, they keep letting Dexterity infringe on Strength.
It is as though Dexterity is whining "Why can't I do that too?" and it is given into everytime, but Strength is turned away with a cold shoulder.
For example, it makes just as much (if not much more) sense to Heavy Crossbow and Long Bow to strength compared to giving a Katana or Scimitar to Dexterity.
We need to look at Strength as a kind of coordination too.
I think we need to stop having Strength and Dexterity overlap so much... Very Few builds favor having good in both stats.
I think this also contributes to a bit of the blantness of Weapon system.
My solution would be to do the opposite: ONLY strength goes to damage. Finesse Weapons have only Dex to hit and give them a higher accuracy.
Finesse Fighters would typically rely on other sources of extra damage - Deadly Strike, Sneak Attack, etc. They'd do just fine.
Let's say I don't get Dex to damage, and I'm a Fighter with Dex of 18 and a Str of 10.
- If I'm using Spring Attack or something, I'm no worse off with this option (better due to the Bonus Finesse To Hit.)
- If I'm using Deadly Strike or Sneak Attack, then I suffer a bit of lose, but I'm mostly reliant on my bonus die for damage, which I do a fine job of delivering due to my to-hit bonus.
- If I'm a non-martial class, then I'm an accurate, low damage character, like you'd expect.
As an added bonus, if I'm a high Strength character instead, I have a use for Finesse weapons still.
|
|
|
|
7 months ago ::
Nov 11, 2012 - 3:14PM
#90
|
|
|
Rogue's sneak attack should be entirely based on Intelligence from the hit to the damage.
How does knowing where to strike result in being able to actually strike with precision (dexterity)? The rogue isn't going to think the victim to death. It actually has to use his dex to strike the proper spot.
This is more or less my argument against skills related to physical stats. Being knowledgeable in proper swimming techniques shouldn't be more useful than your physical ability to actually swim. A character would need an 18 strength(+4) to be more physically capable at swimming than somebody who has the knowledge how(+3 for training), but lacks the physical capability to do so(Say, a strength of 10). It seems extremely backwards to me.
|
|
|
