>>43465067 Dex is often applied to dumb shit, especially situations where the skill should matter more than your dex score, or where it shouldn't be dex at all, but strength and so on. But at the end of the day the crossbow's damage is most likely modeled in a totally shit way, just like the armour or injury mechanic in a lot of rpgs anyway, so does it really matter in the grand scheme of crap?
Deal with it, or play a better game. There's so much shit that's higher on the list than dex bonuses to crossbows.
>>43465187 Accuracy should be represented by the weapon skill itself, not some arbitrary physical gimmick score that was invented to keep the rogues and warriors weapons separate.
Agility could reasonably be used to represent basic hand eye coordination and be good when you're learning finicky stuff, but at the end of the day it's not going to help you compensate for windage and range or know how far to lead against a moving target, that's what the weapon skill score represents.
Getting an agi bonus on anything more complex than skipping stones or throwing a rolled up bunch of paper into the basket kind of fucks with what the skill itself is meant to represent.
You can be a fat fuck that can't stand on one leg and hasn't seen his dick in a decade and still be a fucking terror with a crossbow, just like you might be a master locksmith and shit at dancing.
Agility is often slapped onto skills that are mostly about practice and experience.
>>43465299 That fat fuck will never be as good as an equally skilled person with higher dexterity. You seem to be assuming that dexterity is the only factor whatsoever, which if we're talking about D&D is objectively false. Skill is factored in seperately, via proficiency/BAB/etc.
"Dexterity encompasses a number of physical attributes, including hand-eye coordination, agility, reflexes, precision, balance, and speed of movement".
AKA Dex = Accuracy and Agility.
The reason why the Dex bonus is applied to ranged weapons is because a bow/crossbow uses small pin-point surface areas to do damage. If you aim at a better spot, then you'll do more damage, so this is represented abstractly through a damage bonus.
Weapon Skill = Base Attack/Proficiency Bonus. A person who knows how to aim well (Their dex modifier is high) will be able to aim well with any weapon they are proficient in. If I get good at a long bow, and then pick up a cross bow, after a few shots, my skill and practice with the long bow will carry over and let me fire just as well.
Personally what's being represented would probably be better suited as an increase in the crit range - so instead of critting just on a nat 20, have it be a crit range of 20 to [20-DEX Attribute Bonus]... assuming a 2e style of system where a DEX of 18 gives an attribute bonus of around 3-4 iirc desu senpai.
Note: I am talking about things like Crossbows or guns, where STR doesn't matter a damn for damage or to-hit.
You should add your level (or half your level or 1/3 idk, depends on balance) to your damage. Especially in a game with huge hp scaling like DnD. More experienced fighters will find weak points and quickly dispatch enemies, isn't that right?
>>43465413 >If I get good at a long bow, and then pick up a cross bow, after a few shots, my skill and practice with the long bow will carry over and let me fire just as well.
I don't have enough crayons or patience to illustrate how retarded that statement is in a way that you'd understand, but hey, why would I be here if I didn't like exercises in futility?
The flaw in your argument is that the damage bonus is a shit way to model better accuracy. Say that you aim like a god and hit a dude in the eye? Great, he's fucked.
But how does that work with a total novice picking up that crossbow and getting lucky and hitting someone in the same place? He didn't get a damage bonus, right? So does the arrow somehow know the person firing it is really agile? Complete retardation.
I can totally see agility as a bonus to learning skills that require hand-eye coordination or good muscle memory.
I can see it as a bonus on simple tasks that require the same.
But applying it as a flat damage bonus to complex skills that rely on experience and practice is never going to be anything but stupid. It's not like strength where being stronger literally means you can hit the guy harder. That crossbow bolt is NOT going to magically be more dangerous than another crossbow bolt. It might be more likely to hit, or the person firing it might be better at keeping his hands steady during stressful conditions, or any number of things, but just saying that his crossbow bolts magically hurt more is a completely shitty abstraction.
>>43465471 That's what finesse weapons are for. However, for normal, STR based weapons, it's about how hard you can hit and penetrate their armor, or knock away their sword for a chance at their weak spot.
>>43465698 Except being stronger directly translates into hitting harder, while anyone with half a brain understands that someone's crossbow bolt doesn't magically hold more destructive force because the guy who pulled the trigger is like, SO limber.
>>43465687 >The flaw in your argument is that the damage bonus is a shit way to model better accuracy I'm going to go ahead and stop you right there, cause you're about to make a fool out of yourself.
The damage you do is the model of how well you aim at their weakspots. The To-Hit roll is whether or not you got past their armor to do a meaningful strike on your opponent, and the damage indicates what and how you hit them.
I fire a bow, I managed to beat their AC. That means I got past their armor, but where exactly did I get past their armor at? I roll the damage dice. I get a 1? That means I probably nicked them. I rolled a 4? That means I probably hit a non-vital spot like an arm or maybe a leg. I rolled max? Well shit, I probably hit them somewhere that they're going to be sore on for awhile, like the torso or neck.
The Dex bonus indicates that I am more accurate than an average person, and adjusts my rolls accordingly. I rolled a 1, but I have a +3 to dex? Great, that means that while a normal person would have barely nicked them, I was able to shoot them in the arm. Etc
You're still retarded, FYI. But please don't make me have to go through the boring motion of explaining the abstraction of HPs to you. That subject has been written upon endlessly, and frankly you bore me.
>>43465067 >>43465757 >Exchange some swings with the rest of the nobles in the battlefield >Nothing serious just chilling with the other side >Kidnap a dude, be kidnapped, you know, the usual thing >These fucking filthy peasants fire bolts at you and fucking spill your noble blood >They even kill nobles I swear to God, if the pope doesn't do something I'm going to get mad
>>43465735 You're aiming at a spot that is in general hard to hit, not just because it's more heavily armored as a general basis, but also because they're more likely to be guarding that area, which is why the damage scales up so high.
>>43465899 Finesse is a 5e thing. It means that the weapon is balanced for precise attacks instead of strength based attacks and you can choose to add your Dex mod instead of your Str mod. Short Swords, Daggers, and Rapiers are the more common of the finesse weapons
>>43466323 Not really. Melee weapons are designed to do most of the work by themselves and the speed of a swing affects how hard a blow hits a lot more than mass raw power. This is why most melee weapons are surprisingly light, even when they are axes, hammers or picks.
>>43465067 >game mechanics don't represent well reality Srly? first time I notice, fuck, and here I was thinking each 6 seconds of my life were determined by one standard action, one movement action, infinite free actions, one immediate action and swift action...shit, I see the whole world with other, non darkvisiony, eyes.
>>43465385 BAB is illogical anyway, since it applies to all weapons. Sure, there are non-proficiency penalties, but going by the rules even a mid-level swordsman can use a bow better than the average (i.e. low level) archer, even if he's never used one before in his life. If BAB really represents combat skill, why would experience using a sword make you a better archer? If you're not proficient with bows, you'll be worse with them than with a sword obviously, but your bow skill will still improve as you get better with a sword.
>>43466478 That's bullshit. Not sure what else is there to say. Did you ever throw a punch? Get punched? Been touched by a human being at all? It why there are weight classes in boxing and other martial arts. By you logic all hands would inflict the same damage not matter who they are attached to it. Which is hilariously absurd thb.
>>43465801 Presumably the idea is that they are able to shoot at vulnerable spots because they have better aim.
At the end of the day these mechanics are supposed to balance characters against one another. Don't think it's that hard to understand. If it really bothers you that much the obvious solution would be to houserule or play a different game. You fellow player might not be willing to along with that though, because - as I said - you are fucking with something that is supposed to balance characters against each other.
>>43465539 I think that sort of thing has been accounted for already, at least in theory (not sure to what extent it actually works). Basically, attack bonus scales faster than AC (since once you are rich enough to get heavy armor, any more AC increases are hard to come by) so although you don't do more damage at high levels you do hit more often.
>>43465806 Even if you interpret BAB as "ability to find and exploit weak spots", it doesn't make sense when attacking high-AC, unarmored targets. Like lets say a non-heroic bow hunter (level 1 or 2) and a 7th-level sword champion with no bow experience are both trying to shoot some kind of mundane wild animal with a bow. Assuming both have roughly equivalent DEX scores, the sword champion would still have a higher chance of hitting the target, despite having no former experience with a bow? How would his experience with melee weapons make him such a good archer?
Also, if BAB really was about finding weak spots in armor, it would only cancel out armor protection, and provide no benefit beyond that (i.e., if you have BAB 10 and the other guy has armor with a +7 bonus, you'd only get to apply 7 points of BAB and the rest would be wasted).
>>43468795 You're right; being able to benefit from your physical precision and agility when trying to hit an enemy with an attack using a weapon particularly suited for that IS INDEED an exclusive specialization option only available to certain experts with a significant amount of experience, and at the cost of being unable to do something else very important, in 3.5e.
You're right that it was in the game, as an exclusive feature, at a significant cost.
>>43468795 >allowing a certain category of weapons to get Dex to hit instead of Str To hit but not to damage, which was bullshit. It wasn't until fucking Tome of Battle that you had a feat which allowed you to add your dex to melee damage. What's the use of moving your main attack stat from str to dex if damage doesn't move with it?
>>43469312 Not really. Using weapons just adds a tiny bit of extra weight and maybe a cutting edge. The main difference is that you may have more/less leverage depending on what you do with your weapon, i.e. being able to make better use of your strength.
And you know, strictly speaking, if you are a trained martial artists are legally considered lethal weapons, so any line of argument along the line of 'you're not dangerous if unarmed' is moot anyway. All you need is a pinky finger to poke someone's eye out. You can easily break somebody's neck or crush their larynx with your bare hands, doesn't even require much strength.
These kind of threads pop up periodically and usually I ignore them, but sometimes the opinions of armchair general are so far removed from reality that I just can help myself.
>>43469054 I agree, but in theory the idea was that strength gave you +hit and +dmg while dexterity gave you +hit and +AC (and more skills). At low levels (the only levels were they did any play testing apparently) high dex was a major advantage so it seemed more fair.
>>43468792 >>Durrr maybe you fucking missed what that guy said about abstract HP. HP and AC and all that jazz are abstract, that means they work in whatever way makes the most sense. they are not a model of how shit works in the real world, they are a fucking convenience for a game.
I feel like there shouldn't be a stat that increases damage on ranged weapons at all. The accuracy would probably have dex added, maybe low strength would make it harder to hit but as far as damage goes having more accurate aim would only give you a higher chance at a critical hit at best, not more damage per shot.
>>43473619 If abstraction is that great, why not eliminate all mechanics other than level and say whoever has the highest level always wins? Or just flip a coin to determine if you defeat the BBEG? Just because the rules inevitably involve abstractions doesn't mean we shouldn't try to limit them to just abstractions that make logical sense.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from them. If you need IP information for a Poster - you need to contact them. This website shows only archived content.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content you can contact me at email@example.com with that post and thread number and it will be removed as soon as possible.