|
I want to discuss this. What if the attacker of a touch attack has more strength? He hasn't to surpass any resistance to touch his enemy. The attacker has to be fast, and has to have the accuracy needed to touch him before he can dodge it.
So, I see that Dexterity has more to say in a touch attack than strength. And so I homerule it.
What do you think about this?
I have the same beef with it. Doesn't make sense. Atleast you can use finesse with touch attack (?)
Also, why the heck doesn't shield bonus apply to touch attacks? :-p
thought about that one, too. you just have to prod something to go boom, not punch it to oblivion.
as my characters usually have Weapon Finesse, i had no need for a houserule like that recently, but you have my support :D
Perfectly reasonable.
There will no doubt be the argument that as you are stronger you can move your arm quicker, but that's a fallacy:
Acceleration is proportional to force per unit mass
Muscle force is proportional to muscle cross-sectional area, while muscle mass is proportional to it's volume, hence more powerful muscles will usually have a greater increase in mass than in force for their size, making them slower - and requiring attachment to more robust bones which increase mass with no increase in force at all.
Stronger people do not move any quicker than weaker ones at the end of the day.
Shield bonus does not count because if you touch the shield, you are regarded as touching the holder. In effect, you are.
Shield bonus does not count because if you touch the shield, you are regarded as touching the holder. In effect, you are.
Well yah I know that's by the rules. I just don't get it why I'm burned when someone shoots scorching rays on my shield. Well meh, it's magic. :-p
Shield bonus does not count because if you touch the shield, you are regarded as touching the holder. In effect, you are.Well yah I know that's by the rules. I just don't get it why I'm burned when someone shoots scorching rays on my shield. Well meh, it's magic. :-p
Your shield stopped the ray but caught fire or melted, burning your arm.
Shield spells should add to touch AC though, IMHO.
Why only apply this question to touch attacks?
Even with a sword, Dex is much more important to hit than Str.
In this (A)D&D has always been unrealistic.
Why only apply this question to touch attacks?
Even with a sword, Dex is much more important to hit than Str.
In this (A)D&D has always been unrealistic.
You'll find plenty of people who disagree with that very premise. Combat is reasonably abstract in D&D. Hitting isn't just about hitting a non-armored, non-protected spot. It's also about overcoming the defenses the target has, whether you envision it as knocking aside an attempt at a block or still bruising the target through their armor, and strength would definitely help in that regard.
Combat is reasonably abstract in D&D. Hitting isn't just about hitting a non-armored, non-protected spot. It's also about overcoming the defenses the target has, whether you envision it as knocking aside an attempt at a block or still bruising the target through their armor, and strength would definitely help in that regard.
Combat is abstract, and everything related to it is kind of abstract too (HP, too).
To wave this debate aside, you could envision "Strength" as "what is necessary to hit in melee, as well as being strong" and "Dexterity" as "what is necessary to hit with a ranged weapon, as well as being agile".But if some of us want to houserule it differently, I don't see a problem with that either. Some time ago (AD&D2), I wanted to make rules so that each ability score was split in two, and tie two of these sub-scores to each possible actions, taking either the average of the two or the best. For instance, Strength was split into Power and Endurance, while Dexterity was split into Agility and Hand-Eye Coordination. Attacks (as well as some athletic checks) were to be resolved using an average of Str/Power and Dex/HEC. I may have based this on things I've read at the time, but I don't remember which part. IIRC, 4e does this with the ability tied to saves, only they take the best score.
Generally, in how hit points are constructed, you're not supposed to see every "hit" as actual physical wounds on the target; usually, it will just be in some way "wearing down" the opponent. Seeing it as direct physical wounds leads to all kinds of weird shit at higher levels; even a level 6 fighter can take a dozen kobold arrows without being slowed.
Thus, a "hit" might as well be repeatedly forcing the opponent to block with his weapon, tireing his arm, or hitting the armor at an angle so it doesn't penetrate but still cause pain, or whatever. In this regard, strength definately helps.
That isn't the case of touch attacks though.
|
Even with a sword, Dex is much more important to hit than Str.
Depends on the type of sword. That may be true of piercing weapons and fencing weapons, but not so true of the larger, heavier blades. That's why the Weapon Finesse feat exists. A rapier drinks when it slips through the chinks in your armor, but a greatsword just tries to hack your armor apart, or bruise the heck out of you if it can't chew up your armor.
As I do a fair amount of historical fencing with, among others, the german long sword and the halberd, I can assure you that even with these larger weapons, dexterity is much more important than strength, provided you have the base strength needed to wield these weapons on the first hand.
The only exceptions to this rule are the "smashing" weapons, the mace, the axe (to a degree), the hammer and the shield.
The greatsword is a special in this regard. This weapon is inspired by the german two-handers, a weapon popular in the renaissance and being used to knock aside and cut a swath in the ranks of the ubiquitous pikeman formations of this time. Here, indeed, strength is all, but what works in a major conflict with hundreds or even thousands of rank & file contestants is not necessarily adaptable to the usual duel-like situations seen in D&D. Consequently if you study the late fencing books that have articles on great-/two-handed sword dueling you will see that to perform the maneuvers described there a great deal more Dexterity is needed than is Strength.
Anyone interested in details is welcome to visit youtube and search for "fechten mit dem langen schwert" (fencing with the long sword).
As I do a fair amount of historical fencing with, among others, the german long sword and the halberd, I can assure you that even with these larger weapons, dexterity is much more important than strength, provided you have the base strength needed to wield these weapons on the first hand.
As said, hit points and hitting isn't only about causing a wound, rather it's as much of tireing the opponent. I've done only limited historical fencing, but I've done a little, and it feels like blocking or parrying away a really forceful swing or thrust takes a lot more energy one with less strength behind. It's like the difference between being targeted by a garden hose and a water cannon, more or less.
The easiest way to see it is that only the attack that sends you from positive hit points to negative hit points is a serious physical wound; anything less than that is just bruises, blocks and pure dumb luck.
The problem with this kind of view are healing spells. If you have 150 HP as a Fighter at some point and the Cure Critical Wounds spell doesn't even heal the half of it, it can't all just be bruises, now can it? :)
The problem with this kind of view are healing spells. If you have 150 HP as a Fighter at some point and the Cure Critical Wounds spell doesn't even heal the half of it, it can't all just be bruises, now can it? :)
Well, yes, healing is an issue, but only if you really view it as "closing wounds" healing. It's less bandaids and more coffee; you are restored from being more and more tired.
Which also helps in the abstract sense, since the ability withstand a sword in the chest shouldn't really be increased as rapidly by level as it is. It's easier to see that the vigor and stamina of the character would grow, allowing him to block many more blows. Which comes back to the "cure as coffee"; a large person with a lot of body mass that regularly drinks coffee and is up 24/7 will soon require more and more coffee to continue standing. Believe me, I know ;)
But yeah, it's still a bit weird and abstract. It doesn't solve all the problems, but it's a lot less weird this way. The illogicometer goes from 15 to 4.