Easy_Lee
2018-01-11, 03:33 PM
In the "Dex usable with medium weapons" thread, people were debating the effects of effectively making all weapons finesse. The general feeling was that this would hurt Strength-based fighters. Cynthaer further had this to say about it:
You can homebrew whatever you like, but you're going to end up running afoul of 5e's design sensibilities.
Basically, when assigning the finesse attribute, 5e doesn't look at real-world weapons and try to figure out which ones actually require "dexterity" to wield them in combat (hint: it's all of them), or which ones can be effectively used without much physical strength (hint: it's almost none of them).
Instead, it assigns the finesse property to weapons that are thematically or archetypally used by characters in media who are dextrous rather than strong. In other words, D&D rapiers don't have "finesse" because real-world rapiers are so light you don't need much strength to wield them (they're not (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efZLw-tlIOs)). They have finesse because Zorro is quick and flashy.
...
your approach is all wrong, if you're interested in merging your idea seamlessly with the rest of how 5e does things.
I like Cynthaer, but disagree with this comment. The point of this thread is to show why Switch-hitter weapons (allowing weapons to use either strength or dexterity, user's choice) would actually help strength fighters and fit 5e's design philosophy.
On the armor table there are no strength or dexterity "requirements" listed. Rather characters may add all or some of their dexterity modifier to AC while wearing light or medium armor, and will take a 10' movement penalty to their movement speed if they wear heavy armor and have less than a specified amount of strength (up to 15) or are not a dwarf. Being proficient gives you the full AC of that armor regardless of your attributes. You can sometimes push your AC higher with dexterity, but that's separate from the armor.
Thus armor effectiveness is based more on proficiency than on attributes. Characters with heavy armor proficiency can have minimum scores in all attributes and still get the maximum AC out of heavy armor.
For spells, notice that different classes use different attributes to cast many of the same spells. Bards, sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards share many of the same spells in spite of the last using a different attribute. Clerics and Paladins have similar overlap. Thus different classes accomplish the same thing in different ways.
Some spells don't make spell attacks or have save DCs either, having the same effect regardless of attributes. For those spells with DCs, your proficiency bonus is usually equal to or greater than your casting attribute thus having a slightly higher impact on your effectiveness. For spells that do damage, the attribute usually can only be added to damage once if at all. Proficiency similarly has an equal or larger impact than your attribute on chance to hit. Thus we can say that spellcasting is based more on being proficient with (knowing) specific spells than having high attributes.
Weapons follow neither example. You need proficiency to use a weapon well but that weapon's effectiveness is more based on which attribute the weapon itself requires, not which attribute the character has. For most weapons (D8 or below), the attribute can have an even bigger impact on damage than the weapon's damage die itself. For the hardest hitting weapons, it still works out that your attribute is more important than proficiency since the attribute applies to both damage and accuracy while proficiency applies only to accuracy. Thus even a character who is proficient with all weapons should only ever use ones that line up with his attribute - strength or dexterity.
This affects strength and dexterity characters as follows:
Dexterity characters have fewer weapon choices in melee and, as a result, do a little less melee damage (up to 2.5 less per attack) than strength characters assuming equivalent proficiency.
Strength characters have inferior damage and significantly inferior range and total number of attacks when attacking at range compared to dexterity characters. Characters can only draw one weapon per round and thrown weapons do not count as ammunition for the purpose of being drawn, meaning only one attack is possible unless the character has Dual Wielder.
Thus strength characters are more penalized in ranged combat than dexterity characters are in melee by the current system.
In conclusion, allowing all weapons to be used with strength or dexterity would help strength characters more. In ranged combat, they would gain damage, range, and would be able to make more attacks. Dexterity characters in melee would have more weapon options if proficient, but would only gain up to 2.5 damage per attack. This would also better fit 5e's design philosophies, as shown above. Proficiency with weapons would outweigh having the right attribute, opening up a wider variety of builds.
As many have pointed out, all weapons benefit from both strength and dexterity (accuracy) in the real world, but that isn't the point of this thread.
You can homebrew whatever you like, but you're going to end up running afoul of 5e's design sensibilities.
Basically, when assigning the finesse attribute, 5e doesn't look at real-world weapons and try to figure out which ones actually require "dexterity" to wield them in combat (hint: it's all of them), or which ones can be effectively used without much physical strength (hint: it's almost none of them).
Instead, it assigns the finesse property to weapons that are thematically or archetypally used by characters in media who are dextrous rather than strong. In other words, D&D rapiers don't have "finesse" because real-world rapiers are so light you don't need much strength to wield them (they're not (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efZLw-tlIOs)). They have finesse because Zorro is quick and flashy.
...
your approach is all wrong, if you're interested in merging your idea seamlessly with the rest of how 5e does things.
I like Cynthaer, but disagree with this comment. The point of this thread is to show why Switch-hitter weapons (allowing weapons to use either strength or dexterity, user's choice) would actually help strength fighters and fit 5e's design philosophy.
On the armor table there are no strength or dexterity "requirements" listed. Rather characters may add all or some of their dexterity modifier to AC while wearing light or medium armor, and will take a 10' movement penalty to their movement speed if they wear heavy armor and have less than a specified amount of strength (up to 15) or are not a dwarf. Being proficient gives you the full AC of that armor regardless of your attributes. You can sometimes push your AC higher with dexterity, but that's separate from the armor.
Thus armor effectiveness is based more on proficiency than on attributes. Characters with heavy armor proficiency can have minimum scores in all attributes and still get the maximum AC out of heavy armor.
For spells, notice that different classes use different attributes to cast many of the same spells. Bards, sorcerers, warlocks, and wizards share many of the same spells in spite of the last using a different attribute. Clerics and Paladins have similar overlap. Thus different classes accomplish the same thing in different ways.
Some spells don't make spell attacks or have save DCs either, having the same effect regardless of attributes. For those spells with DCs, your proficiency bonus is usually equal to or greater than your casting attribute thus having a slightly higher impact on your effectiveness. For spells that do damage, the attribute usually can only be added to damage once if at all. Proficiency similarly has an equal or larger impact than your attribute on chance to hit. Thus we can say that spellcasting is based more on being proficient with (knowing) specific spells than having high attributes.
Weapons follow neither example. You need proficiency to use a weapon well but that weapon's effectiveness is more based on which attribute the weapon itself requires, not which attribute the character has. For most weapons (D8 or below), the attribute can have an even bigger impact on damage than the weapon's damage die itself. For the hardest hitting weapons, it still works out that your attribute is more important than proficiency since the attribute applies to both damage and accuracy while proficiency applies only to accuracy. Thus even a character who is proficient with all weapons should only ever use ones that line up with his attribute - strength or dexterity.
This affects strength and dexterity characters as follows:
Dexterity characters have fewer weapon choices in melee and, as a result, do a little less melee damage (up to 2.5 less per attack) than strength characters assuming equivalent proficiency.
Strength characters have inferior damage and significantly inferior range and total number of attacks when attacking at range compared to dexterity characters. Characters can only draw one weapon per round and thrown weapons do not count as ammunition for the purpose of being drawn, meaning only one attack is possible unless the character has Dual Wielder.
Thus strength characters are more penalized in ranged combat than dexterity characters are in melee by the current system.
In conclusion, allowing all weapons to be used with strength or dexterity would help strength characters more. In ranged combat, they would gain damage, range, and would be able to make more attacks. Dexterity characters in melee would have more weapon options if proficient, but would only gain up to 2.5 damage per attack. This would also better fit 5e's design philosophies, as shown above. Proficiency with weapons would outweigh having the right attribute, opening up a wider variety of builds.
As many have pointed out, all weapons benefit from both strength and dexterity (accuracy) in the real world, but that isn't the point of this thread.