Does Dex Trump Str?

[White_Drake]

I play martial characters , I can't stand spellcasters. Generally I prefer light Fighters or Rogues with the occasional Barbarian. I've designed a couple tank builds, but I prefer combat scout or skirmisher types. It seems to me that unless you need the carrying capacity, Strength is largely undervalued. Dexterity factors into AC, which is nice, and with weapon finesse you can use it on attacks too. Then if you get the Graceful Striking enchantment you can also use it on damage. This means you can use Dex for all three primary combat modifier...things (what blanket term encompasses AC, attack, and damage?). At any rate, this is without even involving any splat books. If you throw those into the mix, suddenly you can make Dex based trips, wield one & two-handed weapons using Dex to attack, get a feat for Dex damage, and all sorts of other fun stuff. Also, Dex is a huge factor if your character uses a lot of skills, because such a large portion are Dex based. With Bracers of Armor, you can get your AC way higher than with big clanky iron suits. Also, if you don't need to wear armor to sustain your AC, you can just strip down to go invisible:smallbiggrin:, which works great because a Dex using character has a good chance of having sneak attack. The big question is: are Tanks obsolete?

[Flickerdart]

Tanks (in the sense of guys who pull aggro) were always obsolete. High Strength characters, however, are not, to the extent that a Strength-based build holds the damage record by something like thousands of orders of magnitude.

[Marlowe]

What on earth is Graceful Strike? The only thing I can find is a Homebrew thing on Dandwiki.

[Eisenfavl]

Tanking means you are using stand still + AoO with a large area of threatening to lock down others.
Strength is better than dex because it natively increases to hit and damage, 1.5X 's on two-handed fighting (which all fighting is), and natively boosts tripping and such without taking feats, which can then be spent on better things.

You are fighting an uphill battle to establish high dex as useful, when the native functions of DEX are AC and ref-saves, both of which are useless.

[Flickerdart]

Tanking means you are using stand still + AoO with a large area of threatening to lock down others.
Strictly speaking, that's BC, not tanking.

[White_Drake]

Why is AC useless? It's nice to be able to avoid the hireling attacks, even if the big baddie can still hurt you. Graceful striking is an enchantment in some obscure supplement maybe A&EG? I can't remember exactly where I saw it, but it is WoTC.

[MukkTB]

Strictly speaking, that's BC, not tanking.

Closest thing you can really do to tanking. You want to smack the wizard behind me? Well at least you can't charge him. You're going to have to waste movement getting around me or use a range weapon. Wizard should feel marginally safer.

AC, Ref, and most importantly initiative are what Dex brings you, it takes at least 2 feats and a specific build/fighting style to get damage and to hit from dexterity. In mid to high level play AC and Ref aren't too important. A bit more AC just means the enemy has to power attack for a bit less. Reflex saves are nice but at some point the class saving throws are much more important than the base stat. Initiative is always important, but you could spend 1 feat instead of 2 for +4 init. So unless you're going for a reach + AOO + tripper build its not worth it mid to high level. I feel a great need to point out that both AC and Ref are VERY important at low level. I would recommend high dex>con for a character starting at the dreaded and horrifying eldritch abomination of lvl 1. Level 7 I'd say high Str>Con.

Tanking itself is impossible given the rules. In an open space everyone can fight everyone. In a 5 foot wide corridor ranged attacks can still hit guys behind. Given that it ranges from hard to impossible to protect other party members you can't fill a group role as tank. You can only fill a group role as healer if you can heal significantly more HPs than a single opponent can do in damage in a round. Very hard to do and still somewhat ineffectual. Therefore your contribution to the group revolves around your ability to disable opponents before they disable party members. However I'd like to point out that you need some AC and HP to stay on the field and continue to take out opponents. A glass cannon build that goes unconscious at turn one is much less useful than a rounded brawler who stays up and kicking for a long time.

You do not want to be over armored compared to the rest of your group if that armor is a hindrance. Running for the hills at movement speed 20 when everyone else is going 30 means you will be the one run down and killed. Being the one guy who can't swim across the river to safety also sucks. However you are totally motivated to pick up as much defense as you can as long as you don't lose other forms of survivability. You also need to make sure you aren't a weak tank compared to your party. And if you are you need to be stealthy. If everyone is wearing heavy armor your 30 speed isn't increasing the speed of the group but your low AC is encouraging the enemies to kill you first because you're an easy knock out.

When the group gets large enough, say 3 or more, there is a temptation to defend yourself better than the other members of the group. For example sacrificing strength for dex or positioning yourself 'defensively' on the battlefield. The logic is that you personally will be less likely to die and the group will probably retain enough offensive power regardless. If your buddies realize this they will be pissed off.

A general optimizing rule for many games where everyone can attack everyone, and tanking isn't a role, is that party members who will engage in combat as a unit should build chassis that all have a similar tank to gank ratios and similar modes of transportation. (That doesn't include specialists who will not be in the thick of the fight.) If one person is all tank and the other is all gank the bad guys need only kill the gank guy to win, something they will find easy to do.

Last I need to mention group defense. A group that wants to play defensively can do so. The correct stacking of enemy debuffs, board control, and summons can make it very difficult for an enemy to close and do serious damage. The players coordinate to create a situation where the defensive abilities of the group are greater than the individuals alone.

When people seriously consider a group strategy they ask one of two questions. 'How can we quickly kill the enemy before they can make their plans work?' or 'How do we create a situation where the enemy can't easily harm us?' Everybody is an ubercharger is an answer to the first question. Everybody is a mounted horse archer is an answer to the second. One guy is an ubercharger and the other is a mounted horse archer is an answer to the question, 'How can we be ****?'

[DeltaEmil]

That's because the hired mooks are not relevant anymore at higher levels, and the higher-level enemy (past level 6) uses far more powerful hirelings that all can cast spells that don't need to hit and don't allow saving throws either.

[Zilzmaer]

The Sword of Graceful Strikes (AEG 120) is a +3 shortsword that lets you add your Dex modifier to attacks in place of your Str.

[deuxhero]

Tanks (in the sense of guys who pull aggro) were always obsolete. High Strength characters, however, are not, to the extent that a Strength-based build holds the damage record by something like thousands of orders of magnitude.

I thought the damage record was by abusing a wording clause to get infinite strength and failing that, Hurking Hurler, which doesn't benifit from strength the "normal" way.

[Malachei]

two-handed fighting (which all fighting is)

Obviously, this statement is wrong.

[Golden Ladybug]

I thought the damage record was by abusing a wording clause to get infinite strength and failing that, Hurking Hurler, which doesn't benifit from strength the "normal" way.

Cancer Mage + Festering Anger gets NI Strength (by being an Illumian, that can also give you NI Bonus Spells), because it prevents any negative effects of a disease. +2 Strength every day is by no means a negative effect (although probably not RAI)

The Hulking Hurler record is (10^271)d6 damage, I think. That is a very, very big number.

Compared to those, the Ubercharger is small time.

Back on topic, more useful things key off of Dexterity than they do off of Strength, but its like comparing a Pocket Knife to a Sledgehammer. The pocket knife has more functions, and the Sledgehammer can be used only to do a few, very specific jobs. But I'd be more scared of someone threatening me with a Sledgehammer than someone with a Pocket Knife :smalltongue:

[Marlowe]

Back on topic, more useful things key off of Dexterity than they do off of Strength, but its like comparing a Pocket Knife to a Sledgehammer. The pocket knife has more functions, and the Sledgehammer can be used only to do a few, very specific jobs. But I'd be more scared of someone threatening me with a Sledgehammer than someone with a Pocket Knife :smalltongue:

It depends. Are they strong enough to LIFT the Sledgehammer?

[Golden Ladybug]

It depends. Are they strong enough to LIFT the Sledgehammer?

Well, if someone is dragging a Sledgehammer along the ground and demanding I hand over my purse, I'd be inclined to give it to them. Someone who tries to threaten you with a Sledgehammer they can't even lift isn't someone I really want to mess with :smalleek:

[kulosle]

So I invite you to look at the X stat to Y bonus link in my sig. Yes it is possible to become very Dex SAD, and nearly impossible to become Str SAD. Also the ways to become dex SAD doesn't require many feats or class levels, it's mostly in gold, fierce enhancement, fey craft, special items. For people who don't know how to get the crazy high numbers like the ubercharger (which probably can be done with dex, but with slightly smaller numbers) or the hulking hurler, I could see dex based fighter showing up str based ones. But the main reason why str will always be the more optimized option is because it is easier to get crazy stupid high. The record for str I think is still 187, I don't know how to get your dex that high. loth touch gives you a plus 6 for 1LA and that's not even as impressive as half Minotaur and half ogre. Because size increase ups str but lowers dex. And making your self smaller costs more LA than making yourself bigger. That being said the Dex based fighter is still a very good build.

[Amphetryon]

Why is AC useless? It's nice to be able to avoid the hireling attacks, even if the big baddie can still hurt you. Graceful striking is an enchantment in some obscure supplement maybe A&EG? I can't remember exactly where I saw it, but it is WoTC.

Miss Chances, Concealment, and similar forms of defense are better defenses than AC, from a purely mathematical standpoint. It's trivially easy for even most mooks to get their attack bonuses high enough to reliably hit more than 80% of the time at most levels of the game.

[Emperor Tippy]

Unless the average enemy you face is going to hit on everything but a 1 or miss on everything but a 20, each additional point of AC is equal to an increased 5% miss chance.

If your AC is already high enough that your enemies won't hit you are anything but a natural 20 then investing resources to push it still higher is a waste.

If your AC is low enough that even with all the resources you are prepared to commit to increasing it you still can't get it high enough that your enemies will miss on anything but a natural 1 then investing resources into it is a waste.

I tend to see Strength as a dump stat but that mostly comes from my preferred melee classes being Swordsage and Factotum, in which case it's fairly easy to see why being Dex based is a better choice.

[sonofzeal]

Miss Chances, Concealment, and similar forms of defense are better defenses than AC, from a purely mathematical standpoint. It's trivially easy for even most mooks to get their attack bonuses high enough to reliably hit more than 80% of the time at most levels of the game.
I keep hearing this, and I keep crunching the numbers, and I keep seeing absolutely no support for this whatsoever. You claim that AC does not match up to the attack rolls you're likely to be facing. So let's check...



A CR 13 Iron Golem has +23 to attack
A CR 16 Hound Hero Archon has +25 to attack
A CR 17 Frost Giant Jarl has +30 to attack
A CR 17 Marilith has a bunch of attacks at +25.
A CR 20 Balor has +33 to attack.

These are all melee-heavy monsters (at least in theory, in the Balor's case). Do those sound like numbers that characters of that level can't meet?


Justify your claim.

[Emperor Tippy]

The highest AB in a stat block in the MM1 is +57 for the Tarrasque.

That means anything over an AC of 76 is superfluous for monsters.

Most ~CR 20 monsters have an AB of around +30, which means an AC of around +50 is good enough.

You tend to only see the really high AB out of pretty highly optimized PC's. Full BAB, a +5 weapon, and 30 Strength is only an AB of +35 at level 20. With moderate optimization you can pick up another +15 or so, which high optimization you can push it far higher.

Outside of TO builds the point of AC will most likely make a difference.

[Malachei]

Unless the average enemy you face is going to hit on everything but a 1 or miss on everything but a 20, each additional point of AC is equal to an increased 5% miss chance.

Plus the value of the 5% varies along the curve: For example, it is really valuable if the one-point improvement means a 19 does not hit anymore, whereas before, it had hit -- in this case, I'll now take only half the hits from that attacker (assuming one attack only).

I also think circumventing miss chances is often easier than circumventing AC.

Personally, I also prefer Dex over Str, mostly because when I play a non-caster, I prefer skillmonkeys (Swordsage-based) or AoO concepts.

[CTrees]

Plus the value of the 5% varies along the curve: For example, it is really valuable if the one-point improvement means a 19 does not hit anymore, whereas before, it had hit -- in this case, I'll now take only half the hits from that attacker (assuming one attack only).

Right, it's actually better than 5%, from the point AC moves an attacker from needing a 2 to hit to a 3 to hit, until it moves an attacker from needing a 19 to hit to a 20 to hit.

I forget how to do tables here, so... going from being hit on a 2 to being hit on a 3 means you take 5.3% fewer hits. From 3 to 4 means 5.6% fewer hits, 4 to 5 is 5.9%, and so on. Eventually, going from being hit on a 16 to being hit on a 17 means you take 20% fewer hits, from 17 to 18 is 25%, from 18 to 19 is a third few, and 19 to 20 is a full 50% fewer damaging attacks.

However! This isn't the full story.

First, every point of AC after enemies need a 20 to hit is wasted, as is every point of AC until enemies need a three or better to hit you. So, for the high level wizard? It usually IS much less valuable than cover/miss chance/etc.

Second, normal, full AC only accounts for one type of attack. Many of the easiest ways to boost AC do nothing at all for touch AC, which is important. Many truly nasty spells/abilities/SLAs/etc. don't care about AC in the first place. Various ways to avoid being hit counteract some of these problems (it varies by method and by attack).

Third, even going for high AC, there are options which are far easier and more effective, in the right circumstance. For instance, the cover option of a tower sheild ain't bad - and having a hireling act as shieldbearer for you is even nicer. Alternatively, "I can fly" means even the Tarrasque's mightly AB is worthless. Just a couple, quick ideas, which are situational, yes, but get the point across.

Ultimately... it's complicated, and depends both on the level of play and the optimization level. There are circumstances where AC can be very good, and there are many where it is worthless (look at Shivering Touch vs. dragons as written - huge AC, but the touch attack means it's wasted).

[mcv]

Dexterity factors into AC, which is nice, and with weapon finesse you can use it on attacks too. Then if you get the Graceful Striking enchantment you can also use it on damage. This means you can use Dex for all three primary combat modifier...things (what blanket term encompasses AC, attack, and damage?). At any rate, this is without even involving any splat books. If you throw those into the mix, suddenly you can make Dex based trips, wield one & two-handed weapons using Dex to attack, get a feat for Dex damage, and all sorts of other fun stuff.
What exactly is it that makes you able to use Dex as to-hit bonus for two-handed weapons? Weapon Finesse only works for light weapons.

[Telonius]

What exactly is it that makes you able to use Dex as to-hit bonus for two-handed weapons? Weapon Finesse only works for light weapons.

Elven Courtblade is finesse-able. Requires EWP, though.

[Person_Man]

What exactly is it that makes you able to use Dex as to-hit bonus for two-handed weapons? Weapon Finesse only works for light weapons.

Weapon Finesse works on all light weapons, natural weapons, unarmed strike, and any weapon that is specifically listed in the feat or in the weapon description as Finesse-able. This includes the rapier plus a bunch of exotic weapons - the whip, spiked chain, Elven Court Blade (that Telonius mentioned). Stingray whip, Whip-Dagger, Dragonsplit, Quickblade, Ribbonweave, Thinblade, Lynxpaw, Spinning Sword, and probably others.

[Amphetryon]

I keep hearing this, and I keep crunching the numbers, and I keep seeing absolutely no support for this whatsoever. You claim that AC does not match up to the attack rolls you're likely to be facing. So let's check...



A CR 13 Iron Golem has +23 to attack
A CR 16 Hound Hero Archon has +25 to attack
A CR 17 Frost Giant Jarl has +30 to attack
A CR 17 Marilith has a bunch of attacks at +25.
A CR 20 Balor has +33 to attack.

These are all melee-heavy monsters (at least in theory, in the Balor's case). Do those sound like numbers that characters of that level can't meet?


Justify your claim.
I'm not sure what you're asking. Are you asserting it's reasonable to assume that your AC at level 13 will be higher than 33 in the majority of cases, and that this expected resultant miss chance is better than stacking Blur (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/blur.htm), Displacement (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/displacement.htm), and Mirror Image (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/mirrorImage.htm)? Because, if your numbers bear out the conclusion that AC is likely be that high and to provide better benefit from attacks than these with less investment by the character by 13th level, well, I'd like to see them. Note that, by setting the bar at level 13 (given the lowest CR creature you chose), it's trivially easy to spend on Extend Spell and similar metamagic rods that can make these defenses work all day, as well as investing in both additional defenses, and more offensive capability to deal with those things threatening you in the first place.

Tippy's point about superfluous AC investment is also valid.

[Tengu_temp]

A dexterity-based fighter has to spend lots of money and feats just to keep up with the damage potential of a strength-based one, and is not even guaranteed to match the latter in terms of AC. "Big clanky armor" is way more cost-effective for AC than Bracers of Armor are, and the biggier and clankier it is the better the bang for your buck.

[White_Drake]

What exactly is it that makes you able to use Dex as to-hit bonus for two-handed weapons? Weapon Finesse only works for light weapons.
I said when using splat books, so don't attack me for this, but in Ultimate Feats by Mongoose there's Accurate Attack, which allows Dex based attacks with any one weapon of your choice (hello grreatsword sneak attacks).

[ericgrau]

While you gain AC from a dex focus you lose damage. Furthermore heavy armor means the first 5 points of dex mod don't actually matter for AC; so only dex beyond 20 matters for AC. For practical optimization str trumps dex. I think the theoretical op builds are also str based. I've done a few builds and compared stats and confirmed this. But there was one interesting situation where light armor was required even for the str based build, and due to AC the dex based build was almost as good. Almost.


Miss Chances, Concealment, and similar forms of defense are better defenses than AC, from a purely mathematical standpoint. It's trivially easy for even most mooks to get their attack bonuses high enough to reliably hit more than 80% of the time at most levels of the game.

Similar to what sonofzeal said except I've actually run the numbers. They are actually 25-50% for the average monster vs. PC regardless of the level; even 25% is pretty easy for a PC to get. It's bad enough to spread a misinformed rumor but to pretend that you have numbers behind it when they don't exist is bad form.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Usually we keep discussion to only WotC books; because while they don't have a stellar track concerning balance they are generally better than most 3rd party books (with some exceptions obviously). Besides you can sneak attack with a great sword without problem, you only need to attack a flanked or flat footed enemy to trigger sneak attack.

I am pretty sure that you could make a Dex based shock trooper leap attack, you only need 13 Str for power attack and most damage comes from multipliers not raw strength.

[Amphetryon]

While you gain AC from a dex focus you lose damage. Furthermore heavy armor means the first 5 points of dex mod don't actually matter for AC; so only dex beyond 20 matters for AC. For practical optimization str trumps dex. I think the theoretical op builds are also str based. I've done a few builds and compared stats and confirmed this. But there was one interesting situation where light armor was required even for the str based build, and due to AC the dex based build was almost as good. Almost.



Similar to what sonofzeal said except I've actually run the numbers. They are actually 25-50% for the average monster vs. PC regardless of the level; even 25% is pretty easy for a PC to get. It's bad enough to spread a misinformed rumor but to pretend that you have numbers behind it when they don't exist is bad form.I presented a response. I'm trying very hard not to read your response as simply calling me a liar.

[ericgrau]

It's fine to have the opinion that AC falls behind as a matter of personal experience. I have a problem with saying that "mathematically" monsters hit 80% of the time. Especially as math in general and not even something you've confirmed yourself, as if it's been done before and we've all seen it. Provide numbers or link to them because while I and others have done numbers to the contrary a dozen times, not once have I seen numbers to support that figure.

[Emperor Tippy]

While you gain AC from a dex focus you lose damage. Furthermore heavy armor means the first 5 points of dex mod don't actually matter for AC; so only dex beyond 20 matters for AC.
I believe that you meant that only the first 5 points do matter, not don't matter. And that only applies if you are wearing heavy armor. You are better off using a Bracer of Armor because you can load an extra 5 points of armor abilities onto them and then get the party wizard to hit you with a Greater Mage Armor or the like.


For practical optimization str trumps dex. I think the theoretical op builds are also str based. I've done a few builds and compared stats and confirmed this. But there was one interesting situation where light armor was required even for the str based build, and due to AC the dex based build was almost as good. Almost.
Str trumps Dex in TO for attack/damage focused builds. In actual play Str is a less useful stat than Dex.


Similar to what sonofzeal said except I've actually run the numbers. They are actually 25-50% for the average monster vs. PC regardless of the level; even 25% is pretty easy for a PC to get. It's bad enough to spread a misinformed rumor but to pretend that you have numbers behind it when they don't exist is bad form.
No, Miss chance is better than AC for one reason; it stacks with AC. If you have 75% miss chance and your enemy needs a natural 20 to hit your AC then his odds of a hit are 1.25%, or about 1 chance in a hundred. 50% miss chance takes it from a 1 in 20 chance of a hit to a 2.5 in 100 chance of a hit.

To look at the other extreme where your enemy will hit you on a natural 1, with 50% miss chance you go from a 5% chance of not being hit to a 52.5% chance of not being hit. With 75% miss chance you will get hit 23.75% of the time.

Miss chance is flat out better than AC increases because you enemies have to roll twice to hit you. No matter what your AC is there will always be a 5% chance that any given attack will hit you. Even a 10% miss chance can change that 5% into a 14.5% chance of not getting hit.

[ericgrau]

Perhaps then I should say the first 9 points of dex don't matter for AC then, because anyone with 12 dex and full plate can match your AC at that point, until you finally have such a high dex that you have higher AC when armorless.

I was basing str trumping dex on two things: First, you lose damage so there is some loss to finessing; it's not all gravy so you must compare gains and losses. Second, I've actually put builds together and str is miles ahead. Except in that one specific case where str was forced to use light armor for reasons of armor check penalty, and then str still came out slightly ahead.

Stacking with AC actually hurts miss chance. If 50% of attacks miss due to AC, then out of the remaining 50% hits your miss chance negates half of them. Overall 75% of attacks miss. You only gained 25%. Or you could get 5 more points of AC.

The problem isn't that the concept of miss chance is better or worse, the problem is that sources of miss chance tend to either be ridiculously expensive or eat a turn in a game where the average fight is 5 rounds and the first 3 rounds often decide the fight. Losing your best 1/3 is rarely worth it. In core you can get a cloak of minor displacement for 20% and 20k. For the goal of creating misses, core miss chance items don't catch up with AC magic items until character level 15; and then that only means you get both. It boggles my mind why this discussion isn't including magic items or spells that grant miss chance. Who cares how good miss chance would be if you could afford it and somehow couldn't afford an equal amount of AC? You can't.

[Malachei]

No, Miss chance is better than AC for one reason; it stacks with AC. If you have 75% miss chance and your enemy needs a natural 20 to hit your AC then his odds of a hit are 1.25%, or about 1 chance in a hundred. 50% miss chance takes it from a 1 in 20 chance of a hit to a 2.5 in 100 chance of a hit.

And AC is better than miss chance because it stacks with miss chance. :smallbiggrin:

[kulosle]

So I think this discussion is getting a little off topic, but I have my 2 cents to give. So most games don't even make it to level 15 and in those cases the majority of the game you are playing where AC is better than miss chance because miss chance is completely unavailable, out of your price range, or really hard to maintain. But once you get to level 8 (for teir 1s, or even less if your good at optimizing, it's later for other classes but I don't know the exact number) where persisting spells comes online then you start getting miss chance without wasting any resources.

[Taelas]

And AC is better than miss chance because it stacks with miss chance. :smallbiggrin:

You have AC no matter what. You don't have miss chance no matter what. :smalltongue:

[Rejusu]

I'm going to steer clear of the debate on how effective a good AC is and state that D&D combat tends to work on the maxim that the best defence is a good offence. This is why strength is not undervalued because nearly all a melee damager dealing potential is keyed off strength.

The best base damage you can get is from an elven court blade, which is 1d10 for a medium creature. So already that's behind the 1d12 and 2d6 of the Greataxe/Greatsword and it costs you two feats (EWP and WF). However while this gets you a weapon with Dex to hit, 1.5x strength and 2x Power attack damage you still don't get your dex to damage. Now it seems the best dex to damage melee weapon is that graceful strike shortsword. Which is 1d6, dual wielding to make it up to 1d6 on two seperate attacks (before iterative attacks factor in) at a penalty.

However you don't get 1.5x your dex or any power attack bonus and you have to hit two separate attacks, both of which have a penalty.

Fact of the matter is that your AC doesn't really matter if you can turn your opponent into paste in a single round. The best way not to get hit is to simply not give the enemy a chance to even lift their sword. In addition several useful melee combat manoeuvres (trip, bull rush, overrun) are keyed off strength.

I'm not saying Dex isn't useful for melee combat. Indeed if you're fighting a lot of enemies then a high dex and combat reflexes means a lot of AoO's. But ultimately you'll never match the damage output of a strength based fighter. Your average damage and max damage is always going to be significantly lower. It also takes a lot more investment to get the same things out of dex that you get from strength. I mean it takes a feat just to make it even viable, and getting dex to damage is a rather heavy investment.

It's also worth noting that until you start getting a rather high dex and mithral armour comes into play it doesn't actually give you much of an advantage over other characters to your AC. With a Dex of +5 and a chain shirt you actually have less of a bonus to your AC than a character with +1 dex wearing full plate.

[Gwendol]

Minor nitpick:
Chain shirt: AC +4, DEX +5, equals AC 19
Full Plate: AC +8, DEX +1, equals AC 19

So, they are the same, but with the difference that the full plate wearing character also takes a hit to many of his skills. And keeping touch AC high is strictly better than having a high AC flatfooted.

Regarding OP: I'd say DEX trumps STR, only because STR is good for those wanting to inflict physical harm by hitting things, while DEX is good for all, always.

[Slipperychicken]

Minor nitpick:
Chain shirt: AC +4, DEX +5, equals AC 19
Full Plate: AC +8, DEX +1, equals AC 19

So, they are the same, but with the difference that the full plate wearing character also takes a hit to many of his skills. And keeping touch AC high is strictly better than having a high AC flatfooted.

Fullplate-user saves a lot of resources in terms of ability points and stat boosters, because he can get by with a 12 in dex (chain shirt guy needs a 20), get the same AC, and allocate those points toward Con, Str, and/or a casting stat. In that sense he's getting the same bang for less buck. Hell, fullplate guy could probably use the cash otherwise used on a Dex stat-booster to remove the ACP (possibly the move speed penalty too).

[Darth Stabber]

You can get dex to damage with a feat shadow blade something or other from ToB, but it requires you to be in a stance from the shadow hand school (not that dex based fighters wouldn't love the 2d6SA from assassin's stance). But that is a massive investment. Getting dex to fill the role of strength incurs pretty big opportunity costs. You need finesse, a specific shortsword or feat with big requirements. And while you have been investing in these, str based fighters already have their hit stat and damage stat confluence and are spending the same resources on things that up their damage output significantly. And most of the strength reliant classes have big hit dice and favor big con scores, which means that their defense against attack is HP. Taking hits on the chin is a valid defense strategy, given that clw and lesser vigor wands are fairly cheap. And the ability to take hits stacks with AC and miss chance.

Also miss chance is considered better than ac because it is independant of the attacker's skill. +4ac may or not mean something, 20% miss means 20%miss.

[Gwendol]

I don't argue that in terms of doing physical damage by hitting things STR is better. That's fairly obvious. What I'm saying is that in general, in D&D, hitting things with weapons isn't the only way of clearing an encounter. And for those not choosing to go that route, DEX is generally more useful than STR.

Therefore, on the whole, DEX trumps STR.

As for full plate vs chain shirt... I maintain that in most cases chain shirt will be the armor of choice. In D&D there are after all only three different armor: chain shirt, breastplate, and full plate. You pick one depending on class (mostly).

[Suddo]

Last time I checked I couldn't find a Dex to Trip modifier (I could have just over looked it). That's pretty much the only reason I ever have STR > DEX.

[Amphetryon]

Fullplate-user saves a lot of resources in terms of ability points and stat boosters, because he can get by with a 12 in dex (chain shirt guy needs a 20), get the same AC, and allocate those points toward Con, Str, and/or a casting stat. In that sense he's getting the same bang for less buck. Hell, fullplate guy could probably use the cash otherwise used on a Dex stat-booster to remove the ACP (possibly the move speed penalty too).

He's also slowing the less-armored party down unless everyone's a Dwarf or small-sized, and has spent more GP (in this example) just to match the Chain Shirt wearer's AC before that character invests any of his (larger) share of remaining resources on either additional defenses or additional offense. The benefit that he could spend the cash he didn't spend on a DEX-booster just in order to offset his self-inflicted movement speed penalty (again, excepting cases where he and the rest of the party all are Dwarves/20' movers) seems dubious at best.

[Rejusu]

Minor nitpick:
Chain shirt: AC +4, DEX +5, equals AC 19
Full Plate: AC +8, DEX +1, equals AC 19

So, they are the same, but with the difference that the full plate wearing character also takes a hit to many of his skills. And keeping touch AC high is strictly better than having a high AC flatfooted.

The penalties are easy enough to mitigate, especially when mithral comes into play. And as for touch AC that's just a matter of spending a couple of feats to get your armour bonus to touch AC through something like heavy weapon spec. Considering that a Dex based character has to put in a significant investment just to do all the stuff that strength is normally good for this isn't much of an issue.


Regarding OP: I'd say DEX trumps STR, only because STR is good for those wanting to inflict physical harm by hitting things, while DEX is good for all, always.

As I said though, D&D combat favours offence over defence. This is why sword and board is considered sub-optimal. Going defence over offence in D&D combat makes it harder for the enemy to hit you yes, but also gives them more chances to hit you. With 20 being an automatic hit every enemy is always going to have a 5% chance to hit you, most enemies are going to have higher than that. Give them enough opportunities and the odds of them landing a hit increase.

If you have a high damage output though you can make sure they don't have those opportunities. A CR3 creature like an ogre has 29 HP. My ECL3 half-giant Psy-War uses a strength build and has a high enough damage output that he can cream it in a single round provided he hits all his attacks. And that's not even doing max damage.

A dex based character couldn't even come close to doing that. There'll be at least several rounds in which the ogre will be able to attack. Considering it does 2d8+7 damage if it even hits once it can take off a huge chunk of a level 3 characters HP.

Dex is better for other things sure. But for melee combat strength is king.


He's also slowing the less-armored party down unless everyone's a Dwarf or small-sized, and has spent more GP for his (in this example) just to match the Chain Shirt wearer's AC before that character invests any of his (larger) share of remaining resources on either additional defenses or additional offense. The benefit that he could spend the cash he didn't spend on a DEX-booster just in order to offset his self-inflicted movement speed penalty (again, excepting cases where he and the rest of the party all are Dwarves/20' movers) seems dubious at best.

This is what charging is for. Out of combat move speed doesn't make much of a difference. If the slow speed is so much of a big deal they can always get a pony to ride on. Also you can always just get more movement speed. I took the freedom mantle as the mantled warrior ACF for my psy warr which increases my base move speed by 10ft. Even in heavy armour I still move at the standard 30ft.

Also the difference between a chain shirt and full plate is 1400GP. At low levels yeah this is a lot. Later on it's not so much.

[Seerow]

Minor nitpick:
Chain shirt: AC +4, DEX +5, equals AC 19
Full Plate: AC +8, DEX +1, equals AC 19

So, they are the same, but with the difference that the full plate wearing character also takes a hit to many of his skills. And keeping touch AC high is strictly better than having a high AC flatfooted.

Regarding OP: I'd say DEX trumps STR, only because STR is good for those wanting to inflict physical harm by hitting things, while DEX is good for all, always.


Last I checked Chain Shirt was 4/4, not 4/5.

[Darth Stabber]

What I'm saying is that in general, in D&D, hitting things with weapons isn't the only way of clearing an encounter. And for those not choosing to go that route, DEX is generally more useful than STR.

Killing monsters ends the most common encounter type. Dealing damage kills monsters. Str deals more damage than dex. Killing things faster is generally a better focus than not dying (as a focus). Ergo strength trumps dex.

[Gwendol]

I thought the consensus was that melee combat to end encounters is for the most part the least effective way in this game? Since magic always trumps everything STR is less important than what seems to be implied when reading many of the posts in this thread.
DEX however stays relevant.

But sure, for a non-magical melee combatant STR the primary stat.

Seerow: Right, my bad (never use anything but Mithral chain shirts, so...)

[Slipperychicken]

He's also slowing the less-armored party down unless everyone's a Dwarf or small-sized, and has spent more GP (in this example) just to match the Chain Shirt wearer's AC before that character invests any of his (larger) share of remaining resources on either additional defenses or additional offense. The benefit that he could spend the cash he didn't spend on a DEX-booster just in order to offset his self-inflicted movement speed penalty (again, excepting cases where he and the rest of the party all are Dwarves/20' movers) seems dubious at best.

It's not just the value of the booster item he's getting, but of the ability points spent to get to Dex 20 (and freeing up his race if he would be getting Dex20 without items). It's more a question of whether you value ~2000gp (to offset fullplate penalties) over freeing up the 8 points of ability you would spend on Dex.

[Darth Stabber]

I thought the consensus was that melee combat to end encounters is for the most part the least effective way in this game? Since magic always trumps everything STR is less important than what seems to be implied when reading many of the posts in this thread.
DEX however stays relevant.

But sure, for a non-magical melee combatant STR the primary stat.

Seerow: Right, my bad (never use anything but Mithral chain shirts, so...)

Dedicated melee damagers + dedicated casters providing favorable conditions for them are the means by which I have seen the most effective encounter ending potential. Mailmen with their empowered energyadmixture fell drain acid orbs can out do the average melee fighter, but they are are hardly on the same optimization tier, where mailmen have to compete with uberchargers.

As far as armor goes, one of my gms always said, "never buy with class features and feats what can be bought with money".

[Gwendol]

As far as armor goes, one of my gms always said, "never buy with class features and feats what can be bought with money".

Does that include heavy armor proficiency?

Jest aside, for a caster then, would you also rank STR>DEX?

[Slipperychicken]

Does that include heavy armor proficiency?

Jest aside, for a caster then, would you also rank STR>DEX?

Generally speaking, casters don't use strength for anything, while the attraction of Dex for them is initiative. A Wizard can, however, have Dex 10-12 and won't be too disadvantaged as long as he keeps his Con and Int. But that doesn't constitute "trumping", since Str requires less investment and is still better at what it does (help hit stuff, deal damage, make carrying-capactiy-obsessed DMs happy). For casters, STR is totally useless, while DEX is pretty useful, but not totally essential.


I find that although Dex is generally desirable, Str is better at its specialties (hit things, deal damage, carry stuff), and is hard enough to replace with Dex that it's usually not worth it. Dex however, is generally desirable for initiative and AC, but isn't otherwise useful unless a you build around it.


Tl;dr: Dex might be useful to more characters, but it doesn't Trump Str, because Str still does its own job better than Dex does.

[Gwendol]

Good points! I'm convinced :smallsmile:

[White_Drake]

It's not just the value of the booster item he's getting, but of the ability points spent to get to Dex 20 (and freeing up his race if he would be getting Dex20 without items). It's more a question of whether you value ~2000gp (to offset fullplate penalties) over freeing up the 8 points of ability you would spend on Dex.

I'm talking about with a well rolled and optimized character. If you're lucky you can have Dex 20 at first level. Also, it brings up another point that so far as PH races go, you've got two Dex races to chose from, both with pretty nice abilities. For Str you've got...a Half Orc...

[Darth Stabber]

I'm talking about with a well rolled and optimized character. If you're lucky you can have Dex 20 at first level. Also, it brings up another point that so far as PH races go, you've got two Dex races to chose from, both with pretty nice abilities. For Str you've got...a Half Orc...

No, you have one good race choice for +dex, halfling. Elves are bad, almost as bad as half orc. Strength is good, but not net negative stats and no racial abilities good.

[Rejusu]

I thought the consensus was that melee combat to end encounters is for the most part the least effective way in this game? Since magic always trumps everything STR is less important than what seems to be implied when reading many of the posts in this thread.
DEX however stays relevant.

But sure, for a non-magical melee combatant STR the primary stat.

I was under the impression we were talking about melee martial characters as per the original post. It's been summed up pretty effectively but I'll add that dex makes a better secondary or tertiary stat for most characters but it's weaker as a primary stat due to it not affecting damage for the most part.


I'm talking about with a well rolled and optimized character. If you're lucky you can have Dex 20 at first level. Also, it brings up another point that so far as PH races go, you've got two Dex races to chose from, both with pretty nice abilities. For Str you've got...a Half Orc...

As noted elves are not a great race, and if you're playing halfling? The small size category neuters your damage even further as all your damage die go down a category. Most of the finesse-able weapons are a rather low d6 as it is, being small reduces them to a paltry d4.

And there's plenty of races outside core that are great for strength builds. But to be honest you can never go wrong with the humble human. Doesn't really matter that you don't get a stat boost because it's not like an extra +1 Dex modifier isn't going to magically boost your damage.

Really though the simplest way to solve this is to have a face off between a strength based melee character and a dex based one. I think it's pretty clear who'd win but if you want a definitive answer that's one way to do it.

[Gwendol]

Jack B. Quick?

Weapon damage die is hardly a game breaker (comparing small - medium), since real damage come from different sources altogether: sneak attack die are still d6 irrespective of size of the rogue, and power attack is -1/+1 or -1/+2 no matter what.
The major drawback of being small comes from maneuvers and special attacks (grapple, tripping, demoralization, and whatnot).

[Stegyre]

Last time I checked I couldn't find a Dex to Trip modifier (I could have just over looked it). That's pretty much the only reason I ever have STR > DEX.
Mighty Throw (1st level Setting Sun maneuver) will do just that, allowing a character to use the higher of Dex or Str mod (plus a +4 bonus) on trip check.

[Rejusu]

Jack B. Quick?

Weapon damage die is hardly a game breaker (comparing small - medium), since real damage come from different sources altogether: sneak attack die are still d6 irrespective of size of the rogue, and power attack is -1/+1 or -1/+2 no matter what.
The major drawback of being small comes from maneuvers and special attacks (grapple, tripping, demoralization, and whatnot).

Oh true true. I'm just saying it's yet another damage loss piled on top of all the other ones. Strength just has a much easier time getting access to all those other sources. Power attack can't be used with finesse-able weapons save for about two (Elven Court blade and Spiked Chain) and without a high strength you don't get most of the benefits of wielding a 2-handed weapon (1.5x strength to damage).

And yeah, tripping is one of the best tricks a low level melee character can do.

[Piggy Knowles]

A CR 13 Iron Golem has +23 to attack
A CR 16 Hound Hero Archon has +25 to attack
A CR 17 Frost Giant Jarl has +30 to attack
A CR 17 Marilith has a bunch of attacks at +25.
A CR 20 Balor has +33 to attack.

In case anyone is curious as to what kind of numbers you should be expected to beat, I put together a spreadsheet of attack bonuses from the SRD (http://goo.gl/Kr0F1), organized by CR.

This takes the highest attack bonus from every monster in the SRD, not including touch attacks. It doesn't factor in number of attacks or auto-hit attacks (swarm, engulf, etc.). It also pulls together the average and the median attack bonus for each CR.

So, to take CR 13, the lowest attack bonus is +17, while the highest is +27. The average is +21.83, and the median is +21.5.

So, if you want the majority of monsters to hit you about 50% of the time at CR 13, then you will need an AC of 32 (or you will need to cast a Displacement spell). CR 13, by the way, is sort of an anomaly, because it actually has a lower average and median AB than CR 12 does.

In general, though, the median attack bonus jumps by 2-3 per CR, from +3 at CR 1 to +37 at CR 19. To me, that's the biggest advantage of spells like Blur, Displacement, Mirror Image, et al. Displacement will always give you a 50% miss chance (more, really, since as Tippy mentioned it stacks with AC), whether it's level 1 or level 20. But to get that miss chance from AC alone, you will need to pump your AC by at least two points every level, devoting more and more resources to it. It isn't impossible, but it's a pain in the rear end, even if you're Dex-SAD.

[Darth Stabber]

And yeah, tripping is one of the best tricks a low level melee character can do.

But it's not as good a trick at mid levels where access to flying isn't hard, or especially high levels where having it is all but assumed. Grappling and Charging have longer level spans of usefulness (though charging really needs lvl6 to get shocktrooper).

[Answerer]

You can trip flying creatures, you know, as long as they fly with wings or something rather than just magic.

[Rejusu]

But it's not as good a trick at mid levels where access to flying isn't hard, or especially high levels where having it is all but assumed. Grappling and Charging have longer level spans of usefulness (though charging really needs lvl6 to get shocktrooper).

Oh yes, it definitely grows less useful at later levels. Not just because of flying but because of bigger and bigger enemies too. I wouldn't say it becomes useless though. You'll still run into plenty of enemies who aren't flying and aren't too big to be tripped. If you can boost your size category that extends it's usefulness a lot too.

The best thing is it only takes a couple of feats to get going, both of which can be easily gotten by dipping Monk. Combat Expertise and Improved Trip are the main ones but if you can get Knockdown in there it makes for a fearsome combo (attack, trip, attack).

So once you've grabbed trip you can transition into charging/bull rush/shocktrooper.

[Darth Stabber]

Oh yes, it definitely grows less useful at later levels. Not just because of flying but because of bigger and bigger enemies too. I wouldn't say it becomes useless though. You'll still run into plenty of enemies who aren't flying and aren't too big to be tripped. If you can boost your size category that extends it's usefulness a lot too.

The best thing is it only takes a couple of feats to get going, both of which can be easily gotten by dipping Monk. Combat Expertise and Improved Trip are the main ones but if you can get Knockdown in there it makes for a fearsome combo (attack, trip, attack).

So once you've grabbed trip you can transition into charging/bull rush/shocktrooper.

The problem is that you now have to make up all the feats you are missing, and you have to switch alignment (lawful for monk to chaotic for barbarian). To even have the base charger set up you need pounce (usually from barbarian, though a heavy investment in psywar can do it), power attack, improved bull rush, leap attack, and shock trooper, and that's not counting the prereqs for PRCs (cleave, destructive rage, intimidating rage for frenzied berserker, ewp(bastard sword) for ronin, or any other prc). Personally I really don't much care for the risks associated with frenzied berserker, and will instead angle to mix kungfu bear and charger.