>adding dex bonus to crossbow damage

>>43465067
That's not a grate joke.

>>43465067
Why not? Why add dex damage to bows instead of strength? Why allow STR bonus to hit which anything when accuracy is traditionally represented with dex? Why is there magic?

The answer is go fuck yourself you picky little shit.

>>43465134
Kind of grates on me, to be honest.

>>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.

>>43465067
Yes? Ranged weapons do better damage if you aim at better spots and hit their weak points. It's either dex or nothing, because strength has nothing to do with it.

>>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.

>>43465289
But aiming the fucking weapon is meant to be represented by the weapon skill, not the score that represents... what exactly? How limber you are?

You can be an amazing sniper and still shit at cartwheels or juggling. Agility bonuses on complex skills that rely on experience, knowledge and practice is pretty stupid.

>adding constitution bonus to your trap's damage
>adding riding skill to ac while wielding a shield
lemao literaley wye :/

>>43465299
Dear fucking god, what is ABSTRACTION?

Also, your weapon skill? It's called your BAB. That's where most of the bonus comes from. Your Dex is just a bounus to that.

>>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.

>>43465333
Dex definition:

"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.

Also you're retarded, just FYI.

>>43465299
I like how shadowrun does it. Your skill with a weapon group matters a lot more than your natural agility, but you still need your agility to actually be really good.

>>43465413
>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

The same could be said of a swordsman taking on an armored foe. All but the most well-aimed strikes would simply glance off the armor.

File: 1436525062691.jpg (418KB, 860x1000px) Image search: [Google]

418KB, 860x1000px

>>43465187
>>43465299

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.

>>43465471
Isn't that why they made finesse weapons?

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?

Am I the only one who thinks OP's humor is a little rough?

>>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.

>>43465067
>Adding Str bonus to melee weapon damage

>>43465067
>Feat called deadly aim
>-X to hit +X to damage
>-X to hit
...if you aim is deadly why do you aim worse than normal?

File: what a peasant.jpg (182KB, 1079x810px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 1079x810px

>>43465067
>using a crossbow

>>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.

>>43465801
No, being stronger means using weapons that deal higher die damage, adding Str on top of that is silly.

>>43465524
>that why they made finesse weapons
>>43465694
That's what finesse weapons are for

What's a finesse weapon? Is that a Fifth Edition thing? Which swords are 'finesse'? All the one-handers?

>>43465393
Why don't you get bonus from dex in close combat? Surely being able to be accurate with your blows, parries and thrusts amounts as much to your strikes as your skill and strength.

>Ride check
>Apply con, dex, and cha bonuses

>>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

>>43465916
You do now. Check out 5e.

>>43465134
>>43465190
Its like OP doesn't have a single shred of dignity

>>43465988
How to spot the pretender 101. They claim the origin of things is decades after when they first appeared.

>>43466209
>Directly cites 5e, a recent edition
>What you said

Literally retarded.

>>43466184
Just be grateful he didn't post a smug anime girl as his pic

>>43465846
You have to realize how retarded that statement is.

If I hand my weapon off to someone who's stronger than me, he can hit harder with it, it's not rocket science.

>>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.

>>43466478
than mass or raw power*

>>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.

I wonder what my extra feat when I born was...

>>43465067
>strength
>crossbow
you load it separately. why would it not be dex based?

Still saying shadowrun does it best.

>>43465067
Makes more sense than strength making you more accurate in melee.

File: 783a50_5390170[1].jpg (208KB, 960x895px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 960x895px

>>43465825
Go tell the pope I don't give a fuck

>>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.

>>43466239
His point was that finesse existed back in 3e you moron.

File: 1435091318197.jpg (32KB, 332x288px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 332x288px

>>43465134
>>43465190
>>43465560
>>43466184
You guys are freaking out over a really fine joke. Don't go against the grain here.

>>43465067
Yeah you're right, being a better shot and hitting vulnerable spots more often definitely shouldn't result in better damage.

>>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).

>>43465899
>>43465988
>>43466239
Weapon Finesse was a feat in 3e, allowing a certain category of weapons to get Dex to hit instead of Str

>>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?

>>43468399
There's a big difference between using a weapon and using your fists

>>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.

>>43468082
who fucking cares what edition it is? do you want a cookie because youre so special as to know the origins of a mechanic!! good job anon im so proud of you son!

>>43470371

Is this sarcasm?

>>43465299

This is assuming that an attribute score like Dexterity or whatever only represents inherent talent or natural ability and not any kind of skill training.

Which would make you a complete fucking moron.

>>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.

>>43470371
>do you want a cookie because youre so special as to know the origins of a mechanic!!
yes.

>>43469312
So if hulk uses a dagger it should do the same exact damage a crippled child would do with the same dagger?

>>43465299
>implying fat fucks are dexterious at anything other than vidya

>>43466209
The original person was asking if Finesse weapons existed in 5e, not which edition they first appeared.

>>43471495
>implying most other people are dexterous at anything other than vidya

>>43466209
I've never even played D&D and I know that finesse was around back in 3e.

>>43470647
It being abstract is an explanation for why heroes can be hit by 15 arrows and keep going. It does not explain why being great with a sword makes you better with a bow.

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.

>>43468080
Hey, fuckface. What was the very, very first fucking thing I said?

WHAT. IS. MOTHERFUCKING. ABSTRACTION you goddamn mouthbreather?

>>43465289
Wisdom is used in spot checks, clearly it should +WIS damage.

>>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.

>>43474152
Because neither of those is an abstraction.

>>43470371
Yeah, no asshat.

You don't get to call someone a retard, be wrong and not get called a retard in return.

It's not about me being special or smart or whatever. It's about you being a retard.

>>43474196
Still doesn't mean the rule mechanics should be illogical.

>>43465067
High dex should be able to quickdraw for free though...

dex is pretty handy for holding a target steady in your sights.

>>43473619
>being this mad when your point is this bad
At least you rhyme.

Why not ABSTRACT them with a more logical number, like specific weapon skill. Instead of using "generic skill at ALL things remotely related to this one skill".

I mean come the fuck on, are you so retarded you need the rules to be that fucking light.

>>43477024
Whine more, bitchboy.

Sorry it triggers your autism so goddamn bad, but shockingly, verrrry few other people have this problem with it.

>>43465694
>However, for normal, STR based weapons, it's about how hard you can hit and penetrate their armor
Yep, just like with real swords. Oh wait..

>>43465067

You want to be scared.

The bard is getting Charisma as his to-hit and to-damage skill and the Swordmage his Int.

>not letting players go rambo and use their str bonus to firearms

fuck that