Greater Weapon Finesse (potential idea)

[Elurindel]

I was looking at the list of various weapons, and wondering, some weapons can be fairly graceful in the right hands, even if they aren't that light, so why not have a feat progression that allows finesse to be applied to it?

Would this be balanced?

Greater Weapon Finesse
You can apply your mastery of finesse to a chosen weapon
Pre-requisites: Base Attack Bonus +5, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus (Weapon to be chosen)

Benefit: This feat allows you to apply your Dex modifier to your attack rolls with a chosen weapon that would not count as a light weapon for your size, such as a longsword.

Note: Without this feat, you can only apply your Dex bonus to attack rolls made with light melee weapons, or ranged weapons.

You may select this feat multiple times. Each time, its effects stack with a different weapon of your choice. Weapon is at the DM's Discretion.

[Sciurusaurus]

Sounds good to me. I'm not sure whether it is necessary to have such a high BAB requirement, perhaps 4 or 5 would suffice?

[Whamme]

I'd say +4. Let a level 6 Rogue take it.

[brummeren]

Maybe only one-handed weapons? And lower BAB req, too.

[Infinity_Biscuit]

Maybe only one-handed weapons? And lower BAB req, too.

While I understand greataxes and mauls and the like not being finesse weapons, some two-handed weapons, such as spears, seem to work with this idea.

Perhaps make certain weapons be able to be treated as one-handed for the use of this feat, similar to how rapiers and spiked chains are with the original Weapon Finesse feat?

[Kamakazee_Gnome]

I'd have to agree, a greatclub can't be used as subtly as a spear or katana (Two-handing the katana)

However, "DM's discretion" would work. Also, I agree that the BAB requirement is too high.

[pincushionman]

the Weapon Focus requirement seems a little awkward to me. Prior to taking the Greater Weapon Finnesse feat, taking Weapon Focus in a non-finnessible weapon is essentially a waste of a feat, since even with the +1 attack bonus, it's quite likely his AB from dex mod makes fighting with already-finnessible weapons a better option. Why would a character gimp himself for several levels by taking a focus feat in a weapon he can't use well, when he could take a focus in a weapon he can?

In the end, comparing a char who WFoc-GWFin against one who WFoc'd in a light weapon in the first place: They start with the same AB and stats, and they end up with the same AB and stats. One is just useful one feat selection faster, which is up to three levels before his compatriot.

It seems to me that Weapon Focus is something you would want to take AFTER you might have greater weapon finnesse, not before. Especially if the BAB requirements are that steep to begin with. Maybe the Greater Weapon Finnesse feat should only apply to a chosen weapon instead? That would limit it's power (rather than a blanket "you can use dex mod for anything) while not forcing characters to choose a feat they can't take advantage of when they select it.

[Elurindel]

Thank you for the input, everyone. I'll lower the BAB requirement to +5, and I thought I mentinoed that you only take it for a specific weapon. Oh well, it was late when I wrote it. :)
(Editted)

The reason I say weapon focus as a requirement, is that you'd have to be quite adept with that weapon beforehand, in order to use it in a finesseable fashion.

[Maryring]

I still don't think this feat can be applied to ALL weapons. Greataxe Hammer and Heavy Warmace? No way. Spears and such? Yes.

[Elurindel]

That's why I've added in the description that some weapons are at the DM's discretion.

[Maryring]

Ah, now I see it. Well it certainly seems balanced, though not very attractive for me. But that's a matter of taste. Good job.

[SpiderBrigade]

Hmm, I'd say make it

Benefit: This feat allows you to apply your Dex modifier to your attack rolls with a chosen slashing or piercing weapon that would not count as a light weapon for your size, such as a longsword.

I guess I can't really think of any bludgeoning weapons that can be used with finesse. Maybe a quarterstaff.

The Weapon Focus prereq does seem a little off, as Pincushion noted. On the other hand this feat is good enough that it needs two feat prereqs. Maybe something weird like Agile?

[pincushionman]

I'm sorry, I didn't catch the point about limiting the effects to one weapon on my first read-through. I figured it was your intent (based on the need for selecting a WFoc), but it wasn't totally clear to me. Thanks for pointing that out.

And I should clarify - I don't disagree with the intent of having the character choose a weapon focus. It's the effect on character power progression that concerns me (perhaps I'm more of a powergamer than I'd like to admit, but...)

Anyway, maybe I can be a little clearer...let's assume that a character has weapon finnesse, and a DEX/STR disparity that lets him take advantage of it (if he doesn't have such a disparity, explain why he's taiking finnesse?). He takes weapon focus, hoping to go for Greater Weapon Finnesse on a later level (If he's a fighter on a level where he picks two feats, this is not an issue).

For at least one level, he needs to choose one of the following tactics:
1) Wield a light weapon, or one that can otherwise be finnessed, therefore "wasting" his investment in weapon focus for the time being. This has the nasty RP side effect of you claim to be focusing your training on one weapon, but in reality you're not.
- OR -
2) Wield the weapon he has focus in, the heavy weapon, which cannot be finnessed (yet), therefore "wasting" his investment in weapon finnesse for the time being. This has the nasty game-mechanic effect of the attack bonus for this method can at best only equal the bonus you can get by using method #1.

So until the character has the opportunity to take GWFin, he's effectively "weakening" himself (and thus his party) because the game assumes he can take advantage of all his feat selections, which he cannot. He's not actually getting any worse, just not getting any better. Sure, he'll get really good when he has the opportunity to take the last feat, but is the period of "weakness" worth it? Is he equipped to survive for this period?

[Azrael]

Need to add the requirement of a "one handed" slashing or piercing weapon, IMO. You couldn't really finesse a long spear, as they are very large. But a javelin or short spear? Certainly.

Try this variation, it's exactly as Weapon Finesse, with added material in bold:


Greater Weapon Finesse [General]

Prerequisite:
Base attack bonus +5
Weapon Finesse

Benefit:
With a one handed slashing or piercing weapon made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.

Special:
A fighter may select Greater Weapon Finesse as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Natural weapons are always considered light weapons.

I think the original suggestion is not similar enough to plain old Weapon Finesse. And I don't like the Weapon Focus part at all -- especially since it's crossing two seperate feat progressions.

[pincushionman]

Need to add the requirement of a "one handed" slashing or piercing weapon, IMO. You couldn't really finesse a spear, but a javelin? Certainly.
Here I disagree. Looking at how Eastern martial arts address things like spears, bo (staffs) and katanas, which are all two-handed, I would say those are all most definitely being finnessed.

I should point out that I really like this feat, whatever it's final form is.

[Jural]

I see no problem with it. In effect, it is a way to represent a specific type of character, the highly skilled sword fighter.

I might have made it a one hand weapon, but I think the suggestion to make it a slashing/piercing weapon is a better suggestion.

At the end of the day, the in game mechanics are that a player is able to use a better attribute with a better weapon. In D&D terms, that is at best 3.5 points of damage per attack (from 1d6 to 2d6.)

The pure strength build is still superior in terms of damage, and the AC system in D&D allows their AC's to be approximately equal... so in effect the Dexterity based melee combatant is generally worse off.

[Azrael]

Looking at how Eastern martial arts address things like spears, bo (staffs) and katanas, which are all two-handed...

In response, look at how poorly DnD (outisde of Rokugan etc) handles ANY technique the is unique to eastern martial arts. Remember, this is a [General] feat, not meant for class/setting/race specifics.


EDIT: I might concede the "one-handed" part IFF the "slashing & piercing" part was adopted. Either way, I stand by the fact that Weapon Focus has gotta go ;).

[Gerrtt]

Need to add the requirement of a "one handed" slashing or piercing weapon, IMO. You couldn't really finesse a spear, but a javelin? Certainly.

If you don't think you can use your flexibility and agility to fight with a spear then you need to watch more martial arts tournaments.

I really like the idea of this feat applied to certain weapons, namely the spear, quarterstaff, katana (when used 2-handed), falchion, and scimitar (not two-handed but isn't a light weapon). Allowing a character to use a scythe, greataxe, warhammer, or various other heavy/large weapons with this feat doesn't make much sense. Two-handed weapons really shine in the hands of a high strength character, so I think that in most cases two-handed weapons (and many some 1-handed weapons) this feat shouldn't be applicable because the weapons in question really draw their power from above average strength scores. I've had similar ideas about this kind of feat though, so I commend your actually putting it down on paper.

[[edit]]

Pincushion posted about eastern martial arts as I was typing...so disregard any duplicity in our posts.

[SpiderBrigade]

Yeah, I'd agree that a D&D longspear is NOT one of those whippy asian things, but something more like a pike or lance. The asian spear could be a separate weapon, though: a light two-hander, perhaps? Oooh!

I would PREFER to see this feat without a "weapons are at DM discretion" clause, but that may not be possible. Is there a way for, say, a quarterstaff to be allowed to benefit, but not a greataxe? Hmm. How about "with a weapon weighing less than 8 pounds?" That cuts out a lot of the heavy weapons that clearly could not be finessed.

[Elurindel]

Yeah, I'd agree that a D&D longspear is NOT one of those whippy asian things, but something more like a pike or lance. The asian spear could be a separate weapon, though: a light two-hander, perhaps? Oooh!

I would PREFER to see this feat without a "weapons are at DM discretion" clause, but that may not be possible. Is there a way for, say, a quarterstaff to be allowed to benefit, but not a greataxe? Hmm. How about "with a weapon weighing less than 8 pounds?" That cuts out a lot of the heavy weapons that clearly could not be finessed.

Hmm, there's an idea, although it may need to be changed, depending on size categories. Thoughts on this, people?

[McMouse]

Personally, I really like this feat. If I was to make a combat-oriented, dual-wield Rogue or Rogue/Ranger, I'd definitely put this feat on my list.

[Chris the Pontifex]

ooh yeah I can see my dwarven dualwielding fighter coming down the hall, handling both Dwaven waraxes with grace and style! :P

seriously though, this sounds like a pretty good feat

[Gerrtt]

Well...the feat doesn't make it so that the weapon is a light weapon, so you would still have the penalties for wielding such a weapon in your off-hand. Mechanically it wouldn't be any different than a very strong dwarf doing the same thing.

[Infinity_Biscuit]

Yeah, I'd agree that a D&D longspear is NOT one of those whippy asian things, but something more like a pike or lance. The asian spear could be a separate weapon, though: a light two-hander, perhaps? Oooh!
I don't think anyone here said anything about longspears. Remember that there's an intermediary between shortspear and longspear in DnD. It's, oddly enough, simply called a spear. :P


I would PREFER to see this feat without a "weapons are at DM discretion" clause, but that may not be possible. Is there a way for, say, a quarterstaff to be allowed to benefit, but not a greataxe? Hmm. How about "with a weapon weighing less than 8 pounds?" That cuts out a lot of the heavy weapons that clearly could not be finessed.
I agree. Simply listing something like this as "DM decides" seems to be lazy and removes the element of legitimacy that only written rules have.
However, I'd prefer a list of weapons, such as how it works with normal Weapon Finesse weapons already.

[Chris the Pontifex]

Well...the feat doesn't make it so that the weapon is a light weapon, so you would still have the penalties for wielding such a weapon in your off-hand. Mechanically it wouldn't be any different than a very strong dwarf doing the same thing.

I know, but see, as this is a fighter he needs a high dex to be able to dual wield anyway so this feat would make a lot of sense. min-max-wise.

I calculated the effects of wielding 2d10 -4atk vs 1d10 +1d6 -2atk and the first owned bigtime for anything less then ridiculus ac.

anyway, my post wasn't about mechanics, just commenting that i like the feat and then picturing a dual DWX-wielding dwarf using it


edit: @ IB
first: *stab* for simu-posting

second: isnt every rule always at dm's discretion, in the end?

[Infinity_Biscuit]

isnt every rule always at dm's discretion, in the end?

Every rule is able to be overridden at the DM's discretion, but there still should be a rule there in the first place.

[AtomicKitKat]

Here's an interesting way to "fix" it, drop the Weapon Focus requirement, and give it a medium high Dexterity requirement; Dex 15 and above, or the like. Interestingly, most feat requirements use odd values while stat modifiers use even.

Edit: Possibly require Strength+11-13 too, since it doesn't help your ability to twirl that spear if your pencil-wrists can't support the weight.

[NEoJoe]

Wow, I really like this concept. I usualy don't find a feat worth mentioning on forums, or the internet in general. But I like this! I can't believe I didn't think about this.

I do agree with possibly selecting specific weapons to which this feat can apply. But I disagree with the lower BAB. I would like it to be BAB +6, so it would be available to level six fighters and swashbucklers, and level eight rogues.

But I'm distracted and not trying right now.

[Elurindel]

Hmm, alright, I'm prepared to drop the Weapon Focus, in exchange for a high Dex requirement, although it'll still be specific to one weapon. What's everyone's idea? 17? 19? Personally, I'd say 19.

[Infinity_Biscuit]

Hmm, alright, I'm prepared to drop the Weapon Focus, in exchange for a high Dex requirement, although it'll still be specific to one weapon. What's everyone's idea? 17? 19? Personally, I'd say 19.

Remember that 19 DEX is physically impossible for a human unless he was already in the top .5% (18 DEX) and worked specifically to train himself to be more dextrous.

15 seems to be alright to me, since that means the person is one of the top 4.6% for dexterity. Not only that, but a medium DEX requirement isn't too much of an issue, because no one should blow two feats just to weild one weapon alright unless his DEX is much higher than his STR. This is especially true for two-handers, since the 1.5 STR bonus would be mostly wasted.

[Azrael]

I don't think anyone here said anything about longspears. Remember that there's an intermediary between shortspear and longspear in DnD. It's, oddly enough, simply called a spear. :P

Check your source material (I've linked the SRD below). Shortspears are onehanded, Spears and Longspears are two. So, mechanics wise, the only difference is the weight (longer spear would be heavier, and not able to be thrown). Only a feat with a weight restriction (which is a bad idea IMO) would be able to differentiate between the two.

So, again, I suggest one handers only :D

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm

If you're looking to easily replicate the Asian-type spear, start with a shortspear, re-write the text so that it includes descriptions of the weapons flexibility. Then, an Asian spear could be used for this feat. Your damage would only be a d4, but most finesse-able weapons are as well.

As for two handers, the simple fact that you get 1.5*Str to damage mildly suggest that it is inappropriate to finesse the weapons. Yes, I know the actual mechanic is because you have the .5*Str from the offhand, but none the less, there are further implications...

EDIT: Lotsa tweaks. Plus, if there were a Dex requirement, I would suggest going to higher than 15 - for the same reasons as previous posters.

[Sciurusaurus]

Longspears have reach, spears have not ;)

[Azrael]

True, that's why they are longer. But if you're trying to nail down a category of weapons this is available for, the only way to have Spear but not Longspear included would be to have a) a weight restriction or b) a reach restriction.

Neither of these really have any place in a feat...

[Sciurusaurus]

I don't really see the problem of including "This feat does not apply to reach weapons" in the feat, should one want to limit the # of potential twohanded weapons.

[Azrael]

I just re-read the posts, and after several good suggestions & concessions, try this mostly-agreed upon update from my page one post:


Greater Weapon Finesse [General]

Prerequisite:
Base attack bonus +5
Weapon Finesse
Dexterity 15+

Benefit:
With a one handed slashing or piercing weapon made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls. This feat may be used with the Spear and Quarter Staff. It may not be used with shields or spiked shields.

Special:
A fighter may select Greater Weapon Finesse as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Natural weapons are always considered light weapons.

Again, I tried to leave the text as close to the original Weapon Finesse as possible.

Are we in final form yet? I still see a huge problem in someone finessing a Greatsword, so I kept the one-handed requirement and added quarterstaff and spear to the approved list -- these seemed to be the snagging points anyhow. If you're still bent against limiting to one handers, please check this list:

http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponCategories

And list SPECIFIC weapons that you feel should be added from the two-handed sections.


EDIT: Lots of tweaks, sorry.

EDIT: Last one, I promise. Several specialty weapons written in non-Core books have special inclusions/exclusions about Weapon Finesse (Elven Courtblade has come to my attention as a two handed, finessable weapon). A similar "Special:" note could easily be included (it would HAVE to be at your DMs discrecion) if you're using non-Core weapons.

[Maryring]

Wow, I really like this feat now. It has improved a whole lot since it first appeared here. Good work everyone. I for one is ready to accept this feat into my games, if I am allowed to do so by the creator of course ;)

[Elurindel]

I like most of the tweaks, except I still say the Dex pre-requisite is a little low. I'd say 17, similarly to the twf feats. And I've been thinking about a better restriciton list most of the day.
How about one handed piercing and slashing weapons, and two-handed, none-reaching piercing weapons. Any better?

[AtomicKitKat]

I like most of the tweaks, except I still say the Dex pre-requisite is a little low. I'd say 17, similarly to the twf feats. And I've been thinking about a better restriciton list most of the day.
How about one handed piercing and slashing weapons, and two-handed, none-reaching piercing weapons. Any better?

Except that now it's an extremely elite portion of the population we're talking about. Assuming 3d6 stat roll-up, that's:

18 or 17=6+6+6 ; 6+6+5(3 possible combinations), for a grand total of 4 out of 216=1/54=0.185185~, or about 1.8% of the population. Not even Mensa has that strict a restriction(top 2%)

[Darkie]

The default is 4d6 drop lowest, no?

Keep in mind with most point buys you can easily have a 16 dex to start without racial modifiers, which would qualify for a 17 at level 4...

I mean, a lot of those TWF feats go to 19+, no?

[Sciurusaurus]

In PHB, only one, and that's not available until level 11 anyway (for a warrior-type class). In Complete Warrior, one, which has the same BAB requirement as the one in the PHB.

In Complete Adventurer, there are a couple of Two-weapon feats, but none with a steep Dex requirement.

So I would say no, there's not "a lot" of Dex 19+ feats. And all of them have a 17+ on the step before (with a +6 BAB requirement).

So a 17 would fit with similar feats, 19 would not.

[Azrael]

A quick perusal of both CA, CW and PHB show only three feats with Dex 19 required: Imp Precise Shot, Grtr Two Weapon and Grtr Two Weapon Defense. All of these feats have much stricter BAB/Feat/Etc. prerequisites than our does...

However, a similar progression to our feat is seen in the two weapon fighting tree. Two weapon requires a base dex 15 with no BAB requirement; dex 17 and BAB +6 for improved; and dex 19 and BAB +11 for greater.

So... I would not object to raising the BAB for our feat to BAB +6 and requiring Dex 17


EDIT: BTW Elurindel, there only three "two handed, non reach, piecing weapons." Spear, Halbred and Scythe -- and the last two are both piercing/slashing. I think Spear is the only one that fits our flavor and context. Plus, breaking down weapon categories that far does not have a good precedent in DnD. When categories need further destinction, a list of specific weapons is usually listed instead.

[Darkie]

Something interesting with the oriental martial arts weapons is how light and flexable some versions of them are... 'longswords' where the tip of the blade and be bent to touch the hilt, anyone?

[Elurindel]

A quick perusal of both CA, CW and PHB show only three feats with Dex 19 required: Imp Precise Shot, Grtr Two Weapon and Grtr Two Weapon Defense. All of these feats have much stricter BAB/Feat/Etc. prerequisites than our does...

However, a similar progression to our feat is seen in the two weapon fighting tree. Two weapon requires a base dex 15 with no BAB requirement; dex 17 and BAB +6 for improved; and dex 19 and BAB +11 for greater.

So... I would not object to raising the BAB for our feat to BAB +6 and requiring Dex 17


EDIT: BTW Elurindel, there only three "two handed, non reach, piecing weapons." Spear, Halbred and Scythe -- and the last two are both piercing/slashing. I think Spear is the only one that fits our flavor and context. Plus, breaking down weapon categories that far does not have a good precedent in DnD. When categories need further destinction, a list of specific weapons is usually listed instead.


Hmmm, you have a good point, although I thought the halberd was a reach weapon, and it's quite hard to swing a scythe around like that.
Ok, I'll drop the two-handed bit, and revert to the basic spear as the only two-handable weapon in this case. All agreed?

[Azrael]

Well then, I think that wraps this one up.


Greater Weapon Finesse [General]

Prerequisite:
Base attack bonus +6
Weapon Finesse
Dexterity 17+

Benefit:
With a one handed slashing or piercing weapon made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls. This feat may be used with the Spear and Quarter Staff. It may not be used with shields or spiked shields.

Special:
A fighter may select Greater Weapon Finesse as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Natural weapons are always considered light weapons.




And Jeff -- those weapons are exactly the variation on standard gear that would be most appropriate to use for this feat. And, for the record, very few "real" weapons are nearly as flexible as the movie magic makes them look. Spring Steel, as it is sometimes called today, does not hold an edge very well as a direct result of the high elasticity. And I would think that, in real combat, such a bendy weapon woud be a huge disadvantage when parrying or blocking. But I'm no expert.

[Shevaresh]

I think I remember reading a feat along these lines in a supplement called "plots and poisons" - it's a drow-specific book.

IIRC the feat had strict requirements - stricter than what is listed here, in any case - but also granted the ability to use a medium-sized weapon as a light weapon in an off-hand (so a character could, for example, use two scimitars - Maybe that's what Zz'ditri did.)

[Elurindel]

I'm in agreement with the final summary by Azrael.

[Darkie]

And Jeff -- those weapons are exactly the variation on standard gear that would be most appropriate to use for this feat. And, for the record, very few "real" weapons are nearly as flexible as the movie magic makes them look. Spring Steel, as it is sometimes called today, does not hold an edge very well as a direct result of the high elasticity. And I would think that, in real combat, such a bendy weapon woud be a huge disadvantage when parrying or blocking. But I'm no expert.I was actually referring to two of the swords my (err, I suppose it translates best as 'sei fu'? Swordsmaster?) master has. One is a rigid, heavy blade like european longswords, the other is very, very bendy.

[Elurindel]

Whilst thinking about the issue of applying an extra .5 of your str bonus to your attack roll, I thought perhaps there was a way to make that a different option. What about an extra feat in the chain, requiring more Dex, and allowing you to add the .5 of your Dex bonus to attack rolls and AC instead, making you rely more on finesse then ramming the two-handed weapon home.

[Fhaolan]

I was actually referring to two of the swords my (err, I suppose it translates best as 'sei fu'? Swordsmaster?) master has. One is a rigid, heavy blade like european longswords, the other is very, very bendy.


I could be wrong, but I was under the impression that the really wobbly-bladed martial-art sword... it has a name, it's just escaping me right now... is purely a practice/training blade, not made for actual combat. The idea is the promote balance and smooth action where the blade *doesn't* wobble, so that when you switch to the 'real' combat-type blade, your motions are perfect.

There are european blades that can bend right from tip to hilt, but it's not one of the things that's recommended. One, if you let go at the wrong time, you'll slash yourself up pretty fierce, and two, it does weaken the metal of the blade to do that repeatedly. Real european combat blades are made to flex somewhat, to absorb shock from blocks and blows without snapping, but the level of flexibility and springiness necessary to bend that much repeatedly is not really wise for european combat techniques.