Dexterity is NOT Superior to Strength

[Easy_Lee]

Thought I'd clear up this misconception people have about the statistics. Dexterity is not better than strength. Each stat has advantages relative to the other.

Dexterity

Affects initiative
Affects armor while under the effects of mage armor and similar
Affects bow attacks, better ranged option
Affects sleight of hand, stealth, and acrobatics
More common saving throw

Strength

If user is proficient, enables user to wear full plate without heavy investment in a non-core statistic (15 points is a humongous investment for a DEX-focused character)
Can get high AC faster - the dextrous character must either invest in strength or wait until a minimum of level 8 to cap his AC
MUCH larger weapon selection. Every weapon that drops, save bows, can be swung for full damage with strength. Dex-characters can only use finesse weapons and bows.
Athletics can not only be used in place of acrobatics, but also applies to the largest number of activities out of any skill. Swimming, climbing, and jumping, just to name a few, are all based on athletics.
Failing a strength saving throw usually results in death or immobilization. Failing a dexterity saving throw usually results in taking the full effect of an aoe, rather than just half. Most classes don't get evasion, so even succeeding on a dexterity saving throw does not protect most characters from the full effect.

The only reasons people think DEX is better is because it affects initiative and because more classes benefit from it. It's kind of like the intelligence vs. charisma debate: we have three full charisma casters, but only one intelligence caster. That doesn't mean intelligence sucks, it just means more classes need charisma. Strength is the same way.

Even if there were dexterous equivalents of great axes and so on, strength would still have advantages over dexterity, and vice versa.

So please, everyone, don't propagate this dexterity > strength myth any longer.

[Grand Warchief]

How do you purpose athletics can be used in place of acrobatics? Try balancing on that tight rope with athletics and let me know how it goes.

[Gritmonger]

How do you purpose athletics can be used in place of acrobatics? Try balancing on that tight rope with athletics and let me know how it goes.

I think this might refer to grappling and a few other cases, where I believe the option exists to use either. I can use Athletics for Grappling, I can't use Acrobatics for Swimming.

[Easy_Lee]

How do you purpose athletics can be used in place of acrobatics? Try balancing on that tight rope with athletics and let me know how it goes.

Grab hold of the rope and climb along it with athletics, or jump across the gap with athletics. If you name a circumstance where one has to balance on a tight rope, and can't hang from it, and can't jump the gap, and can't just cling to it either, then that's a very specific circumstance. Fighting someone while standing on a tight rope is not exactly common.

[Giant2005]

I agree that Str > Dex but I don't find your reasons particularly compelling.
The real reason is due to feats. Both Shield Master and Polearm Mastery require Str as your primary stat and they are both among the strongest of feats.
The only combat form worth mentioning that actually benefits more from Dex over strength is ranged combat (TWF is not worth mentioning because it is so much weaker than everything else).

[JNAProductions]

Medium armor seems to be left out...

It benefits from Dexterity, can be capped statwise at creation, and the only limitation on AC is finances, but it relies on Dexterity, not Strength.

[Chronos]

There is never a point at which a Str-focused character can get a higher AC than a Dex-focused character. Once you find heavy armor, both can wear it. Before then, the Dex character has the advantage. The benefit strength gives you with respect to armor is not a higher armor class, it's just a faster speed. Which isn't all that much: The difference between having the strength for armor or not is the same as the difference between a wood elf and a dwarf or halfling. And hey, look at that: Dwarves don't have their speed reduced by armor, and halflings are going to want to go Dex anyway.


Quoth Giant2005:

The only combat form worth mentioning that actually benefits more from Dex over strength is ranged combat
And the kind of combat that occurs after rolling initiative.

[Easy_Lee]

There is never a point at which a Str-focused character can get a higher AC than a Dex-focused character. Once you find heavy armor, both can wear it. Before then, the Dex character has the advantage. The benefit strength gives you with respect to armor is not a higher armor class, it's just a faster speed. Which isn't all that much: The difference between having the strength for armor or not is the same as the difference between a wood elf and a dwarf or halfling. And hey, look at that: Dwarves don't have their speed reduced by armor, and halflings are going to want to go Dex anyway.


Oh really? The difference is not all that great, eh? Free PDF: " the armor reduces the wearer’s speed by 10 feet unless the wearer has a Strength score equal to or higher than the listed score.". That's like getting hit with Ray of Frost every single round. That's a huge penalty. And that's exactly the difference in speed between a wood elf and a halfling.

Furthermore, one of the major reasons to go with a DEX build is so you can use stealth. But you can't use stealth in heavy armor, and it takes a while to don and doff plate, so that's one more reason why the Dex character wouldn't want to wear plate.


And the kind of combat that occurs after rolling initiative.

Regarding ranged combat, strength characters can still chuck spears, axes, daggers, and other types of missiles just fine. They can't chuck those as far as a bow's fire, but again that's one of the advantages of Dexterity. That said, a strength character can grapple targets just fine. Dexterity-focused characters can't grapple worth a damn, and can only escape grapples. A strength character can grapple a dexterity-focused mob with just one of his attacks, forcing the mob to use its entire action to break free or have disadvantage on any ranged attacks, thus negating any ranged benefit. And again, with climbing, jumping, and swimming all being athletics things, the strength character has every opportunity to get to his target and initiate the grapple.

Like I said, it's a trade-off.

[heavyfuel]

I'll join the guys saying Dex is superior if only by a small margin.

Basically, Dex is better because wining Initiative is that good.

It gives you a chance to hit before your opponent, meaning that if both of you take 5 hits to take out the other, you'll take him out while he still needed one more hit. If the enemy is a glass canon (aka, Sorcerer that intends to use Overchannel), you can kill before he even gets a chance to act (or make sure that using Overchannel will mean his death). It makes you more difficult to target with Assassinate, which pretty much instagibs anyone.

Two equally strong characters will pretty much have their battle's outcome decided based on who wins initiative.

[Giant2005]

I'll join the guys saying Dex is superior if only by a small margin.

Basically, Dex is better because wining Initiative is that good.

It gives you a chance to hit before your opponent, meaning that if both of you take 5 hits to take out the other, you'll take him out while he still needed one more hit. If the enemy is a glass canon (aka, Sorcerer that intends to use Overchannel), you can kill before he even gets a chance to act (or make sure that using Overchannel will mean his death). It makes you more difficult to target with Assassinate, which pretty much instagibs anyone.

Two equally strong characters will pretty much have their battle's outcome decided based on who wins initiative.

I feel the opposite.
It doesn't happen often due to the dice gods being fickle, but fights tend to go a lot better when everyone rolls crappy for initiative except for whoever is filling the roll of nuker. If the other characters go before the Wizard, then he can no longer take out all of the enemies with his AOE unless he wants to hit the friendlies too and it is rare for a Wizard to stack enough Dex to beat them consistently.
If one of the non-nukers stack Dex, then the chances of the Wizard going before them is reduced considerably. If you aren't aking that nuker role, then going first (and having high Dex) is very detrimental to the team.

[Easy_Lee]

I'll join the guys saying Dex is superior if only by a small margin.

Basically, Dex is better because wining Initiative is that good.

The lowest one can get one's dexterity is 8. Starting with 10 or 12 is more common, especially for a strength-focused character who doesn't care about INT, CHA, and WIS very much. So the max dex character is looking at +4 to +6 to his initiative roll.

Thing is, when you're rolling a d20, +4 to +6 is far from insurmountable. Unlike with AC or saves, where we're trying to hit a (often high) number, with initiative we just see whose numbers are higher. That's pretty fickle as far as things go. Sure, it's beneficial, but so is being able to grapple and use almost any weapon.

[Ralanr]

Two equally strong characters will pretty much have their battle's outcome decided based on who wins initiative.

Considering how I just fought a match with my level 4 totem barb vs a level 4 champ fighter with 20 strength. I disagree. I got hit hard after I loss the initiative, really freaking hard. I still won though due to other rolls (we both had good rolls in combat, I just had to resort to being really tactical in the fighter pit. Disarm is awesome).

Now we weren't dex based combatants, but we were pretty equal in strength. I went last and won. First to hit doesn't always win, cause your other rolls might really suck.

[Psikerlord]

If user is proficient, enables user to wear full plate without heavy investment in a non-core statistic (15 points is a humongous investment for a DEX-focused character)
Can get high AC faster - the dextrous character must either invest in strength or wait until a minimum of level 8 to cap his AC
MUCH larger weapon selection. Every weapon that drops, save bows, can be swung for full damage with strength. Dex-characters can only use finesse weapons and bows.
Athletics can not only be used in place of acrobatics, but also applies to the largest number of activities out of any skill. Swimming, climbing, and jumping, just to name a few, are all based on athletics.
Failing a strength saving throw usually results in death or immobilization. Failing a dexterity saving throw usually results in taking the full effect of an aoe, rather than just half. Most classes don't get evasion, so even succeeding on a dexterity saving throw does not protect most characters from the full effect.
[/LIST]
I think dex > str.

- 10' speed difference is minor to nothing for most classes, esp if you play ToTM. Like we do
- I have not found getting higher AC quicker at all. Sometimes the opposite is true, esp if you roll stats. Dex guys gets his high AC immediately, str guy has to save gold for that plate. Yep, we roll stats.
- Athletics isnt interchangable with acrobatics. But fair point, athletics is more useful than acrobatics I think.
- I dont think most failed str saves = death. They mostly = grappled. It's dex saves that keep you alive by reducing damage.

It's not that str is bad, it isnt, it's cool and competitive. It's just that dex is (mostly) better.

[xyianth]

Oh really? The difference is not all that great, eh? Free PDF: " the armor reduces the wearer’s speed by 10 feet unless the wearer has a Strength score equal to or higher than the listed score.". That's like getting hit with Ray of Frost every single round. That's a huge penalty. And that's exactly the difference in speed between a wood elf and a halfling.

Furthermore, one of the major reasons to go with a DEX build is so you can use stealth. But you can't use stealth in heavy armor, and it takes a while to don and doff plate, so that's one more reason why the Dex character wouldn't want to wear plate.

First, its only a huge penalty if your speed is lower than 30 to begin with. Moving 20' per round is unlikely to have a devastating effect on your performance. Second, it makes literally no sense for a dex character to use heavy armor other than plate mail. Roughly equivalent cost medium armor gives the same AC (assuming 14+ dex) as heavy armor. If your dex is higher, light armor can also work. Plate mail is the only armor that exceeds the AC possible on a dex character, unless the dex character is using an unarmored defense feature or mage armor effect.


The lowest one can get one's dexterity is 8. Starting with 10 or 12 is more common, especially for a strength-focused character who doesn't care about INT, CHA, and WIS very much. So the max dex character is looking at +4 to +6 to his initiative roll.

Thing is, when you're rolling a d20, +4 to +6 is far from insurmountable. Unlike with AC or saves, where we're trying to hit a (often high) number, with initiative we just see whose numbers are higher. That's pretty fickle as far as things go. Sure, it's beneficial, but so is being able to grapple and use almost any weapon.

This is playing dirty pool... If you will assume 10-12 dex on the strength character, then for fairness you should consider 10-12 strength on the dex character. As for grapple checks using athletics, nothing says a dex grappler doesn't get proficiency in athletics. Add to this fact that dex based characters have vastly easier access to expertise and suddenly the advantage on grappling (or any athletics check really) disappears. Honestly, I consider expertise in athletics more valuable than which stat you are using. (especially if we are assuming a 10-12 strength score on a dex focused character, since the difference is only +4-5) Also remember that grappling is exactly like initiative; it is a contested d20 roll which, as you say, "+4 to +6 is far from insurmountable."

Note, I am not arguing that strength is less important than dexterity. That said, I disagree with your reasons for why. The +1 AC that strength focus can yield is fine and all, but it's not amazing. The few strength saves that exist are potent, but they are easily the 4th or 5th most frequent saves, so they won't come up very often. Add to this that most strength saves can be contested by athletics checks and the value of strength focus drops even more. The ability to wield any weapon is of questionable value, and really only comes up if you are using truly random treasure drops and you don't have any way to transfer magic properties between items. (I'd argue that this is not the common state, but YMMV) The real value of strength focused builds is the feat support it has. High damage via melee isn't possible on dex builds (outside rogues) because there isn't an equivalent to great weapon master. Polearm master is so useful that it might as well have an entire shrine erected on these forums for people to sing its praises in. It is those feats that help balance strength against dexterity.

Here is how I see the abilities stacking up:
Dex: boosts initiative, most common save, boosts ranged and melee combat, ok feat support, lots of class support
Str: slightly better armor in some cases, fantastic feat support, moderately better at athletics checks, moderate class support

Due solely to the increased number of classes that benefit from dexterity, I'd say that dex is the more commonly useful ability. If your concept can make use of strength however, it is a perfectly viable and potent ability to focus on.

[Kurald Galain]

Dexterity

Affects initiative
Affects armor while under the effects of mage armor and similar
Affects bow attacks, better ranged option
Affects sleight of hand, stealth, and acrobatics
More common saving throw

So that makes it better than strength. Thanks for making that clear :smallcool:

[jazzymantis]

If I am a pure caster (not war clerics), monk, rogue, ranger, ranged fighter Dex will be more important to strength than me.

If I am a barbarian, paladin (not archer), fighter (not archer) or war/tempest cleric, Str will be more important to me.

If I am worried about athletics checks, I will get proficiency from a background or something.

If I am a SAD caster, con and dex will be next stats to boost, AC and initiative depend too much on dex. Strength is always a dump stat there.

If I am a monk/rogue, I might have 10-12 str... but it doesn't really matter there either.

As an archer, I will have a finesse weapon as a backup.

So I don't really know what OP means by Str>dex are we just talking about one class? I think Str is only better if you want to grapple or use a great weapon. Sword and board is the same either way with rapier or longsword.

Str does have the feat support though.

[rollingForInit]

Thought I'd clear up this misconception people have about the statistics. Dexterity is not better than strength. Each stat has advantages relative to the other.


Can get high AC faster - the dextrous character must either invest in strength or wait until a minimum of level 8 to cap his AC




I don't think that's a good point at all. A high-dex character gets his dexterity basically for free after studded leather armour. A Str-based character has to buy full plate armor, and how long that takes is extremely campaign-dependent. There's no guarantee that a level 8 character will have been able to buy a full plate armour for 1500 gp.

That aside, I think both stats are decent. It depends entirely on what you're going to build. I think Dexterity is a much more powerful stat in general, because it has benefits that's great for all classes. Sure, you can do a Wizard with high Str that carries armor and can swing a sword, but I think that in most cases, having high Dexterity, going earlier in Initiative and still having a decent AC (e.g. Mage Armor) would be more beneficial.

But for some melee characters? Sure, Str is very strong. I agree.

[HoarsHalberd]

Xyianth, dex has a lot better than OK feat support. Sharpshooter is better than gwm. (+2 attack while in corridors and the greatly increased effective range is better than the cleave effect and the higher attack of most ranged builds makes the -5 less of a hit.) Dex melee on the other hand has fairly terrible feat support. Dual wielder is effectively +1 to damage +1 to AC (and thus outclassed by boosting dex till you reach dex cap.) For melee if you have the choice go with strength. If you just want to be optimised in a vacuum then dex ranged with either hand crossbow and shield cheese or heavy crossbow with dex or the powerhouse that is the polearm fighter/pally are overwhelming amongst the mundanes.

[Gnaeus]

Grab hold of the rope and climb along it with athletics, or jump across the gap with athletics. If you name a circumstance where one has to balance on a tight rope, and can't hang from it, and can't jump the gap, and can't just cling to it either, then that's a very specific circumstance. Fighting someone while standing on a tight rope is not exactly common.

Well, it also covers fighting someone on a rocking ship (Try that with Athletics), and we had an entire shipbound campaign, so YMMV. The real problem with comparing Acrobatics with Athletics is that Acrobatics has poorly defined mechanics as to what "Acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, summersaults and flips" actually means. If it allows you to do combat things that used to be covered by Tumbling (like escape AOOs, reduce fall damage, or get up faster from prone) it is better than Athletics, but thats going to be a table by table call. RAW legal, because the book says you can do acrobatic stunts, but grey as to what that does in play.

But regardless, Dex is better than Str for skill use even if Acrobatics < Athletics. Dex is used for Stealth (Awesome), Slight of Hand (situational), Vehicle Operation (Situational), Rope use (Good), Escape Artist (Good), some crafting, stringed instruments, picking locks/disabling traps (awesome).

[heavyfuel]

@ People saying I'm wrong based on "that one experience I had" and because the d20 is fickle:

I know, hence why I said "by a small margin" and "pretty much". The d20 clearly alters it, but if you take the average damage dealt each round, whoever wins Initiative, wins (especially if there's an Assassin in either party)

[Chronos]

A dex-based character won't be very good at grappling others. But then, nobody's going to be very good at grappling others. Grappling just doesn't do much. If I'm a Dex-based character and someone tries to grapple me, well, first off, they only have about a 50-50 chance of success, since my Acrobatics is probably about as good as their Athletics. But if they do grapple me, I'm not going to use my actions to try to escape, because I don't care. If I want to attack that foe, I'll just keep poking them with my rapier. If I want to attack someone else, I'll just keep plinking them with my bow. I can't move, but I don't much care, because I don't need to.

[Myzz]

Saving Throws: Way More effects have Dex saves than Str saves, the Dex saves result in taking either no dmg or half dmg, while the Str saves usually means grappled/held/loss of movement or minimized movement.

Ability Checks: Both Str and Dex have abilities attached to them. Perhaps Str abilities more useful in combat... slightly so. Dex abilities are probably more useful for setting upcombat (ie stealth)

Attacks: Both Str and Dex are utilized in Melee Combat to the same degree... Difference being that Str weapons can benefit most from existing weapon feats. While Dex can also apply to ranged attacks beyond 20 ft (thrown weapons being the only Str based Range Attacks). Str and Dex bonuses apply to hit and dmg.

AC: Str does not apply at all EVER to AC. Str only applies to not limit your movement if you do not meet the requirments for heavy armor... which can be mitigated by being a dwarf, or minimized by being a woodelf, or taking the mobile feat. Therefore in regards to AC Dex is really the only stat applicable.

Initiative: ONLY Dex helps initiative, or Alert feat.

SO essentially both stats could potentially apply to 5 areas of benefit. Strength does absolutely NOTHING for one of those areas, and almost nothing for another. So out the box Dex is KING in 2 of the areas. Dex and Str are a virtual tie in Attacks, Str only wins out by a small margin when you factor in that existing feats only really help the Str builds. So the only debatable part is really whether Str or Dex wins out with saves and ability checks... Both are probably matter of opinion. In my opinion Dex wins both areas.

So my score card has Dex 4, Str 1... and the one that Str wins is very minimal, and MUST account for feats. so in a Featless game Dex = 5, Str = 0!

either way Dex is either WAY better than Str or on Par (if you gave saves and ability checks to Str)...

[Easy_Lee]

{scrubbed}

Dexterity has its merits, but it is far from superior in all regards. It's not even superior in most regards.

Skills: dexterity
Weapon choice: strength
Initiative: dexterity
Damage: strength
AC: strength
Saving throws: dex more common, strength more critical
Combat options: strength (push and grapple)
Out of combat options: dexterity

The list goes on and on. {scrubbed}

[heavyfuel]

{scrubbed}

That's... just a wrong way to argue, man. Can you trully make this assumption?

[Myzz]

Anyone in this thread arguing that dexterity is superior to strength, or that the two do not have advantages over each other, is speaking from a position of inexperience. I have laid out all of the major reasons why in the main post. Continue ignoring that and perpetuating this pointless debate if you wish, but it won't change the fact that strength offers more combat options, more weapon choices, controls the most versatile feat, and allows full use of the best armor in the game.

Dexterity has its merits, but it is far from superior in all regards. It's not even superior in most regards.

Skills: dexterity
Weapon choice: strength [Combine with Damage since the argument where Str wins is based on the weapon doing more dmg]
Initiative: dexterity
Damage: strength [Based on weapon type, ignores TWF, adds in existing Weapon Feats]
AC: strength [completely wrong, Strength only affects moving in heavy armor and has no bearing on AC calculation]
Saving throws: dex more common, strength more critical
Combat options: strength (push and grapple) [Ignores stealth and setting up Combat and ambush]
Out of combat options: dexterity

The list goes on and on. I could offer a counterpoint to everything said in this thread, but it's really not worth the time.
Bold points mine

Range Combat: Dexterity

[Gnaeus]

Combat options: Dexterity (Stealth gives advantage on your attacks and disadvantage on attacks against you, making it far better than push and grapple)


Fixed that for you.

[HoarsHalberd]

Attacks: Both Str and Dex are utilized in Melee Combat to the same degree... Difference being that Str weapons can benefit most from existing weapon feats. While Dex can also apply to ranged attacks beyond 20 ft (thrown weapons being the only Str based Range Attacks). Str and Dex bonuses apply to hit and dmg.


I agree with you mostly but this is just horrifically wrong. If you want a damage die above a d8 in melee you're going strength. If you want a reach melee weapon above a d4 you're going strength. They are not utilised equally, there are 4 finesse weapons I can think of ATM (afb) and these are the only melee weapons that benefit from dex to attack and damage. Now if you're going two weapon style you go dex, because it is a superior stat because of the sheer number of effects it has that you have outlined. But melee weapons favour strength. With no feats it is 5d6 + 25 for dual short sword wielding fighters vs 8d6 + 20 for a great sword/maul wielder. Difference between the two is 5.5 on average, and the two handed fighter has a fighting style to push it's efficiency up even further and has his bonus action free. Haste and action surge favour the 2 handed style even more. None of the others have much choice in stat. Rogue, monk and ranger are all but obliged to go dex and paladin and barbarian favour strength.

[Gnaeus]

Now if you're going two weapon style you go dex, because it is a superior stat because of the sheer number of effects it has that you have outlined. But melee weapons favour strength.

Sword and board favors dex slightly. A dex rapier is same to hit and damage as a str (any one handed weapon) but the dex user has better init and likely AC. Bounded accuracy makes S&B a thing.

[HoarsHalberd]

{scrubbed}

[Giant2005]

Sword and board favors dex slightly.
Only until you take the Shield Mastery feat. Then that dex-based sword-and-boarder would be wishing he was str-based while he consistently fails to push his enemies with his bonus action.

[Easy_Lee]

Only until you take the Shield Mastery feat. Then that dex-based sword-and-boarder would be wishing he was str-based while he consistently fails to push his enemies with his bonus action.

Though the dexer would get more benefit out of the other feature, since he's more likely to pass his reflex (dexterity) saves. It's a trade-off. Shield master works best with a decent score in the other stat, whichever is your main.

[Gnaeus]

Only until you take the Shield Mastery feat. Then that dex-based sword-and-boarder would be wishing he was str-based while he consistently fails to push his enemies with his bonus action.

Only until you get hit with one of those common dex saves. Then that str-based sword-and-boarder would be wishing he was dex-based and had evasion. Completely ignoring the dragon's breath weapon >>>>>>>>> a 5 foot bonus action shove.

Ninjas everywhere this AM.

[Giant2005]

Only until you get hit with one of those common dex saves. Then that str-based sword-and-boarder would be wishing he was dex-based and had evasion. Completely ignoring the dragon's breath weapon >>>>>>>>> a 5 foot bonus action shove.

Ninjas everywhere this AM.

That case could be made if you were a class that had a regular use for that bonus action (Which is only the Monk and Rogue, neither of which are likely to be using a shield in the first place) but for everyone else, productively using that bonus action every single turn of every single combat is far more beneficial than the pseudo-evasion benefits that are likely to be of use less than once per session.

[Myzz]

I agree with you mostly but this is just horrifically wrong. If you want a damage die above a d8 in melee you're going strength. If you want a reach melee weapon above a d4 you're going strength. They are not utilised equally, there are 4 finesse weapons I can think of ATM (afb) and these are the only melee weapons that benefit from dex to attack and damage. Now if you're going two weapon style you go dex, because it is a superior stat because of the sheer number of effects it has that you have outlined. But melee weapons favour strength. With no feats it is 5d6 + 25 for dual short sword wielding fighters vs 8d6 + 20 for a great sword/maul wielder. Difference between the two is 5.5 on average, and the two handed fighter has a fighting style to push it's efficiency up even further and has his bonus action free. Haste and action surge favour the 2 handed style even more. None of the others have much choice in stat. Rogue, monk and ranger are all but obliged to go dex and paladin and barbarian favour strength.


No 1 handed weapon has higher than 1d8... so all TWF builds can build around a Finesse or Non-Finesse weapon which means that Str and Dex are equivalent in those builds. Increased Dmg die on weapons come in the 2hand variety and will do more dmg once you get to Level 11 Fighter ONLY... Or if you find a way to utilize your bonus action consistantly, at which point it can apply after everyone gets thier second attack. Otherwise a TWF using his bonus action to attack could be doing 2d8 base while 2handers get 2d6 or 1d12. After 5 the 2 hander does 4d6 or 2d12 while TWF does 3d8. (of course I'm giving TWF in question Dual Wielder and not yet giving the 2hander GWM or PM... at which point the 2 hander wins...)

It should be noted that the 2hander will be doing consistantly higher dmg than average due to GWF as a fighting style, while the TWF has a consistantly higher AC AND the TWF will be adding first double his Mod for dmg, then triple (due to TWF fighting style)

The real tipping point on the dmg is the feats... then the acquisition of more attacks... Without the Feats, TWF is better till level 5 (or first Extra Attack) at which point they are on par. Then later with the acquisition of a second Extra Attack (which only fighters get) moves the dmg in favor of a str based 2 hander. Although acquiring consistant use of bonus action to attack gives 2 hander the edge as well.

[Gnaeus]

That case could be made if you were a class that had a regular use for that bonus action (Which is only the Monk and Rogue, neither of which are likely to be using a shield in the first place) but for everyone else, productively using that bonus action every single turn of every single combat is far more beneficial than the pseudo-evasion benefits that are likely to be of use less than once per session.

Monks and rogues, yes. Also Rangers and Paladins (for spells), Fighters (Second Wind, EKs), War Clerics (second attack), Bards (inspiration). You're right, none of those classes will use shields. And I'm not sure why that is of use less than once per session. It heavily nerfs a large subset of monsters, traps, and spells.

[Giant2005]

Monks and rogues, yes. Also Rangers and Paladins (for spells), Fighters (Second Wind, EKs), War Clerics (second attack), Bards (inspiration). You're right, none of those classes will use shields. And I'm not sure why that is of use less than once per session. It heavily nerfs a large subset of monsters, traps, and spells.

The key word you missed was "regular" the above have options for bonus actions but they are all limited to the exent that each of the above would greatly benefit from the free shove from Shield Mastery.
I said less than once per session because having to make a Dex save isn't something that occurs every session. I have played 20+ hours of 5e each week since it was released with a bunch of different and completely unrelated to one another DMs and I think I have made a total of 3 Dex saves and they all occurred in the same fight.

[Garimeth]

Look at it this way: more people want DEX more frequently than they want STR. The only time you want STR over dex is if it is your Prime Attribute (PA). Dex is everybody's third best friend though.

PA > Con > Dex.

In some cases Wis or Cha may beat out Dex here, but not most. There are plenty of classes that don't need or want Str at all, the same can not be said of Dex, everybody wants some Dex.

[xyianth]

Xyianth, dex has a lot better than OK feat support. Sharpshooter is better than gwm. (+2 attack while in corridors and the greatly increased effective range is better than the cleave effect and the higher attack of most ranged builds makes the -5 less of a hit.) Dex melee on the other hand has fairly terrible feat support. Dual wielder is effectively +1 to damage +1 to AC (and thus outclassed by boosting dex till you reach dex cap.) For melee if you have the choice go with strength. If you just want to be optimised in a vacuum then dex ranged with either hand crossbow and shield cheese or heavy crossbow with dex or the powerhouse that is the polearm fighter/pally are overwhelming amongst the mundanes.

Context is important. As I mentioned, melee dex has ok feat support. No one in their right mind is arguing strength is in the same league as dexterity when it comes to ranged combat. Throwing weapons have a range of "I'm too lazy to walk over and hit you," next to no feat or style support, and little to no class feature support. The only reason throwing weapons is even a thing is so strength based melee characters can attempt to deal with a flying opponent without caster assistance. No question that ranged dex feat and style support is excellent.

I don't even know what Lee is trying to achieve in this thread anymore. Which stats are more valuable is highly build dependent. I think his argument is: for builds that can be focused on either strength or dexterity equally, dex is not superior to strength. But that is true for what, 2-3 possible character builds? The vast majority of characters are going to have the choice between the two stats made for them: barbarians lose quite a bit of their features if they choose dex, rogues lose quite a bit if they choose strength, rangers and monks are strongly encouraged to choose dex, paladins are strongly encouraged to choose strength, clerics' choice will depend on domain, druids don't gain much of anything from strength (and honestly can dump both), sorcerers and wizards would be crazy to choose strength. That leaves bards, fighters, and warlocks with an actual choice; and there are indeed valid arguments in favor of both choices. But if the argument is that strength is equally helpful on average, I'd say the above list is pretty clear evidence that dex is more important on average due solely to the number of characters that rely on dex as their primary or secondary stat. (strength: barbarians, paladins, some fighters, some bards, some warlocks, some clerics; dexterity: rogues, rangers, monks, sorcerers, wizards, some fighters, some bards, some warlocks, some clerics; which list is longer?)

[Chronos]

How are paladins strongly encouraged to use Str? Most of their spells are bonus actions, so they don't have as much need for the one from Shield Master or Polearm Master. Most of their damage comes from smiting, so the base damage die doesn't matter as much for them. The only benefit I can see that paladins specifically have for Str is that, for some reason, they need it to multiclass.

[Garimeth]

LOL.

There is ONE TRUTH to stats: your Prime Attribute is the best stat, and the second best stat is usually Con. After that is it dependent on the build.

/sarcasm: So clearly Constitution is OP.

[Myzz]

LOL.

There is ONE TRUTH to stats: your Prime Attribute is the best stat, and the second best stat is usually Con. After that is it dependent on the build.

/sarcasm: So clearly Constitution is OP.

AND Hill Dwarves! lol

[Galen]

LOL.

There is ONE TRUTH to stats: your Prime Attribute is the best stat, and the second best stat is usually Con. After that is it dependent on the build.
For a non-caster: Fighting Stat (Str or Dex) > Con > anything else
For a caster: Casting Stat (Int/Wis/Cha) > Fighting Stat (Str or Dex) = Con > anything else

[Chronos]

Well, yes, but some classes have a choice of what their Prime Ability is. Which of the two should they choose? And, heck, for a paladin, it isn't even clear whether their prime ability is (Str/Dex) or Cha.

[Garimeth]

For a non-caster: Fighting Stat (Str or Dex) > Con > anything else
For a caster: Casting Stat (Int/Wis/Cha) > Fighting Stat (Str or Dex) = Con > anything else

Yeah I agree, that's why I said "usually Con". Though I would say the only casters who care about a "fighting stat" on the level of cons are the Gish types, but this is why I put my dependent on build comment. I hedged my statement alot for the sake of brevity, lol.

[Garimeth]

Well, yes, but some classes have a choice of what their Prime Ability is. Which of the two should they choose? And, heck, for a paladin, it isn't even clear whether their prime ability is (Str/Dex) or Cha.

TBH given the coice I would tell my player to pick whichever fits their idea for their character better. A min/max player has probably already made up his mind about which one he feels is superior, and I'm not interested in debating him, lol. A few posts up I mentioned I think the fact is that "more people want dex more frequently" and based off of that alone Dex is superior imo. That said, I think the mechanical advantage of one over the other is not that huge in this edition, and whatever disadvantage you recieve can often be mitigated through smart play.

In the case of the paladin their prime attribute is definitely not CHA, as it is not the stat they use to resolve their attack rolls. You are correct though that a few classes get their choice between Dex and Str.

EDIT: Grammar.

[Icewraith]

Let's reframe this slightly:

If you're a DEX-based character, dumping strength won't affect anything you do right up until you need to
-use a combat maneuver to grapple or shove an enemy prone (unless you get expertise and used it to make up for this gap). Hopefully someone else who is better suited to do this is in a place where it would be useful, but sometimes you're the one who either needs to shove the [melee attacker] out of melee/grapple with the warlock/archer OR definitely kill it on your turn.
-make a STR-based saving throw, used by very (very?) specific types of enemies. If you don't make this save something bad or at least very inconvenient will happen to you.
-the dm starts tracking weight for encumbrance, and doesn't roll up some extradimensional storage or doesn't include any in the loot.
-find a finesse-able magic weapon when the treasure horde doesn't have any, or have a d10 or better weapon damage die.
-use athletics instead of acrobatics (again, unless you used expertise on athletics).
-have high ac before you can get stat boosts in a game where the dm is permissive about the availability of plate armor. Medium Armor Master may be a good option if having Max AC and stealthiness really is that important. You can probably get your mitts on some half plate by 4th level.
-pick up a top-tier melee combat feat.

If you're a STR-based character, dumping DEX won't affect anything you do right up until you need to:
-not wear heavy armor (or use stealth, or disable traps). This is (hopefully) someone else's job, if you want to tag along on stealth missions you need some Dex and probably Medium Armor Master or Mithril Full Plate (DM dependent).
-make a DEX-only based saving throw, used by very specific but significant types of enemies. You're probably going to take half the damage anyways, but taking full damage does suck. One way to avoid making this kind of save entirely is to not stand next to the spellcasters and make the DM choose which PC he's going to AOE.
-go early in the first round of combat. Do you have some massive aoe or encounter dominating spell (wall spells, WIS save-based cc) you need to use?
-make an acrobatics check instead of an athletics check. There are probably some situations you can't weasel out of (using a rope to cross a large gap is not one of them, as has been demonstrated), but those will probably be corner cases or a sign something has already gone terribly wrong (why are you fighting on a tightrope when you dumped DEX?).
-have high ac and the DM is stingy about treasure or the availability of full plate, and you have heavy armor proficiency.
-make ranged attacks because there's nothing to melee within movement range, and there won't be for at least a round or two, and there are things the party is actively attacking in longbow range.

If you're neither a DEX nor a STR-based character:
-You want to go early in initiative to get your awesome spell off while the enemies are bunched up (DEX), or at the end to heal people (STR).
-You don't like taking full damage from breath weapons because you don't have a lot of HP, and the Dragons know this. (DEX)
-If you're getting shoved or grappled, the guys who pumped DEX and STR probably screwed up or you ran into the middle of combat like a noob (or you're BUILT to run into the middle of combat like a noob), or you got ambushed, or you haven't put out the right kind of battlefield control.
-You're not proficient in heavy armor (DEX) unless you're specific breeds of Cleric (STR).
-You probably have a spammable attack cantrip (INT, WIS, or CHA) unless you get bonus damage on melee attacks (STR unless you have Martial Weapon proficiency or are ok with using a d4 for base weapon damage). Or you can turn into a bear (WIS) or T-rex (INT, CHA).
-Being able to sneak around IS kind of nice (DEX), if your DM allows you to customize your background or you don't mind being an Urchin or a Criminal or a High Elf or a Human.
-You want a decent AC but you don't want to pump DEX first but don't get it as a racial boost or don't want to waste class resources on Mage Armor (INT, CHA), so HELLO MEDIUM ARMOR PROFICIENCY (Get to 14 DEX, leave it there AND wear a shield for good measure!)!

[xyianth]

How are paladins strongly encouraged to use Str? Most of their spells are bonus actions, so they don't have as much need for the one from Shield Master or Polearm Master. Most of their damage comes from smiting, so the base damage die doesn't matter as much for them. The only benefit I can see that paladins specifically have for Str is that, for some reason, they need it to multiclass.

Maybe I shouldn't have said strongly... They are given all armor and weapon proficiencies ('best' weapons are not finesse and 'best' armor is plate) and the fighting styles they have favor strength based melee. (no TWF, no archery) You are absolutely correct that they could choose to be dex based, so I should have put them on the list of classes that can choose. My apologies.

[Easy_Lee]

A strength based paladin is a bit more versatile, able to push well, grapple if he has to, and use a wider range of weaponry. Using a Lance from horseback is particularly potent on paladins due to find steed, and lance damage is nothing to dismiss. On the other hand, a dex paladin has better initiative, will almost never take full damage from an AoE, and probably only has one or two, fewer AC.

So, like I've been saying, it's a trade-off.

[Galen]

Stupid question, AFB right now ... if your Dex modifier is negative, do you penalize your AC in heavy armor? Guess would be yes, but can't hurt to ask.

[Elderand]

Stupid question, AFB right now ... if your Dex modifier is negative, do you penalize your AC in heavy armor? Guess would be yes, but can't hurt to ask.

No: Heavy armor have a set AC and you can't apply your dex to it at all.

I quote from the books


Heavy armor doesn’t let you add your Dexterity modifier to your Armor Class, but it also doesn’t penalize you if your Dexterity modifier is negative

[heavyfuel]

No: Heavy armor have a set AC and you can't apply your dex to it at all.

Not only that. Heavy armors explicitly tells you a negative modifier doesn't affect it.

[Elderand]

Not only that. Heavy armors explicitly tells you a negative modifier doesn't affect it.

Yup, edited my post seconds after I posted to reflect that.

[Chronos]

Quoth Icewraith:

Hopefully someone else who is better suited to do this is in a place where it would be useful, but sometimes you're the one who either needs to shove the [melee attacker] out of melee/grapple with the warlock/archer OR definitely kill it on your turn.
Why does anyone need to shove anyone out of grappling the warlock/archer at all? Grappling really doesn't do much. And, heck, if it's a warlock being grappled, he can probably push the grappler away himself better than the strong guy can.

And even if it is that important, shoving isn't going to be much of a solution, because the threat can just come right back the next turn.

Strength is better than Dex for shoving and grappling, but that's not very important, because shoving and grappling aren't all that useful.

[Galen]

No: Heavy armor have a set AC and you can't apply your dex to it at all.

I quote from the books


Not only that. Heavy armors explicitly tells you a negative modifier doesn't affect it.

Thanks. So Str-based is even a bit better than I though it was...

[Easy_Lee]

Strength is better than Dex for shoving and grappling, but that's not very important, because shoving and grappling aren't all that useful.

Consider the 11 fighter who uses two of his three or four attacks one round to first shove a target to the ground, then grapple and hold them there. That's advantage on all attacks vs that target, and disadvantage for its attacks, until it can get back up again. If the target does try to break out, it takes an action. Meanwhile the fighter can do the same thing again for half a round's attacks.

Shove can be useful when used properly. If nothing else, shoving a target can prevent them from taking opportunity attacks against you and your allies when they move, and it only takes one attack.

[SharkForce]

i would add one caveat: dexterity is almost always going to be superior to strength if you don't have heavy armour proficiency.

for basically anyone who is not proficient in heavy armour (and is not going to become proficient in reasonably short order), i would say that dexterity is the more valuable attribute. whether it's valuable enough to warrant any focus for any given build is debatable (it may very well not be; a wizard gets more out of dex than strength, but probably gets more out of maxing int and con, and picking up defensive feats like resilient(con) and warcaster than boosting strength). but the value is generally not.

(and yes, i even include medium armour in that... you'll want at least 14 dex with medium armour, and that's a big investment for something that is going to be at best your third most important stat most of the time).

[MustacheFart]

shoving and grappling aren't all that useful.

You couldn't be more wrong. Either you're playing in very limited, boring games or you're forgetting:

1) prevent the flying/running creature/monster/whatever from fleeing with his/her/it's magic items once at little HP.

2) Pushing the enemy off a cliff, out a window, down a pit, etc. This is a valuable tactical move that shouldn't be forgotten.

3) Pushing a hard to hit enemy down so ALL of your melee companions have advantage on their attacks.

These were but only a few.

[MadBear]

How are paladins strongly encouraged to use Str? Most of their spells are bonus actions, so they don't have as much need for the one from Shield Master or Polearm Master. Most of their damage comes from smiting, so the base damage die doesn't matter as much for them. The only benefit I can see that paladins specifically have for Str is that, for some reason, they need it to multiclass.

I'm playing a vengeance paladin right now. Grabbing the Great weapon fighting style is amazing for paladins, because it allows them to re-roll the 1's and 2's on their smite damage dice. Gotta say, I'm currently using Greatsword that adds 2d6 necrotic damage, and getting to re-roll all those 1's and 2's when I go nova really makes me a reliable nuke when needed.

[Psikerlord]

Anyone in this thread arguing that dexterity is superior to strength, or that the two do not have advantages over each other, is speaking from a position of inexperience. I have laid out all of the major reasons why in the main post. Continue ignoring that and perpetuating this pointless debate if you wish, but it won't change the fact that strength offers more combat options, more weapon choices, controls the most versatile feat, and allows full use of the best armor in the game.

Dexterity has its merits, but it is far from superior in all regards. It's not even superior in most regards.

Skills: dexterity
Weapon choice: strength
Initiative: dexterity
Damage: strength
AC: strength
Saving throws: dex more common, strength more critical
Combat options: strength (push and grapple)
Out of combat options: dexterity

The list goes on and on. I could offer a counterpoint to everything said in this thread, but it's really not worth the time.

We understand your argument. We just disagree, for the reasons we have given. Str is fine, it's good and useful. It just isnt as good or useful as dex, if you are forced to choose between the two.

[Sindeloke]

I'm playing a vengeance paladin right now. Grabbing the Great weapon fighting style is amazing for paladins, because it allows them to re-roll the 1's and 2's on their smite damage dice. Gotta say, I'm currently using Greatsword that adds 2d6 necrotic damage, and getting to re-roll all those 1's and 2's when I go nova really makes me a reliable nuke when needed.

Unfortunately, that's apparently not RAI (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/06/great-weapon-smite/).

Which means Great Weapon is actually pretty weak compared to Dueling, no matter who's using it. The math works out to adding < 1 point of damage per swing, while rapier dueling of course adds +2 to every single one, for an average of 6.5 damage before ability mods (identical to an unmodified greataxe, better than a GW'd polearm and still barely 1 pt per swing behind a GW'd greatsword). I'd trade ~1 damage for a 2 AC shield on a frontliner most days of the week.

(Incidentally if you want to fix that flaw in Great Weapon, just change it to roll one extra die, drop lowest. This brings the benefit to just about +2 dmg per swing, and equalizes greatsword and greataxe instead of further exacerbating their disparity.)

[Easy_Lee]

We understand your argument. We just disagree, for the reasons we have given. Str is fine, it's good and useful. It just isnt as good or useful as dex, if you are forced to choose between the two.

For which class? No stat is equally useful for all classes, not even CON. Ask a barbarian, or a champion fighter, or a half orc player how they feel about strength, and you're likely to get a very different answer than if you ask a wizard or a rogue. That's my point.

In a phrase, the forums need to quit pooping on strength.

[Elderand]

For which class? No stat is equally useful for all classes, not even CON. Ask a barbarian, or a champion fighter, or a half orc player how they feel about strength, and you're likely to get a very different answer than if you ask a wizard or a rogue. That's my point.

In a phrase, the forums need to quit pooping on strength.

I haven't seen anyone pooping on strength until you started this very topic though.

[HoarsHalberd]

[QUOTE=Chronos;18919478 how are paladins strongly encouraged to use Str? Most of their spells are bonus actions, so they don't have as much need for the one from Shield Master or Polearm Master. Most of their damage comes from smiting, so the base damage die doesn't matter as much for them. The only benefit I can see that paladins specifically have for Str is that, for some reason, they need it to multiclass.[/QUOTE]

Firstly, damage is damage and a d10+ is always helpful. Secondly, paladins benefit more from a bonus action attack to put a free action smite on than a spell cast in terms of pure damage on most rounds. Thirdly, improved smite makes OA's triggered by polearm master much much more deadly. And finally none of their class features apply to ranged, removing much of the utility dex gives to fighters.

As to all the others, I agree with you on most points, including dex being the better stat and most of my arguments are too pedantic to bother with.

[Tonden Ockay]

I think dex > str.

- 10' speed difference is minor to nothing for most classes, esp if you play ToTM. Like we do


EK at level 7 with a long bow can cast one can trip and fire one shot every round

Ray of Frost 1d8 damage -10 to movement and one shot from a bow.


you have 30 you got the -10 which you said was minor. The EK cast Ray of Frost on you so you take another -10. However the EK is moving at 30 and shooting you with a bow every round.

I know some DMs only play in a Dungeon. But in my world we play in a large open world (lots of wilderness, some dungeons/caves, large cities, and ruins. So most of the time the players are not in a Dungeon.

Plus in your world there are different faction so are a lot of NPC's that the Player's fight.

[Tonden Ockay]

DEX is far better if your playing in the campaign setting " Dark Sun "

[Tonden Ockay]

DEX is far better if your playing in the campaign setting " Dark Sun "

little metal in the world and you suffer from fighting in metal armor in the sun.

[MeeposFire]

little metal in the world and you suffer from fighting in metal armor in the sun.

That would depend on whether you were able to get heavy armor that is not metal. They did that in 4e at the very least (various beast hides were shown to be material for light or heavy armor). If you make heavy armor from the hide of a deadly animal (probably something with a hard heavy shell) then dex is not anymore sufeul than it is anywhere else.

If you restrict heavy amors to be made from metal then it becomes a problem.

[SharkForce]

that's kinda part of the theme of dark sun though. it would somewhat cheapen things to have totallynotmetalTM armour in darksun. even the ridiculous armours that you could get from creatures like elemental drakes counted as something like leather iirc, with some being hide (i think the best you could pull off reasonably easily was rasclinn hide armour, which was relatively good at AC 4 and counted as hide armour).

you'd probably have to compensate fighters to some extent in that setting, but it really just wouldn't feel like dark sun imo if everyone wasn't walking around with limited gear in much the same way that it wouldn't feel like dark sun if wizards weren't being hunted or if there were priests of actual gods.

[MadBear]

Unfortunately, that's apparently not RAI (http://www.sageadvice.eu/2014/10/06/great-weapon-smite/).)

Well that's unfortunate. Oh well, we do it in my group and I highly enjoy it. It definitely makes strength way better in that particular case.

[Grayson01]

The lowest one can get one's dexterity is 8. Starting with 10 or 12 is more common, especially for a strength-focused character who doesn't care about INT, CHA, and WIS very much. So the max dex character is looking at +4 to +6 to his initiative roll.

Thing is, when you're rolling a d20, +4 to +6 is far from insurmountable. Unlike with AC or saves, where we're trying to hit a (often high) number, with initiative we just see whose numbers are higher. That's pretty fickle as far as things go. Sure, it's beneficial, but so is being able to grapple and use almost any weapon.

The lowest a Dex "Could" be is 3. Not everyone plays Point buy or takes the starting Stat block.

[coredump]

Dex will effect: AC, attk, dmg, more common saving throws, more skills, effects range *and* melee, initiative. Most Dex builds can have an 8 Str without missing a beat.

Heavy armor mitigates this some, assuming you have Heavy Armor proficiency and can grab plate.
Plate allows 18 AC, Dex allows 17 AC or 16 with no Dex disadv.

As a characteristic, Dex is just better....

The biggest mitigating issue is GWM, PAM, SM, and grappling. IOW, for certain melee builds Str is still viable. If WotC (or others) come out with a Dex version of the above feats... Str becomes almost forgettable.

(And from earlier, a Dex based paladin is *very* strong)

[Easy_Lee]

Dex will effect: AC, attk, dmg, more common saving throws, more skills, effects range *and* melee, initiative. Most Dex builds can have an 8 Str without missing a beat.

Strength allows for higher AC at lower levels, and full plate allows higher AC than studded leather or half plate ever do without a feat.

The strength saving throws are more dangerous to fail than dexterity saving throws, since they generally involve things like failing to escape from a gelatinous cube or getting pinned in place by a Web, whereas dex saves are usually just save for half damage.

The strength skill, athletics, is applicable to more situations than any dexterity skill. Climbing, jumping, swimming, breaking things, pushing, and grappling are all athletics. You can't throw someone out a window or suplex them off a cliff without a good athletics score.

Strength is still capable of ranged damage. The range is shorter than dexterity, but strength characters are still capable of it. Just carry some javelins and you're fine.

Strength raises your carrying capacity.

And strength enables a much wider selection of gear and weapons than dexterity.

The only advantages dexterity has over strength are longer range and initiative. Depending on one's build, those things may not actually matter. Meanwhile, strength offers pushing, grappling, one extremely common skill (meaning you don't have to spend three skill points to get the full benefit), one detrimental to fail saving throw, increased carrying capacity, higher potential AC through heavy armor, and a larger gear selection. In addition to that, all great weapons are strength-only, and those deal higher damage.

So how do you figure that dex is superior? You don't, that's how.

[JNAProductions]

Easy_Lee, if you have a Wizard or a Sorceror or a (insert any other non Strength-based class here), what are your second and third stats?

Constitution and Dexterity, for me, and for most other players (mechanically. Fluff could change your decisions, to be a charming Wizard, for instance).

If Strength is better, then a Wizard with 18 Int, 16 Str, and 10 Dex is better than a Wizard with 18 Int, 16 Dex, and 10 Str. Is that the case?

[Vogonjeltz]

There is never a point at which a Str-focused character can get a higher AC than a Dex-focused character.

Although Dexterity-based Characters are theoretically capable of wearing heavy armors, they typically lack the Strength required to keep their speed up. This penalizes their speed which impacts a number of Combat related skills. It also means that a Strength-based character can pretty much run down a Dexterity-based character at will if the Dexterity character wears heavy armor in order to reach AC parity with the Strength character.

It is more likely than not that the Dexterity character would eschew this disadvantage for medium or light armor, which are inferior in terms of AC to the heavy armor. That's ok, there are benefits and disadvantages to both methods, with someone with high strength taking advantage of heavy armors more effectively than someone of high dexterity and vice versa.


Well, it also covers fighting someone on a rocking ship (Try that with Athletics), and we had an entire shipbound campaign, so YMMV. The real problem with comparing Acrobatics with Athletics is that Acrobatics has poorly defined mechanics as to what "Acrobatic stunts, including dives, rolls, summersaults and flips" actually means. If it allows you to do combat things that used to be covered by Tumbling (like escape AOOs, reduce fall damage, or get up faster from prone) it is better than Athletics, but thats going to be a table by table call. RAW legal, because the book says you can do acrobatic stunts, but grey as to what that does in play.

But regardless, Dex is better than Str for skill use even if Acrobatics < Athletics. Dex is used for Stealth (Awesome), Slight of Hand (situational), Vehicle Operation (Situational), Rope use (Good), Escape Artist (Good), some crafting, stringed instruments, picking locks/disabling traps (awesome).

I'd say Strength (Athletics) probably takes precedence when it comes to climbing the rigging, jumping from ship to ship, and swimming back to the ship if you get knocked overboard. Acrobatics is important too, but Athletics has a clearly defined place there.

Tumbling is a Dexterity (Acrobatics) check in DMG iirc.

But those are just the defined uses. I think if any player can make a convincing case that what they want to do is a feat of acrobatics or athleticism, then kudos to them, they should be allowed to try it. After all, 5th edition is thoughtful invention not rigidly defined activities.

I wouldn't say one is totally superior to the other, they both clearly have important effects that can not be totally simulated by the other (in the same way that all the other stats have their niches); I would say that Strength is more important to Melee Combatants and the stereotypical Knight or Fighting Man, in the same way that Dexterity is more important to the stereotypical Archer or Sneaky Thief.

It's not that one is better, it's that which one is more important depends on who your character is.


A dex-based character won't be very good at grappling others. But then, nobody's going to be very good at grappling others. Grappling just doesn't do much. If I'm a Dex-based character and someone tries to grapple me, well, first off, they only have about a 50-50 chance of success, since my Acrobatics is probably about as good as their Athletics. But if they do grapple me, I'm not going to use my actions to try to escape, because I don't care. If I want to attack that foe, I'll just keep poking them with my rapier. If I want to attack someone else, I'll just keep plinking them with my bow. I can't move, but I don't much care, because I don't need to.

Combat Statuses in 5th edition are very reliant on combos now.

Yes, Grapple alone doesn't do alot, but Grapple + Shove means your opponent suffers disadvantage on their attacks and enemies attacking them get advantage. They also can't stand up because their movement is 0, so the only way to get out of that is to use their entire action escaping it. So it costs the attacker just 1 melee attack (assuming they have extra attack) to grapple an opponent and 1 melee attack to shove them to the ground. While in this position, the attacker can also drag their opponent into something horrible, like shallow water (drowning them), or pushing them off a cliff or out a window (both possibly lethal outright).

So in those respects, Strength (Athletics) offers combat options that Dexterity (Acrobatics) does not.


Well, yes, but some classes have a choice of what their Prime Ability is. Which of the two should they choose? And, heck, for a paladin, it isn't even clear whether their prime ability is (Str/Dex) or Cha.

According to the PHB their primary ability score is Strength. Charisma is second fiddle.

[SharkForce]

Strength allows for higher AC at lower levels, and full plate allows higher AC than studded leather or half plate ever do without a feat.

The strength saving throws are more dangerous to fail than dexterity saving throws, since they generally involve things like failing to escape from a gelatinous cube or getting pinned in place by a Web, whereas dex saves are usually just save for half damage.

The strength skill, athletics, is applicable to more situations than any dexterity skill. Climbing, jumping, swimming, breaking things, pushing, and grappling are all athletics. You can't throw someone out a window or suplex them off a cliff without a good athletics score.

Strength is still capable of ranged damage. The range is shorter than dexterity, but strength characters are still capable of it. Just carry some javelins and you're fine.

Strength raises your carrying capacity.

And strength enables a much wider selection of gear and weapons than dexterity.

The only advantages dexterity has over strength are longer range and initiative. Depending on one's build, those things may not actually matter. Meanwhile, strength offers pushing, grappling, one extremely common skill (meaning you don't have to spend three skill points to get the full benefit), one detrimental to fail saving throw, increased carrying capacity, higher potential AC through heavy armor, and a larger gear selection. In addition to that, all great weapons are strength-only, and those deal higher damage.

So how do you figure that dex is superior? You don't, that's how.

as i've said elsewhere, strength is only equivalent if you are able to use heavy armour. that's great for fighters and paladins, both of whom are able to wear heavy armour. i'm not sold on heavy armour proficiency being worth a feat on its own (even with the bonus physical attribute), though i do feel that heavy armour mastery is good enough to be worth taking proficiency first.

but if you're not willing or able to use heavy armour, strength loses a lot. because the greater frequency of dex saves pretty much equals out the potentially greater nastiness of strength saves (even if we buy that a failed strength save is always worse, which is not always true, failing too many dex saves can make you just as dead as failing the wrong strength save), dex is equal on defending against maneuvers, etc.

also, the value of combat maneuvers is largely dependent on how many attacks you have (and therefore what % of your DPR you are losing to attempt the maneuver), and how many rider effects you have on your regular attacks (a fighter is missing out on an attack. a babarrian is losing out on their rage bonus to damage, and a paladin is losing out on... well, a bunch of stuff really. though i'd still go strength-focused on barbarian, mind you... it just wouldn't be because of maneuvers or grappling in the slightest).

[Easy_Lee]

Easy_Lee, if you have a Wizard or a Sorceror or a (insert any other non Strength-based class here), what are your second and third stats?

Constitution and Dexterity, for me, and for most other players (mechanically. Fluff could change your decisions, to be a charming Wizard, for instance).

If Strength is better, then a Wizard with 18 Int, 16 Str, and 10 Dex is better than a Wizard with 18 Int, 16 Dex, and 10 Str. Is that the case?

If you're ranking stats by how many classes benefit them, then the best statistics are CON > CHA > DEX > STR > WIS > INT. But who in the hell plays a character that dips in every class? Nobody.

For those classes who can use strength to its full benefit, such as barbarians, fighters, paladins, some clerics, and even some rangers, strength is very much a viable option. My point in making this thread was to show that dexterity is not just automatically better, like so many around here seem to think.

[JNAProductions]

No one (or no one I've heard) thinks Dexterity is automatically better in a Strength-using class. But there is a world of difference between "Strength is just as good or better than Dexterity for Fighters" than "Strength is just as good or better than Dexterity". You've been missing that distinction.

[xyianth]

Strength allows for higher AC at lower levels, and full plate allows higher AC than studded leather or half plate ever do without a feat.

I'm going to walk through these point by point.

The first statement is dependent on how much gp characters get for the early levels. For the sake of argument, lets compare the strength character A who has 16 str, to the dex character B who has 16 dex. For the sake of comparison, both characters have a 10 in the other stat. (so A has 16 strength and 10 dexterity; B has 16 dexterity and 10 strength) I'm going to assume both characters have 50gp for armor at level 1, 100gp for armor at level 2, 200gp for armor at level 3, and 800gp for armor at level 4. For the purposes of this example, both A and B are proficient with all armors.

At level 1: Character A uses ring mail and a shield, giving him an AC of 14+2=16; Character B uses hide armor and a shield, giving him an AC of 12+2+2=16; A and B have same AC, B spent less gp.
At levels 2&3: Character A uses chain mail and a shield, giving him an AC of 16+2=18; Character B uses scale mail and a shield, giving him an AC of 14+2+2=18; A and B have same AC, B spent less gp.
At level 4: Character A uses splint mail and a shield, giving him an AC of 17+2=19; Character B uses half-plate and a shield, giving him an AC of 15+2+2=19; A and B have same AC, A spent less gp.
When plate mail becomes an option, character A gains +1 AC over character B, in exchange for a large amount of gp.
When the two characters have between 210 and 759 gp, character A can also get +1 AC due to the cheap cost of splint mail. How long this period is will be campaign dependent.


The strength saving throws are more dangerous to fail than dexterity saving throws, since they generally involve things like failing to escape from a gelatinous cube or getting pinned in place by a Web, whereas dex saves are usually just save for half damage.

Most dex based characters have effective ranged attacks that can be made after being restrained. (the 90% effect of failing a str check) Also remember that most str checks are athletics checks, and nothing prevents a dex based character from being proficient or having expertise in athletics. Also, save for half damage isn't useless.


The strength skill, athletics, is applicable to more situations than any dexterity skill. Climbing, jumping, swimming, breaking things, pushing, and grappling are all athletics. You can't throw someone out a window or suplex them off a cliff without a good athletics score.

The roll on a d20 will have much more effect on making athletics checks than your strength score. As long as the dex character is proficient in athletics, all of these things are still doable. If expertise is factored in, the missing strength score won't even be missed.


Strength is still capable of ranged damage. The range is shorter than dexterity, but strength characters are still capable of it. Just carry some javelins and you're fine.

The range is laughable. The feat support is non-existant. No styles affect throwing weapons. You are flat kidding yourself if you think strength comes anywhere close to dexterity in the ranged department. The fact that it can be done does not make it a good idea.


Strength raises your carrying capacity.

So does a mule, a bag of holding, tenser's disk, your teammates, etc... And this is entirely dependent on if your DM even bothers with tracking this. (in my experience, this is often overlooked)


And strength enables a much wider selection of gear and weapons than dexterity.

This only matters if you are running a truly random treasure game. Most DMs tailor rewards to their players. This is made more true by the lack of a functioning magic item economy. A powerful magic item that no-one can use or sell is essentially fancy firewood.


The only advantages dexterity has over strength are longer range and initiative. Depending on one's build, those things may not actually matter. Meanwhile, strength offers pushing, grappling, one extremely common skill (meaning you don't have to spend three skill points to get the full benefit), one detrimental to fail saving throw, increased carrying capacity, higher potential AC through heavy armor, and a larger gear selection. In addition to that, all great weapons are strength-only, and those deal higher damage.

Initiative is an extremely potent advantage. D&D (every edition) has always rewarded alpha striking as the best tactic generally. Long range also contributes to alpha striking and kiting strategies. In addition, dexterity boosts stealth, sleight of hand, thieves' tools, and acrobatics checks. (If strength gets to count athletics, dexterity gets to count these) Unlike strength, dexterity has a lot of impacts outside of combat as well as being perfectly viable in combat. When over half of the benefits of strength boil down to the athletics skill, just take the athletics skill as a dex character and be done with it.


So how do you figure that dex is superior? You don't, that's how.

By looking at it objectively and not disregarding dexterity's many benefits while simultaneously elevating the niche benefits of strength to some kind of super valuable ability? Just a thought.

[Easy_Lee]

{scrubbed}

[JNAProductions]

Everything you said was wrong. You say the roll of the d20 matters more in athletics checks, then turn right around and say dexterity's initiative boost is a potent advantage. Way to defeat your own argument.

Care to explain why the rest is wrong?

[Giant2005]

There is no need for such debate...
As long as Polearm Master exists, Strength is superior.
there are basically three types of characters in the game:
1. Those that use magic as their primary means of attack.
2. Those that use Polearm Master, or at least should be using Polearm Master if they care about optimization.
3. Those that have class mechanics superior to and mutually exclusive with Polearm Master ie. Monks and Rogues.

[xyianth]

Everything you said was wrong. You say the roll of the d20 matters more in athletics checks, then turn right around and say dexterity's initiative boost is a potent advantage. Way to defeat your own argument.

Actually, you made the claim that the roll on the d20 matters more first here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=18917604&postcount=11). An important distinction is that you can usually retry athletics checks by using another attack action to grapple/shove/etc... Initiative is a one and done roll that impacts the entire encounter, and is guaranteed to happen once per encounter. You also can't gain proficiency or expertise in initiative to make up for a poor dexterity score. (and making up for it using the alert feat is basically admitting that strength focus costs you 1 ASI)


There is no need for such debate...
As long as Polearm Master exists, Strength is superior.
there are basically three types of characters in the game:
1. Those that use magic as their primary means of attack.
2. Those that use Polearm Master, or at least should be using Polearm Master if they care about optimization.
3. Those that have class mechanics superior to and mutually exclusive with Polearm Master ie. Monks and Rogues.

And 4. Archers(crossbow snipers). Though if ever there was a case for polearm master and crossbow sniper being OP, this is a pretty good way to argue it. (or maybe that martial combat is UP without them?)

[SharkForce]

And 4. Archers(crossbow snipers). Though if ever there was a case for polearm master and crossbow sniper being OP, this is a pretty good way to argue it. (or maybe that martial combat is UP without them?)

i'm inclined to say that it is the latter. with crossbow master and sharpshooter, a fighter can just barely outdamage a warlock that has invested one cantrip and one invocation, and is using one of their pact magic slots for hex (which could potentially last the entire day). an evocation wizard has something like 30-35 expected DPR as i recall, while a full champion fighter with two feats has something like 48 expected DPR with both of those feats, and that's at level 20 when the fighter finally gets attack number 4.

both of those characters will enjoy vastly more utility over the course of the day than the fighter can hope to, and will also enjoy the ability to nova in ways that the fighter cannot (not saying the fighter can't nova, mind you... i'm saying that when a wizard decides to pull out all of the stops, it's a heck of a lot more impressive than when the fighter does, unless we're talking exclusively about single-target damage).

[Chronos]

Another point about AC: What about shields? Most of the feats/styles that benefit from Str require a two-handed weapon, which means no shield. So if you're going to credit Str fighters for the extra +1 to AC they get from plate, then you should also debit them the -2 from the shield they're missing. If you're going to wield a shield, then the best damage you can get is 1d8, and there's no difference between a longsword and a rapier.

[coredump]

I am amazed you can play up the 'importance' of Swimming, and be completely dismissive of things like Stealth.


Strength allows for higher AC at lower levels, and full plate allows higher AC than studded leather or half plate ever do without a feat. 50gp gives scale and 16 AC, you will get Splint fairly soon, for a whopping 17 AC.
Plate gives you a nice 18 eventually, but with 20 dex, even Studded leather gives 17.
IOW, the difference isn't very much, and *all* heavy armor gives disadv for Dex skills, and takes much longer to Don and Doff.



The strength saving throws are more dangerous to fail than dexterity saving throws, since they generally involve things like failing to escape from a gelatinous cube or getting pinned in place by a Web, whereas dex saves are usually just save for half damage. {scrubbed}
BOTH the web spell and the Cube's Engulf allow for a Dex save to completely avoid the situation.
Or.... you can rely on Str and instead get caught first, take damage, and then lose a turn to try and use Str to get out.
So, um... how is the Str save better...???

And those are the examples *you* chose!!

Now we get into the frequency... there are a lot more dex saves in a game than Str saves. Pit traps, falling, slippery surfaces, fireballs, dragon breath, etc etc... Yeah, you might come across a Roper... but just not that often.


The strength skill, athletics, is applicable to more situations than any dexterity skill. Climbing, jumping, swimming, breaking things, pushing, and grappling are all athletics. You can't throw someone out a window or suplex them off a cliff without a good athletics score.
Yes, a Grappling build needs str... but if you are not going with that one narrow build....
Climbing? *swimming*? C'mon... how often does that come up. Oh, and the fan favorite "breaking things".
As opposed to Stealth!!?? Not to mention Acrobatics.
How often do you want to sneak up on a monster, as opposed to swimming up to a monster..??
And the Str build is not only *lousy* at stealth, they are stuck in Heavy Armor for disadvantage..... YAY!!


Strength is still capable of ranged damage. The range is shorter than dexterity, but strength characters are still capable of it. Just carry some javelins and you're fine. This just shows how weak your argument has become... you get to throw *1* javelin a turn, with the awe-inspiring 30' range. That is simply weaksauce compared to using a bow etc.


Strength raises your carrying capacity. Yeah, I guess that makes up for the loss of Initiative and stealth and everything else... Just *who* has encumbrance issues, *especially* in 5E.


The reason Str is competitive, is because of the feats. (Or if you want a grapple build)

[MeeposFire]

armor disadvantage only applies to dex (stealth) not to just any old dex check.

[Ralanr]

Another point about AC: What about shields? Most of the feats/styles that benefit from Str require a two-handed weapon, which means no shield. So if you're going to credit Str fighters for the extra +1 to AC they get from plate, then you should also debit them the -2 from the shield they're missing. If you're going to wield a shield, then the best damage you can get is 1d8, and there's no difference between a longsword and a rapier.

I know shoving is athletics based. So if you include shield master into the argument and give it to a barb, you got someone who's rolling advantage to athletics checks after every hit (with advantage if they're raging. There should be no if). That's a pretty awesome benefit to strength builds with a shield. Problem is that your attack is lower cause of the d8. But the control you get with knocking people down seems worth it.

Then you got pseudo evasion plus danger sense and suddenly you're making a bunch of bull**** excuses on how the dragons fire breath was blocked by your shield (I know I'm looking forward to using it)

[Gwendol]

I don't get this argument. Strength is important for a strength-focused build (heavy armor, pole-arm master, shield master, grappler, etc). Outside of those, most PC's will want to keep DEX higher thanks to the advantages the ability offers (ranged attacks, AC and initiative, mostly). You can't really say one is superior to the other since the choice of STR over DEX (or vice versa) is entirely depending on the build. I mean, if you can have both it's great.

[Elderand]

I don't get this argument. Strength is important for a strength-focused build (heavy armor, pole-arm master, shield master, grappler, etc). Outside of those, most PC's will want to keep DEX higher thanks to the advantages the ability offers (ranged attacks, AC and initiative, mostly). You can't really say one is superior to the other since the choice of STR over DEX (or vice versa) is entirely depending on the build. I mean, if you can have both it's great.

Hush, don't you come barging in with your common sense now :P

[Gwendol]

Hush, don't you come barging in with your common sense now :P

Yeah, yeah. Sorry for the interruption, please carry on! :smallwink:

[Mandragola]

I do think a problem with dnd has always been that some stats are "responsible" for more things than others, making them "better". Dex is responsible for too many things in my opinion, including key skills, initiative, common saves, attack and damage rolls and so on. For a rogue it's basically the only stat you need and it's a great stat to have as your primary, because it covers so much.

On the other hand intelligence is responsible for hardly anything. Int saves are rare, it only applies to "out of combat" knowledge skills, and even then it's fine if only one member of a party is good at those. It's a very safe dump stat, since it will hardly ever hurt you if your character is stupid. Charisma is similar in that someone will probably use it as their casting stat, so let them take the persuasion skill. Wisdom is the king of the mental stats as it covers important saves and probably the most important skill as wel, so it's common to see martial-type characters with 12 or 14 wisdom, but 8 int and/or cha.

Thinking about it, this is wrong. There ought to be an advantage in being clever and a penalty for being stupid. To fix that I'd suggest a house rule to use intelligence instead of dexterity for initiative rolls - representing a quick-witted character reacting more quickly than someone who was physically stronger but mentally lacking. A less harsh way to do this might be to allow players (and monsters) to use the better of int or dex.

It's worth saying that I tend to agree with Easy Lee on the main point, which as I understand it is that a strength-based character is not necessarily weaker than a dex-based one. I think a perfectly-balanced party would want to have at least one strong guy and also at least one dexterous guy, rather than doubling up on either. My main worry whenever making a dex-based fighter or equivalent would be whether I'd ever find a magical finesse weapon to use, and that's never going to be an issue for the strong guy.

One of the main points in favour of dex-based characters is being able to use bows. I actually don't think that's always very useful, because of the hassle of switching weapons and shields around. Strength-based characters are very easily able to switch to throw an axe or javelin, because they don't have to spend an action getting their shield out or putting it away. Missing your action is almost as bad as missing your whole turn. Of course, dex characters can throw daggers, so the option is available to them too, but the bow thing isn't as huge as all that.

[pasko77]

The mere fact that there is this thread means that Dex is superior :smallamused:

Only STR builds will need STR.
Only DEX builds will need DEX.
Everyone else will like to have mildly high DEX and won't care the slightest about STR.

Therefore DEX is overall more desirable.

[Chronos]

Carrying capacity is a joke. Even at the low end, an 8 Str character can carry 40 pounds, even if the optional encumbrance rules are in effect. You have to try pretty hard to come up with practical gear that weighs more than 40 pounds, and I say this as a guy who often has three-page equipment lists on my characters. And on the high end, a 20 or even 30 strength fighter still can't carry as much as the first-level wizard with Tenser's Floating Disk.

[Naanomi]

I've found STR to be like INT and CHA... It is very nice to have at least one person in the party good-if-not-excellent in it. Only one guy needs to be able to force open the gate, carry the heavy thing, swim up the raging river, escape the sticky goo... But if no one can do it you are in trouble.

I was building a lot of themed adventuring parties for an adventure and found myself having to insert some muscle on more than one occassion; probably showing that 'normal' adventuring parties will feel the lack of muscle the same way they might expect to feel the lack of brainpower for lore checks if no one rolled a wizard

[Broken Twin]

I agree with Mandragola in the idea that Dexterity is just responsible for too many things in D&D. The idea that accuracy, reaction time, fine dexterity, and flexibility are all measured by one stat to be... interesting. Intelligence and Strength both get the shaft in that they're defined in very narrow terms of what they can do, and are near useless for the vast majority of characters.

Personally, I'd balance Dex/Str by stripping Dex out of Initiative. Make it your proficiency mod. For classes that get initiative proficiency, they get their mod x2. Doesn't seem like it would mess with game balance too much.

[coredump]

I think INT is neglected because a lot of Investigation checks are made as Perception checks instead.

For Dex, I would likely change Finesse to use Dex for attk, and Str for Dmg. But then probably need/want a feat to help boost finesse damage potential.

[Easy_Lee]

I agree with Mandragola in the idea that Dexterity is just responsible for too many things in D&D. The idea that accuracy, reaction time, fine dexterity, and flexibility are all measured by one stat to be... interesting.

Except accuracy is controlled by strength for most weapons. Bows are the only weapon type that are exclusive to dexterity.

Flexibility isn't really a statistic, though you could arguably lump it in with acrobatics. That said, one needs to acquire an acrobatics skill to use it particularly well, while just about anything that can be done with the skill and more can be done with athletics.

Athletics also controls pushing, grappling, jumping, and swimming, which are some of the things strength gets in place of initiative bonus. Between that and the expanded equipment pool, anyone who can use medium armor or better has plenty of reasons to invest in strength.

I think where people are getting confused is thinking that dexterity is better just because more people can use it. That's kind of like saying charisma is better than wisdom just because more classes have charisma as their primary casting stat.

If you build a character around a stat, then that will be the best stat for you. Further, building a character around a particular stat does not make that character worse than a character built around a different stat. Strength has advantages over dexterity and vice versa; I have shown this. One is not better than the other for every character concept.

[Mandragola]

I think where people are getting confused is thinking that dexterity is better just because more people can use it. That's kind of like saying charisma is better than wisdom just because more classes have charisma as their primary casting stat.

I think I do understand that, and I agree - up to a point.

People are not saying that dex is superior to strength because more classes use it. We are saying it's superior to strength because it is used more often in the game in general - so every class wants a good dex score if they can have it, even if it's not their primary stat. The same doesn't apply to strength. Initiative is certainly one example of where dex matters but skills like stealth and reflex saves are also hugely important, and reliant on dex. Athletics is not unimportant, but it's really the main selling point of strength, as far as skills go.

So a caster like a wizard will have his main stat as int (or cha or wis or whatever). Then he will want a respectable constitution score for hp and saves, and then he'll want dex. Then maybe some wisdom for perception and saves. Strength, intelligence and charisma are far less valuable, unless they are your primary stat. I really do not think that there's a balance between the different stats. Some are more useful more often than others and that benefits the classes which have those stats - dex in particular, as their primary stat.

The good thing is that the game still feels pretty balanced. Dex-based classes don't feel like they are out and out better than strength or int-based characters. But that's due to things like having a limited selection of weapons, or that a wizard isn't really comparable to a martial character anyway.

So yeah, ultimately I do think that dex is better than strength. I just don't think that, as a result of this, a rogue is better than a paladin.

[Myzz]

So a caster like a wizard will have his main stat as int (or cha or wis or whatever). Then he will want a respectable constitution score for hp and saves, and then he'll want dex. Then maybe some wisdom for perception and saves. Strength, intelligence and charisma are far less valuable, unless they are your primary stat. I really do not think that there's a balance between the different stats. Some are more useful more often than others and that benefits the classes which have those stats - dex in particular, as their primary stat.

I'd argue that for a Wizard or Sorcerer with only d6 Hit Dice, constitution is not that great. Sure, you can quite easily double your HP's. Which means your HP total goes from being abysmal to only bad. Going before opponents in combat will be worth way more than those few measley HP's... You obviously dont want negative HP, but if your getting hit anyways, something is probably very wrong...

[HoarsHalberd]

Except accuracy is controlled by strength for most weapons. Bows are the only weapon type that are exclusive to dexterity.

Flexibility isn't really a statistic, though you could arguably lump it in with acrobatics. That said, one needs to acquire an acrobatics skill to use it particularly well, while just about anything that can be done with the skill and more can be done with athletics.

Athletics also controls pushing, grappling, jumping, and swimming, which are some of the things strength gets in place of initiative bonus. Between that and the expanded equipment pool, anyone who can use medium armor or better has plenty of reasons to invest in strength.

I think where people are getting confused is thinking that dexterity is better just because more people can use it. That's kind of like saying charisma is better than wisdom just because more classes have charisma as their primary casting stat.

If you build a character around a stat, then that will be the best stat for you. Further, building a character around a particular stat does not make that character worse than a character built around a different stat. Strength has advantages over dexterity and vice versa; I have shown this. One is not better than the other for every character concept.

{scrubbed} The equivalencies are
Heavy armour, vs dex. Heavy armour wins at the top end, with equivalent stats until characters reach plate.

Out of combat utility, climbing and jumping and swimming vs scrambling, tumbling and balancing. Equal. Pushing/breaking vs opening, disarming and escaping traps. Dex wins. Plus out of combat stealth for icing on the cake,

In combat utility, athletics vs stealth and tumbling. For most builds, dex wins. Once you factor in initiative, dex dominates.

Threat response - both can go sword and shield equally. Javelin vs shortbow is laughably in Dex's favour.

Melee damage - strength wins, 4d10+1d4 with feat vs 5d8 with feat. 24.5 vs 22.5.

Ranged damage - dex wins, massively, 4d10 or 5d6 with feat, 4d8 without. Vs an action wasted arraying javelins for next turn if you want to throw more than one, then 4d6 until you run out. Not to mention 3.3 times the effective range for the crossbow and 5 times the range for the longbow.

Now for strength based builds str will always win and for dexterity based builds dex will always win. But for the two builds that have a choice, sword and board vs dual wielding, dex is mechanically the better choice in a vacuum.

{scrubbed}

[Mandragola]

Ranged damage - dex wins, massively, 4d10 or 5d6 with feat, 4d8 without. Vs an action wasted arraying javelins for next turn if you want to throw more than one, then 4d6 until you run out. Not to mention 3.3 times the effective range for the crossbow and 5 times the range for the longbow.

This really isn't right either. There's no action required to lay out javelins - though there is if you want to get rid of a shield you've got equipped and start using a bow. The strength-based (or hand-crossbow-using) character can stow his longsword and start shooting things straight away - and keep his shield bonus to AC while doing so.

Range is an issue... when you are far away. In a dungeon the strength-based guy is actually better off as he doesn't need to swap shields around.

I remain happy that classes which use strength as their primary stat are roughly equal to ones that use dexterity as their primary stat. That's where I agree with Easy_Lee. I doubt I'd make a dex-based paladin for instance, or at least not for mechanical reasons, because I think that strength-based ones are at least as good and probably better.

Where I disagree is that, when you're not looking at a specific class, or when you're looking at a class that has neither stat as its primary, then dex is clearly a lot better than strength. It's miles better. Initiative, saves, and more skills is why you get lots of dexterous wizards, sorcerors and warlocks but not too many beefy strong ones.

[coredump]

I remain happy that classes which use strength as their primary stat are roughly equal to ones that use dexterity as their primary stat. That's where I agree with Easy_Lee. I doubt I'd make a dex-based paladin for instance, or at least not for mechanical reasons, because I think that strength-based ones are at least as good and probably better. .

Dex based Paladins are very strong, the only thing benefiting the Str Paly, are the Str based feats.

Dex covers a lot more ground than Str, there are still some builds that require Str (grappler, Barbarian) and it has better melee feats (PAM, GWM, SM), but without those feats, Str becomes a very niche stat.

[coredump]

This really isn't right either. There's no action required to lay out javelins - though there is if you want to get rid of a shield you've got equipped and start using a bow. But if you are within 30', you can just move and melee anyway. The Dex fighter is good at close range, and at long range.
And you need to draw a javelin, so that fighter 5 is only getting 1 attack with javelin, but two with a bow or sling.

[Easy_Lee]

Heavy armour, vs dex. Heavy armour wins at the top end, with equivalent stats until characters reach plate.

Out of combat utility, climbing and jumping and swimming vs scrambling, tumbling and balancing. Equal. Pushing/breaking vs opening, disarming and escaping traps. Dex wins. Plus out of combat stealth for icing on the cake,

In combat utility, athletics vs stealth and tumbling. For most builds, dex wins. Once you factor in initiative, dex dominates.

Threat response - both can go sword and shield equally.

Melee damage - strength wins, 4d10+1d4 with feat vs 5d8 with feat. 24.5 vs 22.5.

Ranged damage - dex wins, massively, 4d10 or 5d6 with feat, 4d8 without. Vs an action wasted arraying javelins for next turn if you want to throw more than one, then 4d6 until you run out. Not to mention 3.3 times the effective range for the crossbow and 5 times the range for the longbow.

You admit heavy armor wins in AC.

You're 100% wrong about dexterity having an answer to athletics, as there is NO OFFICIAL SUPPORT ANYWHERE for acrobatics assisting with jump checks, push checks, and many other things athletics can do.

Pushing / breaking things can be tried a second, third, and hundredth time. Attempting to pick a lock and failing will likely get a broken pick stuck in the lock. Attempting to pick a pocket and failing will get you arrested. Attempting to disarm a trap and failing will get you dead. This is why rogues need expertise: not only can dexterity skills individually be used in fewer endeavors, but failing them will usually get you killed. Some failed athletics checks can get you killed, such as failing a climb, but you can usually just try them again until you get it. In addition, athletics lets you break, climb, swim, and so on. Not only does dexterity not let you do any of these things, but many applications of dexterity, such as picking locks, require tools. You also have to pick up three separate dex skills in order to get a set that is in any way comparable to how useful athletics is by itself. And in addition to that, the actual usefulness of dexterity skills, particularly Stealth, is completely up to the DM. That's really not the case with athletics.

Dexterity wins for ranged damage, but not nearly by the factor you suggest. More things can be thrown as an improvised weapon using strength than can be shot out of bows, yeidling strength versatility. Arrows have to be carefully managed and only about half can be recovered, while javelins and the like are assumed to never break unless one's DM says otherwise. Range may be beneficial, but just as likely may not be if one finds oneself in a dungeon or face to face with an enemy. Notably, a Fighter carrying nothing but javelins can still use them in melee for opportunity attacks. And the range on javelins is 30ft, not 20, meaning they will be able to reach the target just fine in the vast majority of cases. Compared to a longbow, javelins do all of one damage less per attack. That's next to nothing.

And as you said, strength is better for dealing damage.

So strength is easily comparable. More classes rely on dexterity, that's true, and winning initiative can be beneficial. But dealing more damage, having a wider variety of skills (since one didn't have to invest three skills, instead picking one very versatile one and one and taking others as needed), having more gear options, and having better weapons are all very strong arguments in favor of strength.

[Mandragola]

Dex based Paladins are very strong, the only thing benefiting the Str Paly, are the Str based feats.

Dex covers a lot more ground than Str, there are still some builds that require Str (grappler, Barbarian) and it has better melee feats (PAM, GWM, SM), but without those feats, Str becomes a very niche stat.

Thing is those feats do exist, as do the weapons that exist. If you just had the stats and no equipment, feats or class features then dex would certainly be miles better. But you do have those things and it's absurd to ignore them, because that's how the game is in fact played.


But if you are within 30', you can just move and melee anyway. The Dex fighter is good at close range, and at long range.
And you need to draw a javelin, so that fighter 5 is only getting 1 attack with javelin, but two with a bow or sling.

And what if you're 60' away, or if the enemy is flying 30' above you, or you don't actually want to charge into the middle of a group of monsters? Having a ranged option is nice and javelins are, in many situations, the best option available. Historically, javelin-equipped warriors would hold a few javelins in their shield hand, where they could easily be reached and thrown.

I'm pretty sure the rules let you draw and throw two javelins. But even one is a lot better than nothing, which is what you do in the round while a dex-based guy mucks about with his shield.

Dex-based fighters are great if they have a magic rapier. They are sad when they find a magic longsword. A strength-based fighter is happy to bash people with anything he comes across.

[Chronos]

You really don't want to mention the possibility that the enemy is flying 30' above you, because once that's on the table, so is the enemy flying 31' above you. At which point the Str-based fighter is making every attack roll at disadvantage. Or, of course, the enemy flying 121' above you, at which point the Str-based fighter is completely helpless. Or we could have a monster flying a mere 15' above you, but which is immune or resistant to nonmagical weapons: You're a lot more likely to find one magical bow than you are to find a whole quiver full of magical javelins. Javelins just plain aren't very good ranged weapons.

[Easy_Lee]

You really don't want to mention the possibility that the enemy is flying 30' above you, because once that's on the table, so is the enemy flying 31' above you. At which point the Str-based fighter is making every attack roll at disadvantage. Or, of course, the enemy flying 121' above you, at which point the Str-based fighter is completely helpless. Or we could have a monster flying a mere 15' above you, but which is immune or resistant to nonmagical weapons: You're a lot more likely to find one magical bow than you are to find a whole quiver full of magical javelins. Javelins just plain aren't very good ranged weapons.

How often is something going to be flying overhead exactly within a bow's extended range but outside of javelin range? Did somebody go and piss off one of my cheesy beast masters riding a pteranodon?

Unless you're fighting a dragon who refuses to land, this probably isn't going to be a big deal. Even when it is, a spell called fly exists. Getting one strength user in range will allow him to push the flyer prone, meaning it falls to the ground. That may very well be a better tactic than trying to fight the thing in the air.

[Chronos]

How often is something going to be flying overhead exactly within a bow's extended range but outside of javelin range?
Every single time, if the "something" is an archer on a flying mount.

[Easy_Lee]

Every single time, if the "something" is an archer on a flying mount.

Didn't realize that was a common enemy who shows up in every campaign. I've never encountered one of those, except for other players.

Certain types of magical beasts, especially dragons, seem more reasonable to find in this kind of situation. That said, there are plenty of ways to get a strong character up there, and shoving a flyer prone is an extremely effective use of one's action for the round.

[coredump]

You admit heavy armor wins in AC.

You're 100% wrong about dexterity having an answer to athletics, as there is NO OFFICIAL SUPPORT ANYWHERE for acrobatics assisting with jump checks, push checks, and many other things athletics can do. Dude, a Shove check *explicitly* states you can use Acrobatics. And so do things like grappling, and often cliimbing lets you use athletics or Acrobatics.

No one is saying it is a *100%* replacement... of course there are some edge cases...
Just how often do you need to jump really far anyway? Is that a mainstay of your campaigns? Since 5E started, I have had to do a *lot* more terrain dex checks (boats, slippery surface, etc) than Str checks.



Pushing / breaking things can be tried a second, third, and hundredth time. Attempting to pick a lock and failing will likely get a broken pick stuck in the lock. Attempting to pick a pocket and failing will get you arrested. Attempting to disarm a trap and failing will get you dead. This is why rogues need expertise: not only can dexterity skills individually be used in fewer endeavors, but failing them will usually get you killed. Some failed athletics checks can get you killed, such as failing a climb, but you can usually just try them again until you get it.
To quote you:
"NO OFFICIAL SUPPORT ANYWHERE" for breaking lock picks being likely
I like how you assume every trap leads to death, but falling is no big deal... your examples are always so convenient.

But the funnies part... is you are making my case. From what you have asserted, Str checks can be repeated, usually are not time sensitive, and you can often get help (pushing etc.)
Dex checks, need to be done right the first time, quickly, and if you fail badness happens. Which means it is *more important* to have a high Dex than a high Str.
Someone can help me push a big rock, I can try climbing 3-4 times, I can take the time to make a rope ladder, etc.
Trying to sneak up on someone, I am on my own, and I need to get it right the first time.



In addition, athletics lets you break, climb, swim, and so on. Not only does dexterity not let you do any of these things, but many applications of dexterity, such as picking locks, require tools. Stealth doesn't, climbing does, sleight of hand doesn't, etc. Besides, who cares? You also need 'tools' to fight... so what?
I could benefit from stealth in about *every* session I play.... I have never needed a Jump or Swim check in 6 months, and can only remember 1 time I had to climb. (There would have been a second time, but we had time to get a rope ladder... so no check needed.)
Even without taking stealth, it sucks getting disadvantage when trying to approach quietly.



You also have to pick up three separate dex skills in order to get a set that is in any way comparable to how useful athletics is by itself. Again, open question for anyone... how often could you benefit from stealth, how often from swimming and jumping...??
How often do you need a dex check to keep from slipping/falling... how often do you need a str check?



Dexterity wins for ranged damage, but not nearly by the factor you suggest. More things can be thrown as an improvised weapon using strength than can be shot out of bows, yeidling strength versatility. Arrows have to be carefully managed and only about half can be recovered, while javelins and the like are assumed to never break unless one's DM says otherwise. ..... really.....??? You want to stick with 'improvised weapons' as your benefit...?? Stupid Legolas, using bows instead of picking up a drinking cup....



And as you said, strength is better for dealing damage. *IF* you include the feats... without the feats, Str is clearly the weaker stat.

[coredump]

Thing is those feats do exist, as do the weapons that exist. If you just had the stats and no equipment, feats or class features then dex would certainly be miles better. But you do have those things and it's absurd to ignore them, because that's how the game is in fact played. I agree, and have said as much a few times, including my first post.

Dex is a stronger characteristic than Str.... the feats help boost Str builds to make them worthwhile. Some folks can't even agree with that....




And what if you're 60' away, or if the enemy is flying 30' above you, or you don't actually want to charge into the middle of a group of monsters? Having a ranged option is nice and javelins are, in many situations, the best option available. Of course, my paladin has some javelins for just such an occassion. But those are some pretty uncommon situations, and for most of them, I would prefer a bow.
60' away, I can use the bow, and either back up, or start to switch to melee while *they* close the gap.
30' above, they are likely flying, so may easily get farther than 30', but in either case, the bow will likely be a better choice.
Don't want to charge... bow lets me keep my distance, with javelin I *have* to get close enough for them to charge.
If Bows went off Str instead of Dex, I would gladly drop the javelins for a bow.


I'm pretty sure the rules let you draw and throw two javelins. But even one is a lot better than nothing, which is what you do in the round while a dex-based guy mucks about with his shield. Nope, just one. But bow would let you keep your distance, and only switch over when you need to. I am sure there will be an encounter at some point where the javelin will be more convenient, but that would be the exception, not the rule.

[coredump]

How often is something going to be flying overhead exactly within a bow's extended range but outside of javelin range? Did somebody go and piss off one of my cheesy beast masters riding a pteranodon? Dude, way to cherry pick...
How often, sometimes, not a lot maybe.
How often will the be between 30' and 150'?? Probably quite a lot.
How often will it be better to get 2 arrow shots or 1 javelin throw? Pretty much every time.
But hey, you could also throw a drinking mug....


Unless you're fighting a dragon who refuses to land, this probably isn't going to be a big deal. Even when it is, a spell called fly exists. Getting one strength user in range will allow him to push the flyer prone, meaning it falls to the ground. That may very well be a better tactic than trying to fight the thing in the air.
1) Now you are bringing other PCs and spells into it... likely because your case is weak.
2) Unless its a Wyrmling, you won't even catch it.
3) Unless it is Young, you *can't* push it.
4) You brilliant plan is to go one on one with a dragon, and try and outmuscle it....okay...
5) Wait... you found a DM that will let you fly 200' into the air, *push* a dragon, and have it end up on the ground...?? You are playing a very different game than I am...


I find it remarkable that you are able to continue to assert that Javelins are just as good as a bow....

[coredump]

Didn't realize that was a common enemy who shows up in every campaign. I've never encountered one of those, except for other players.
.
Says the man that keeps bringing up Swimming and Jumping as important abiitities...

[Easy_Lee]

Dude, a Shove check *explicitly* states you can use Acrobatics. And so do things like grappling, and often cliimbing lets you use athletics or Acrobatics.

Grappling and shoving let you resist with acrobatics, but you use athletics to attempt the maneuver. I suggest you reread the free pdf or PHB. Pushing and Grappling aren't effective options for a character with no athletic ability or strength.


No one is saying it is a *100%* replacement... of course there are some edge cases...
Just how often do you need to jump really far anyway? Is that a mainstay of your campaigns? Since 5E started, I have had to do a *lot* more terrain dex checks (boats, slippery surface, etc) than Str checks.

Everything depends on the campaign, but the vast majority of acrobatics checks can be construed as an athletics check. In comparison, dexterity has no answer to climbing, swimming, jumping, breaking things, pushing, or Grappling.


To quote you:
"NO OFFICIAL SUPPORT ANYWHERE" for breaking lock picks being likely
I like how you assume every trap leads to death, but falling is no big deal... your examples are always so convenient.
Ask your DM what he thinks happens when you fail to open a lock.

I'm showing that there are at least as many instances where strength can save one's ass as dexterity. My vote argument is that strength is just as good, not inferior and not superior.


But the funnies part... is you are making my case. From what you have asserted, Str checks can be repeated, usually are not time sensitive, and you can often get help (pushing etc.)
Dex checks, need to be done right the first time, quickly, and if you fail badness happens. Which means it is *more important* to have a high Dex than a high Str.
Someone can help me push a big rock, I can try climbing 3-4 times, I can take the time to make a rope ladder, etc.
Trying to sneak up on someone, I am on my own, and I need to get it right the first time.


Sneaking is DM-dependent, and only sometimes is it needed. A strength character is good at those things that he can afford to fail once or twice. A dexterity character sucks at the above, and will often get himself in major trouble for failing checks related to dexterity.

A strength character wouldn't have bothered trying to sneak, pick pocket, or whatever, and would have instead found another, possibly better option. You could say that a dexterity character might find their way around strength checks too, but then we'll be right back to it being a trade-off.

In addition, one can invest fully in strength for the cost one one skill/expertise, as opposed to three required for full investment in dexterity. Athletics is a more efficient choice of a skill than anything in dexterity, because it applies to more situations (both RAW and theoretical).


Stealth doesn't, climbing does, sleight of hand doesn't, etc. Besides, who cares? You also need 'tools' to fight... so what?
I could benefit from stealth in about *every* session I play.... I have never needed a Jump or Swim check in 6 months, and can only remember 1 time I had to climb. (There would have been a second time, but we had time to get a rope ladder... so no check needed.)
That says a lot more about your DM and playstyle than the game. I use athletics type checks all the time when I play.


Again, open question for anyone... how often could you benefit from stealth, how often from swimming and jumping...??
How often do you need a dex check to keep from slipping/falling... how often do you need a str check?
It depends on the game, but the better question is: of often could one use strength / athletics to do something beneficial? The answer is frequently.


..... really.....??? You want to stick with 'improvised weapons' as your benefit...?? Stupid Legolas, using bows instead of picking up a drinking cup....

I said it was a benefit, not the only benefit. As anyone who's ever thrown a table, a sword of evil's bane, or an unruly goblin can tell you, improvised strength throws can be quite useful in the right circumstances. They're not the only thing one can do with strength, but they are an option.


*IF* you include the feats... without the feats, Str is clearly the weaker stat.
See above. Strength is only weak on those classes who absolutely need dexterity in order for their AC or class abilities to not suck. In other words, dexterity is more important for rogues, monks, and some casters. For everyone else, strength is very much a viable and competitive choice, able to do many things that dexterity can't (and vice versa). It's not something you want your whole party to dump.

[Myzz]

... strength is very much a viable and competitive choice, able to do many things that dexterity can't (and vice versa). It's not something you want your whole party to dump.

This I agree with whole heartedly...


Though, in a vacuum... Dex is typically superior to stealth. BUT you want to have one character in the party with decent strength, even if its the token muscle-head!

In a Feat-less game strength on a melee build is not even that far superior (except on a Barbarian in Rage)... for damage purposes both str and dex builds are within allowable tolerances. Going first, stealth, and higher AC on armors NOT plate typically make Dex the far superior choice, for combat purposes even acknowledging pushing, shoving and the like...

With Feats in the game (realize some peeps don't use em in their games) in Melee builds Str is the optimal choice for Dpr, and most melee builds would prefer str based, even with a rogue a str based rogue utilizing finesse wpns isnt terrible (if in Medium Armor), especially if its a Rogue/Barbarian or Rogue/Paladin.

And while a Dex based Paladin is not terrible, and does benefit from a dex build, I'd think the tradeoffs (since STR has to be at 13 if dual classing at all) would not be worth it. In cases where str and dex both are about 14... a Str based build is definatly viable on every melee class... although maybe not optimal.

PS. My str based melee classes typically have ~6 throwing axes or hammers and maybe a spear/javelin on their person somewhere... but that only really amounts to 'better than nothing'!

[xyianth]

...
Ask your DM what he thinks happens when you fail to open a lock.


Your other arguments aside, I have no idea why you think failing to open a lock results in a broken pick. Have you ever picked a lock in reality? I have, thousands of them. In all that time, I have broken a pick exactly once. I have cut my hands a few times, damaged the lock a few times, and taken hundreds of attempts against a single lock on occasion. Broken picks are generally the result of a critical failure combined with years of general wear and tear. They are absolutely not a common result of failing an attempt. The most common result of failure is mild frustration at having to try again.

If I wanted to simulate lock picking in reality, here is how I would handle it:

If you meet or beat the DC on the lock: it unlocks successfully.
If you fail by <5: it remains locked, but no other effect happens.
If you fail by 5-9: it remains locked and produces a clicking sound that can be heard with a DC 1 perception check (+1 DC per 1' of distance)
If you fail by 10+: it remains locked, produces the clicking sound described above, and deals 1 damage to the lock picker.
If you roll a natural 1: in addition to any effects above, you have disadvantage on all future attempts to pick this lock.

Breaking a pick is a rare enough occurrence that it doesn't need to be a result of a failed pick attempt. Most lock pick sets have lots of different picks, and in a pinch you can often use more than one type to pick the same lock. It shouldn't be a problem to simply assume that a lock picker would just replace the broken pick at his/her next opportunity. (if you must associate this with a cost, have thieves' tools carry a 1gp maintenance cost/unit time you feel appropriate.)

[Easy_Lee]

Your other arguments aside, I have no idea why you think failing to open a lock results in a broken pick. Have you ever picked a lock in reality? I have, thousands of them. In all that time, I have broken a pick exactly once.

The pick doesn't have to be what breaks. It's basic mechanics: if the lock pick is made of a sturdier material than the lock, then it can foul up the lock and make it difficult (or impossible) to open even with the key. If the lock is sufficiently heavy, and made out of a sturdier material than the pick, it can easily break the pick on a failed attempt. Bear in mind that we're not dealing with the kind of locks we have in modern day, but actual dungeon-tier locks from multiple cultures and even non-human races. Some of them are extremely heavy. Some are rusted. Some may very well be designed to lock up if someone attempts to pick them.

And none of that even matters, because one's DM might just say, "I break picks all the time in Skyrim, so a failed attempt means the pick breaks and nobody can open the lock." We aren't dealing with real life, here, we're dealing with people.

[Chronos]

And one's DM could also say "any time you roll a 1 on any skill check, you accidentally summon Orcus". There's no point judging the game by what random DMs might say; we just judge the rules on their own merits. And the rules don't say anything about breaking tools.

[Easy_Lee]

And one's DM could also say "any time you roll a 1 on any skill check, you accidentally summon Orcus". There's no point judging the game by what random DMs might say; we just judge the rules on their own merits. And the rules don't say anything about breaking tools.

I've seen this argument before; you're not innovating by posting it. The problem with that argument is that it ignores the way the game is actually played. For example, even though feats are technically optional, they are very much the default assumption because nearly every table allows them. Similarly, I very much suspect that most DMs are going to impose a penalty for failing attempt to pick a lock.

[JNAProductions]

I don't allow most feats. Magic Initiate, Durable, and that's about it. I also don't allow multiclassing without a seriously good reason. (Paladin who goes Cleric to help heal people better? Allowed. Fighter multiclassing into Rogue for expertise in Athletics? No.)

So what's that about default assumption?

[Easy_Lee]

{scrubbed}

[JNAProductions]

{scrubbed}

[Easy_Lee]

{scrubbed}

[JNAProductions]

{scrubbed}

And I seem to recall fwiff also runs a featless game. I don't pretend to know exact numbers, but there's at least a sizable minnority who run without the optional rules.

[BootStrapTommy]

I do think a problem with dnd has always been that some stats are "responsible" for more things than others, making them "better". Dex is responsible for too many things in my opinion, including key skills, initiative, common saves, attack and damage rolls and so on. For a rogue it's basically the only stat you need and it's a great stat to have as your primary, because it covers so much.

On the other hand intelligence is responsible for hardly anything. Int saves are rare, it only applies to "out of combat" knowledge skills, and even then it's fine if only one member of a party is good at those. It's a very safe dump stat, since it will hardly ever hurt you if your character is stupid. Charisma is similar in that someone will probably use it as their casting stat, so let them take the persuasion skill. Wisdom is the king of the mental stats as it covers important saves and probably the most important skill as wel, so it's common to see martial-type characters with 12 or 14 wisdom, but 8 int and/or cha.

Thinking about it, this is wrong. There ought to be an advantage in being clever and a penalty for being stupid. To fix that I'd suggest a house rule to use intelligence instead of dexterity for initiative rolls - representing a quick-witted character reacting more quickly than someone who was physically stronger but mentally lacking. A less harsh way to do this might be to allow players (and monsters) to use the better of int or dex. I love this. But every time I propose disadvantage for stupidity, people tell me I'm a ****.

I think the problem is that they removed Int's effect on skills, which used to be the ability's strongest benefit. After all, smarter people being able to develop more skills, or better skills, made sense.

As for Dex, I think it has a more broad application, meaning it is more likely to be useful to any class, save the Barbarian. Of course, any party which neglects Str is likely going to pay for that decision a few times before the spellcaster develop solutions.

[Easy_Lee]

Then by all means, repeat your old arguement about Strength and Dexterity. You've only posted it a half-dozen times now and ignored the flaws in it at least that many times.

Anyone who argues against "my old argument" is arguing that dexterity is better than strength in all cases and that nobody should ever play a strength-focused character. Anyone who believes that is wrong. My argument was never that strength is better than dexterity, merely that strength is not inferior. In order for something to be inferior, it has to be worse in every way, always a poor choice. This is not even close to the truth regarding strength vs dexterity.

The only thing one needs to be able to say about strength, in order for it to not be inferior to dexterity, is that there are many things strength can do better than dexterity. This is demonstrably true. DPR is one of those things.

If one wanted to make the argument even stronger, one would point out things strength can do which dexterity can't do at all. Once again, this is demonstrably true. Jumping, grappling, pushing, breaking things, and swimming are just a few of those things. All five of those are on the same skill too, meaning that one strength skill is extremely versatile.

If one wanted to make the argument even stronger, one would point out things that strength has an answer to many of dexterity's advantages. Demonstrably true again. One trying to pick a lock with dexterity can break it open with strength. One trying to make an acrobatics check can frequently, if not almost always, find a way to use athletics instead.

So what ground do you, or any of these other people arguing that strength is inferior and irrelevant, have to stand on? There is no ground left. The barbarian just tore up your ground with his massive strength score and now you're free-falling.

If you want to argue that dexterity is better because more classes can make use of it, then constitution and charisma are the superior statistics and everyone should play a sorcerer. If you want to argue that dexterity is better because it can use more skill checks, then wisdom and charisma are the best scores. But wisdom and charisma don't do physical damage, so presumably one is picking between strength and dexterity only for the sake of combat. Strength beats dexterity when it comes to combat; strength has more options in combat and higher damage.

If one picks dexterity, one picks it to have a light or un-armored AC, to use ranged damage, to be sneaky, or to go first in combat. One picks strength if one wants to do heavy damage, wear heavy armor, be able to push and grapple foes, or have an extremely versatile skill in athletics (thus opening up more secondary skill slots). That's just D&D is. One stat is not better than the other.

[JNAProductions]

{scrubbed}

[Easy_Lee]

{scrubbed}

[Haruki-kun]

The Winged Mod: Thread closed for review.

EDIT: This thread has now gotten to a point where I don't see it recovering. Thread locked permanently.