Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Do most RPGs get the combat effects of STR & DEX wrong?

Stoned Ape

Savant
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
586
Location
The belly of the whale
After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.
 

HeatEXTEND

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Feb 12, 2017
Messages
3,928
Location
Nedderlent
Not saying you're wrong but

intro-to-barbarian.jpg

a80115478ad1f024f11e348618d1f489--thief-fantasy-fantasy-art.jpg


Videogames baby
 

Stoned Ape

Savant
Joined
Jan 9, 2018
Messages
586
Location
The belly of the whale
Yeah, I get that but not all games have to be the same just because convention pushes them that way.

I'd love to find an RPG that tried to simulate combat in a fashion that followed on from what has been learned about medieval martial arts. I think there would definitely be a place for it.

Things like attacks having to not only strike at your opponent but also defend, that gaining and seizing the initiative in a fight being important.

I'd quite like (for example) there to be a footwork skill that would boost both your ability to fight effectively, and for height and weight to actually matter (I realize that the latter set works in Dragon's Dogma but I found that game so tedious in other respects I couldn't get on with it at all).

As an example, this video shows three instructors each sparring against two advanced students. Especially watch out for the third instructor's technique and how differently he approaches the fight. Despite being the shortest and heaviest of the three, his footwork, aggressiveness and balance mean that he performs far better than the other two.

 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.

After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.
Yes and no. Brute strength is mostly associated with the ability to lift heavy weights, but that is not necessary so. Strength is the result of intra and intermuscular coordination (results in pulling abiltiy of x kg per cm^2) and muscle diameter in cm^2 (which is related to the muscle type and amount of fibres).
With his strength the power lifter is lifting relative slowly heavy weights, while the fighter accelerates his fists or feet or a sword to a certain fast speed to deliver a momentum ( p = m * v ) in a strike to the opponent. Both events result in an Work (W = F * s ( Unit Nm ) ) with a Force (F = kg * m / s^-2).
The amount of Work may be even the same, but the Force is different in both cases.
The muscles are classified into fast twitch (typ 1 and 2) and slow twich muslces fibres. But the same kind of muscles fibres are the main contributer for this kind of Work, because the slow twich are only responsible for sustaining a certain low amount of Work for a very long periode of time. In other words both the fast 100 meter runner and the heavy power lifter require a high percentile amount of fast twitch muscles fibers, while the long distance runner needs more the slow twitch fibres. The muscle diameter is also different on all athlets. The fighter needs a diameter that allows him to punch as fast as possible, but if the diameter is too high or too low then the punch becomes slower. One the other hand the fighter can pull more weight in kg per cm^2 of muscle than a power lifter, while a power lifter has a higher diameter.
The intra and intermuscular coordination is a result of the central nervous system neural adaptation to to the kind of exercise. The neurons of a power lifter need to shoot impulses more often to the the muscle fibers than that of the fighters who needs upon one impuls activate more fibers for a muscle contraction.
The power lifter needs different muscles in an lift attempt at different stages of the movement, while the fighter needs all the muscles involed in the movement nearly at the same time ( very good extreme example is Bruce Lee and his one inch punch ).
I hope that you can now understand what strength is and how it comes about.

Now technique is not so well defined and more difficult to explain so i will be more sloopy. One movement or form of attack requires also and is a technique and several movements combined is also a technique.
The first one needs to be exercises correctly and fast if an window of opportunity is perceived or the defence is necessary. Several movements combined into to a technique have either a goal to open a window of opportunity for a strike or to deliver several strikes after each other.
Now i will quote the awsome statement from Conor McGregor: "Precision beats power and timing beats Speed. These are the fundamentals." Think carefuly about this!
Reaction times is faster than action times, and the cowboy who draws second is mostly faster. But what technique you will use to attack and to defend yourself and how well you execute the technique is based on trainings experience and the central nervous system. Precision and timing is also learned through training like Speed (equates to power). Overall in a duell a good training with a certain amount of strength is better than only with high strength with few or no training. And that is the reason why martial arts are trained and why a boxer will beat a power lifter in a fight.
In DnD 3.5 (DnD 5th has fucked this up) terms this would mean that a 10 Lv fighter with STR 14 is better than a 01 Lv fighter with STR 18.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.
No. There are to many beginner errors here and therefore i will skip this.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.
Now this on the other hand is very correct, besides the last statement. See my answer above.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.
1 YES and 2 NO! The threat range of a spear can be up to 5 meters, while the sword is up to 3 meters.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.
Shields have also the ability to mask your body signaling (in Poker it is called tells).

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.
The idea is not stupid, but DEX is reserved for the hand eye coodination and skills like balance, slight of hand and etc. And in an DnD fight this represents the ability to pull body parts from the line of attack, therefore you dont get this bonus if you are constrained.
 
Last edited:

Mexi

Dumbfuck!
Dumbfuck
Joined
Jan 6, 2015
Messages
6,811
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.

After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.
Yes and no. Brute strength is mostly associated with the ability to lift heavy weights, but that is not necessary so. Strength is the result of intra and intermuscular coordination and muscle diameter (which is related to the muscle type and amount of fibres).
Strength power lifter lift relative slowly heavy weights, while the fighter accelerates his fists or feet to a certain fast speed to deliver a momentum ( p = m * v ) to the opponent. Both events result in an Work (W = F * s ( Unit Nm ) ) with a Force (F = kg * m / s^-2).
The amount of Work may be even the same, but the Force is different in both cases.
The muscles are classified into fast twitch (typ 1 and 2) and slow twich muslces fibres. But the same kind of muscles fibres are the main contributer for this kind of Work, becasue the slow twich are only responsible for sustaining a certain low amount of Work for a long periode of time. In other words both the fast 100 meter runner and the heavy power lifter require a high percentile amount of fast twitch muscles fibers, while the long distance runner needs more the slow twitch fibres. The muscle diameter is also different on all athlets. The fighter needs a diameter that allows him to punch as fast as possible, but if the diameter is too high or too low then the punch becomes slower. One the other hand the fighter can pull more weight in kg per cm^2 of muscle than a power lifter.
The intra and intermuscular coordination is a result of the central nervous system neural adaptation to to the kind of exercise. The neurons of a power lifter need to shoot impulses more often to the the muscle fibers than that of the fighters who needs upon one impuls activate more fibers for a contraction.
The power lifter needs different muscles in an lfit attempt at different stages of the movement, while the fighter needs all the muscles involed in the movement nearly at the same time ( very good extreme example is Bruce Lee and his one inch punch ).
I hope that you can now understand what strength is and how it comes about.

Now technique is not so well defined and more difficult to explain so i will be more sloopy. One movement or form of attack requires also and is a technique and several movements combined is also a technique.
The first one needs to be exercises correctly and fast if an window of opportunity is perceived or the defence is necessary. Several movements combined into to a technique have either a goal to open a window of opportunity for a strike and to strike, or to deliver several strikes after each other.
Now i will quote the awsome statement from Conor McGregor: "Precision beats power and timing beats Speed. These are the fundamentals." Think carefuly about this!
Reaction times is faster than action times, and the cowboy who draws second is mostly faster. But what technique you will use to attack and to defend yourself and how well you execute the technique is based on trainings experience and the central nervous system. Precision and timing is also learned through training like Speed (equates to power). Overall in a duell a good training with a certain amount of strengths is better than only high strength with few or no training. And that is the reason why martial arts are trained and why a boxer will beat a power lifter in a fight.
In DnD 3.5 (DnD 5th has fucked it up) terms this would mean that a 10 Lv fighter with STR 14 is better than a 01 Lv fighter with STR 18.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.
No. There are to many beginner errors here and therefore i will skip this.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.
Now this on the other hand is very correct, besides the last statement. See my answer above.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.
1 YES and 2 NO! The threat range of a spear can be up to 5 meters, while the sword is up to 3 meters.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.
Shields have also the ability to mask your body signaling (in Poker it is called tells).

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.
The idea is not stupid, but DEX is reserved for the hand eye coodination and skills like balance, slight of hand and etc. And in an DnD fight this represents the ability to pull body parts from the line of attack, therefore you dont get this bonus if you are constrained.
All said like a guy who read an anatomy 101 book and doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
Hey, wow, another 'hyper-realism' thread. Awesome. Can't wait for the 10,000 pics of swords from museums and butch men play-acting with them.
 

Bohrain

Liturgist
Patron
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Messages
1,442
Location
norf
My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit.
After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.

DnD and RPG stats in general are just there to create a vague abstractions of a character's capabilities. You are just giving yourself a headache if you try think of them as something real and logical.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,103
Yes, I've started threads about this before. Stats are absolutely retarded in D&D, following some ancient uneducated nerd-view that physical strength is super important in armed combat (its not beyond some basic thresholds). Technique is most important, followed by what we usually call athleticism, which is some combination of speed, coordination, reflexes, and the ability to see things quickly. In an interesting system, technique would be represented by actual moves/abilities, instead of just a number.
 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.

After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.
Yes and no. Brute strength is mostly associated with the ability to lift heavy weights, but that is not necessary so. Strength is the result of intra and intermuscular coordination and muscle diameter (which is related to the muscle type and amount of fibres).
Strength power lifter lift relative slowly heavy weights, while the fighter accelerates his fists or feet to a certain fast speed to deliver a momentum ( p = m * v ) to the opponent. Both events result in an Work (W = F * s ( Unit Nm ) ) with a Force (F = kg * m / s^-2).
The amount of Work may be even the same, but the Force is different in both cases.
The muscles are classified into fast twitch (typ 1 and 2) and slow twich muslces fibres. But the same kind of muscles fibres are the main contributer for this kind of Work, becasue the slow twich are only responsible for sustaining a certain low amount of Work for a long periode of time. In other words both the fast 100 meter runner and the heavy power lifter require a high percentile amount of fast twitch muscles fibers, while the long distance runner needs more the slow twitch fibres. The muscle diameter is also different on all athlets. The fighter needs a diameter that allows him to punch as fast as possible, but if the diameter is too high or too low then the punch becomes slower. One the other hand the fighter can pull more weight in kg per cm^2 of muscle than a power lifter.
The intra and intermuscular coordination is a result of the central nervous system neural adaptation to to the kind of exercise. The neurons of a power lifter need to shoot impulses more often to the the muscle fibers than that of the fighters who needs upon one impuls activate more fibers for a contraction.
The power lifter needs different muscles in an lfit attempt at different stages of the movement, while the fighter needs all the muscles involed in the movement nearly at the same time ( very good extreme example is Bruce Lee and his one inch punch ).
I hope that you can now understand what strength is and how it comes about.

Now technique is not so well defined and more difficult to explain so i will be more sloopy. One movement or form of attack requires also and is a technique and several movements combined is also a technique.
The first one needs to be exercises correctly and fast if an window of opportunity is perceived or the defence is necessary. Several movements combined into to a technique have either a goal to open a window of opportunity for a strike and to strike, or to deliver several strikes after each other.
Now i will quote the awsome statement from Conor McGregor: "Precision beats power and timing beats Speed. These are the fundamentals." Think carefuly about this!
Reaction times is faster than action times, and the cowboy who draws second is mostly faster. But what technique you will use to attack and to defend yourself and how well you execute the technique is based on trainings experience and the central nervous system. Precision and timing is also learned through training like Speed (equates to power). Overall in a duell a good training with a certain amount of strengths is better than only high strength with few or no training. And that is the reason why martial arts are trained and why a boxer will beat a power lifter in a fight.
In DnD 3.5 (DnD 5th has fucked it up) terms this would mean that a 10 Lv fighter with STR 14 is better than a 01 Lv fighter with STR 18.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.
No. There are to many beginner errors here and therefore i will skip this.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.
Now this on the other hand is very correct, besides the last statement. See my answer above.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.
1 YES and 2 NO! The threat range of a spear can be up to 5 meters, while the sword is up to 3 meters.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.
Shields have also the ability to mask your body signaling (in Poker it is called tells).

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.
The idea is not stupid, but DEX is reserved for the hand eye coodination and skills like balance, slight of hand and etc. And in an DnD fight this represents the ability to pull body parts from the line of attack, therefore you dont get this bonus if you are constrained.
All said like a guy who read an anatomy 101 book and doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.
An basic form of an argument like the implication (logic) in modus ponens is based on a nonempty set of premises and the resulting conclusion. Form ( if A then B and A is valid therfore follows B ). Everything else is retarded and someone is that what he does.
 

Bohrain

Liturgist
Patron
Joined
Aug 10, 2016
Messages
1,442
Location
norf
My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit.
Yes, I've started threads about this before. Stats are absolutely retarded in D&D, following some ancient uneducated nerd-view that physical strength is super important in armed combat (its not beyond some basic thresholds). Technique is most important, followed by what we usually call athleticism, which is some combination of speed, coordination, reflexes, and the ability to see things quickly. In an interesting system, technique would be represented by actual moves/abilities, instead of just a number.

It does it's job as a simple stat that makes you hit harder.
I don't really know a real world equivalent for something like that. Hitting without exerting enough force isn't really an issue in fencing if you are able to hold your weapon.
 

Lonely Vazdru

Pimp my Title
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
6,656
Location
Agen
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.

tumblr_inline_ml5pm68hM01qz4rgp.png
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.
tumblr_inline_ml5pm68hM01qz4rgp.png

To be fair, I found the lecture about being patronising more patronising than the garbled and barely decipherable text it was referring to.
 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
You have written many things that are correct and false at the same time, but mostly due to lack of knowledge in control apparatus of the central nervous system and human muscles and bone physique and physics. I will try to be basic as possible and give you the necessary amount of information so that you will perhaps understand this more thoroughly.
tumblr_inline_ml5pm68hM01qz4rgp.png
So telling someone the truth and teaching someone the basic of predicate logic is patronizing? Welcome to the world of postmodern retards.
 

Darkzone

Arcane
Joined
Sep 4, 2013
Messages
2,323
It's not what you say, it's how you say it. Like "Teaching" for instance, who the fuck do you think you are ?
Someone who knows predicate or first order logic, in opposite to you.
Basically the hint towards the predicate logic is that if someone accusess me off not knowing something or representing something what is wrong then the person should eleborate on the problem and explain what is wrong in my statement or what i have misrepresented. If that happens then i can respond according to the presented claims.
Calling someone an idiot just because nothing is not an argument. Explaining why someone is an idiot on the other hand is an argument no matter if it is false or not.
I have no problem to admit if i'm wrong on a case and for me the truth is very important and i condemn willful misinformation.

It's not what you say, it's how you say it. Like "Teaching" for instance, who the fuck do you think you are ?

You could ask before you accuse. He might be a teacher...
Yes i have taught and perhaps i will teach predicate logic again.
 
Last edited:

shihonage

Subscribe to my OnlyFans
Patron
Joined
Jan 10, 2008
Messages
7,157
Location
location, location
Bubbles In Memoria
After learning a bit about HEMA, it seems that technique is more important than brute strength when fighting.

Strength has its place, but generally only insofar as it a much stronger fighter can mask errors in technique when defending against a weaker opponent; you can force an attack away from you even with poor structure if you are physically dominant. However, if you throw too much power behind a cut it's a good way of getting out of line and allowing your opponent to attack into a different quarter. Also, if you do somehow get pas their guard when you over hit you're likely to get your sword stuck in them.

Footwork is massively important in fighting, especially when attacking. Coordination between movements and strikes is vital, and knowing the difference between the different times in fighting is of tremendous value. This all seems to be more related to dexterity than to strength.

Also, two handed weapons such as longswords or Dane axes need less strength and conditioning to use effectively than sabres or rapiers do, but one handed weapons generally have a better effective reach.

Also, off topic slightly but shields are weapons. Especially in viking times when they tended to be the primary weapon to open attacking options when fighting a single opponent, while the sword was there to exploit the gaps that were created by clever use of the shield.

TL;DR I'd say that if anything STR should modify AC and DEX should modify to hit and damage.

Congrats on taking up a physical activity.
 

Tigranes

Arcane
Joined
Jan 8, 2009
Messages
10,350
no because then you can't have bikini wearing D-cupped womyn warriors cause they have to pump STR and everyone knows STR means you get buff like steroids thats why muscle wizards are dum and everybody wants bikini womyn fighters amirite
 

AdolfSatan

Arcane
Joined
Dec 27, 2017
Messages
1,871
Yeah, I get that but not all games have to be the same just because convention pushes them that way.

I'd love to find an RPG that tried to simulate combat in a fashion that followed on from what has been learned about medieval martial arts. I think there would definitely be a place for it.

Things like attacks having to not only strike at your opponent but also defend, that gaining and seizing the initiative in a fight being important.

I'd quite like (for example) there to be a footwork skill that would boost both your ability to fight effectively, and for height and weight to actually matter (I realize that the latter set works in Dragon's Dogma but I found that game so tedious in other respects I couldn't get on with it at all).
You should give Exanima a try. Approach it with patience and an open mind though, it takes about half/an hour in the arena before you start getting the hang of it, but once you do you'll love it.
 

flushfire

Augur
Joined
Jun 10, 2006
Messages
771
As an example, this video shows three instructors each sparring against two advanced students. Especially watch out for the third instructor's technique and how differently he approaches the fight. Despite being the shortest and heaviest of the three, his footwork, aggressiveness and balance mean that he performs far better than the other two.
Cool. Now link a video of people fighting in full plate armor, actually trying to pierce that armor and kill each other because that's what RPGs (the ones relevant to the discussion anyway) are trying to portray. Whether such fighting is historically accurate is another matter.

Also, DnD does have initiative, dodge and mobility feats, weapon finesse for dexterity based fighting, even intelligence based fighting. Some other games do str = damage, dex = chance to hit by default too so idk maybe you're just looking for something else?
 

sser

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Mar 10, 2011
Messages
1,866,661
Anything past that first contact is all fatigue management.
 

gaussgunner

Arcane
Joined
Jul 22, 2015
Messages
6,151
Location
ХУДШИЕ США
Cool. Now link a video of people fighting in full plate armor, actually trying to pierce that armor and kill each other because that's what RPGs (the ones relevant to the discussion anyway) are trying to portray. Whether such fighting is historically accurate is another matter.

You'd use a war hammer against full plate. But in medieval times only rich knights and kings could afford it; everyone else had chain mail, scale mail, or partial plate at best. Still, RPGs probably undervalue STR. You need to hit hard to punch through wood, metal, or hard leather. If you're strong your movements will be faster, more forceful, more controlled, and you'll have more endurance. There's no tradeoff. DEX would improve your aim and impact force slightly, and your parrying ability, but an enemy with superior strength would wear you down. Stamina (heart conditioning) would be far more important in melee.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom