Community

Feb 8, 2013 -- 8:40PM, lokiare wrote:

You have a better chance of hitting and dealing damage, it doesn't matter how you fluff it, its accuracy.... If they wanted 'pure force' they would have put it in the damage category.

It improves your "to hit" roll which is not solely about precision.  If to-hit only represented precision you'd never modify your to-hit roll with Strength.  That's really what people are complaining about -- that Strength bonuses moduify your to-hit, which they then conflate with increased precision.  But to-hit has never solely represented precision.  And the complaint about advantage is not different than complaining about barbarians getting bonuses to-hit in prior editions. 

Feb 7, 2013 -- 9:39AM, wrecan wrote:

So the parts about better accuracy being completely out of character for a wildly swinging barbarian is nitpicking?

No.  I'm saying it's a misplaced argument.  The same people who complain about barbarians getting Strength advantage don't complain about barbarians getting bonuses to hit in prior editions because the complaint isn't really about increased to-hit bonuses, and isn't really about Strength modifying your to-hit roll.  It is simply a complaint that insufficient homage has been paid to past editions by people seeking to edition war under the veneer of an actual argument.  (Not you, lokiare.  I know you're no fan of pre-4e mechanics.) 

Someone who really think barbarians should not get bonuses to hit should (but don't) similarly argue that nobody should add their Strength mods to any to-hit rolls (and, conversely, that nobody should add their Dex mods to damage) under the theory that to-hit solely represents precision and damage solely represents force.  This would require wide-ranging changes.  For example, non-thrown ranged weapons would get no bonus to damage, thus rendering ranged weapons less optimal than melee weapons.  It would make Dexterity an even more important stat as it would be the only way to improve your accuracy. It would require the game to eliminate AC, since armor does not inhibit precision, making Dexterity even more important as it becomes the only way to avoid damage.

Feb 9, 2013 -- 6:26AM, CarlT wrote:

I don't complain about them getting bonuses to hit in prior editions because it was specified that they could do things which required accuracy and precision.

So the bonus was clearly about brute strength.


5e does not make that distinction.

Of course it does... playtest barbarians only get advantage on Strength-based attacks, ability checks and saving throws. You do not get advabtage on Dexterity-based attacks (such as non-thrown ranged attacks).  It's absolutely clear that it's all about brute strength.

It they added in a line which reduce their ability to make certain types of accuracy dependent attacks

But barbarians never got penalized for Dexterity-dependent attacks.  In any edition.  They only got a bonus to strength-based attacks. This is an entirely new complaint that would have applied to prior ediytions but magically never appeared until this one. And that makes it very suspicious.