Hmmm. I'm not sure how we got on this topic with the Patch 9 thread, but whatever.
So, here's the part where we're missing each other, I think. "Point being, IF the quick guy can get inside of the swing of the big guy, one jab of an ice pick in the ear is going to end the life of the guy that can cut you in half with a great sword, great axe, halberd or any other weapon that REQUIRES distance to be effective."
So, "REQUIRES distance to be effective." That's the thing. You are focusing on what is REQUIRED for serious amounts of damage. However, in order to do SOME damage, you don't need to do a full swing with any weapon, big or small. And that's where the disconnect is.
A greataxe does 1d12 damage. Greatsword does 2d6. So, you can actually do a minimum of 1+Str Bonus damage. Not effective. OR you can do 12+Str Bonus damage with a full - effective - swing.
See. There are LOTS of ways you can use a sword or axe or staff or whatever while in combat that does damage but isn't necessarily effective. Those methods are quicker attacks with those weapons. They aren't necessarily effective, but they are faster than a full swing, making the weapon just as quick and effective as a dagger depending on what type of attack you are making.
Standardly, a person wielding a greatsword or greataxe won't get that many full swing attempts that do 12+ damage when facing any enemy, big or small. A person with a greataxe going up against a dagger wielder will likely do a jab with the head at the dagger person, smack them with the butt end, do a small swing/swipe, try to bash them with the staff part of the greataxe, etc. Then, when the timing is right, after throwing their opponent off balance, they take the full swing, dealing in D&D 5e terms, a full 12+ damage. MOST of the time, though, the greataxe won't be doing a full swing, so again, no slower than a dagger.
And notice, the dagger does a fairly consistent amount of damage each time. 1 or 4+ damage is very little difference. This is because with the dagger it doesn't matter whether you do a quick jab or a slash, it's going to do roughly the same damage.
My point is that the 5e system is pretty darn good if you truly understand why things are the way they are. A person with greater strength will have an easier time wielding a bigger weapon like a greataxe, so they have a faster strike and are more likely to hit than someone who has like 10 Strength. Meanwhile, a faster person will have a much better chance of hitting with a dagger against a slower person because they can get inside their attack zone and make that quick jab before the slower person can dodge out of the way or bat the attack to the side with their big weapon.
Nevertheless, as soon as you start adding weapon speeds into the mix, realism actually starts flying out the window. I've tried it when I was attempting to create my own RPG. What you get are these dagger wielders with like 3-5 strikes to every 1 strike from a two-handed person - no matter how strong they are or how capable they are at wielding the big weapon - and suddenly the fast dagger wielder is beating the living tar out of the big guy who has no chance at stopping him. When, in real life, the two handed big guy would likely wipe the floor with the dagger wielder because the dagger wielder has a puny six inch knife and the big guy has this seven foot long sword that can run the dagger wielder through before the dagger wielder even gets within 5 feet of him. Why? Because the two handed sword guy doesn't do a full wide swing with the sword. He makes a quick jab/thrust at the dagger person as the dagger person makes a measly attempt to try to get in close.
