PDA

View Full Version : Should Weapon Finesse cost a feat?



Nate the Snake
2010-10-23, 04:39 PM
It seems to me that Weapon Finesse is an unnecessary hurdle for a Dexterity-focused melee combatant. Would it make a big difference in the grand scheme of things to just make it a benefit inherent to the relevant weapons?

I'm thinking about instituting this as a houserule in the game I'm DMing, because the party rogue (who is a halfling) has hilariously low Strength and it doesn't seem fair that he has to spend a feat to be able to meaningfully contribute in combat.

CockroachTeaParty
2010-10-23, 04:40 PM
Nevermind that that poor halfling bastard is going to have to wait until 3rd level to take it (+1 BAB prereq has ruined many a low-level concept).

I wouldn't object to Weapon Finesse being waived.

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-23, 04:40 PM
No, it shouldn't be a big deal to let him have weapon finesse without a feat. I've always thought it should work that way, anyway.

Siosilvar
2010-10-23, 04:41 PM
No, it probably shouldn't cost a feat. Many people give it for free with light weapons; I tend to lump in Dex to damage with it, and then it's only moderately useful.

Wow, ninja'd. Better Nate than lever, though...

BeholderSlayer
2010-10-23, 04:43 PM
No, it probably shouldn't cost a feat. Many people give it for free with light weapons; I tend to lump in Dex to damage with it, and then it's only moderately useful.

Wow, ninja'd. Better Nate than lever, though...

I agree, give the printed feat for free, and make Weapon Finesse instead add dex to damage instead of strength. That'd be fair (and would help out the character a lot).

Eloel
2010-10-23, 04:45 PM
I'd say make it Dex instead of Str to damage, Dex to hit, and no requirements.
So the aforementioned halfling rogue can grab it at L1, and actually do damage even when not sneakattacking

Mystic Muse
2010-10-23, 04:48 PM
Better Nate than lever

....Curse you for bringing that up.

I'd say no, it should not cost a feat.

Soren Hero
2010-10-23, 04:49 PM
when im dm'ing, i usually make the feat apply to ALL finesse-able weapons available. that way you still have to spend a feat, but it does more. additionally, once bought, I always add dex to damage on those weapons

JRKlein
2010-10-23, 04:50 PM
Is there a feat that lets you use your DEX mod for melee damage too? I've been wondering about that for a while.

Reynard
2010-10-23, 04:52 PM
when im dm'ing, i usually make the feat apply to ALL finesse-able weapons available. that way you still have to spend a feat, but it does more. additionally, once bought, I always add dex to damage on those weapons

...So half of your houserule is that Weapon Finesse applies to... all the weapons it already applied to?

Greenish
2010-10-23, 04:52 PM
when im dm'ing, i usually make the feat apply to ALL finesse-able weapons available. that way you still have to spend a feat, but it does more.That's how it works by default in 3.5.

[Edit]: Curses, swordsage'd.

Is there a feat that lets you use your DEX mod for melee damage too? I've been wondering about that for a while.Shadow Blade, from ToB. Only works on Shadow Hand's favoured weapons and only when in Shadow Hand stance.

Starbuck_II
2010-10-23, 04:53 PM
Maybe he meant any weapon. That would be a upgrade: longsword can use Dex if he wants.

Tavar
2010-10-23, 04:54 PM
Well, Shadow Blade does it, though...it's just not worth a feat to bump up your damage by such a small amount.

grarrrg
2010-10-23, 05:00 PM
....Curse you for bringing that up.

Forget cursing him. He needs a good Pox upon him AND his family...

Anyhoo... back on topic, a couple of alternate ideas:

If the flavor fits/is allowed a dip of Swashbuckler can provide Weapon Finesse for 'free'.
Or
Remove Weapon Finesse as a feat, but make certain weapons "finesse ONLY", as in, a Rapier automatically counts Dex for to-hit but CANNOT count Str for to-hit. So a Barbarian with Str 18 and Dex 10 with a Rapier would have a to-hit bonus of 0. (as for Str and/or Dex to damage, that's up to you/your DM)

Soren Hero
2010-10-23, 05:05 PM
That's how it works by default in 3.5.

[Edit]: Curses, swordsage'd.
Shadow Blade, from ToB. Only works on Shadow Hand's favoured weapons and only when in Shadow Hand stance.

my bad, I meant to say all weapons....and the added dex damage as well

Nate the Snake
2010-10-23, 05:13 PM
Thanks for the prompt responses and landslide of support, everyone.

I thought about letting Weapon Finesse apply Dex to damage instead, but I didn't want to make it strictly better than Shadow Blade. The "non-finesse weapon becomes finesse-able" idea sounds good, though.


If the flavor fits/is allowed a dip of Swashbuckler can provide Weapon Finesse for 'free'.

Swashbuckler is allowed, but doesn't fit well. Besides, why bother when I can just flex my DM muscles? :smallwink:


Remove Weapon Finesse as a feat, but make certain weapons "finesse ONLY", as in, a Rapier automatically counts Dex for to-hit but CANNOT count Str for to-hit. So a Barbarian with Str 18 and Dex 10 with a Rapier would have a to-hit bonus of 0. (as for Str and/or Dex to damage, that's up to you/your DM)

I fail to see how a barbarian can't hit just as hard with a rapier as with anything else. :smalltongue:

kryan
2010-10-23, 05:13 PM
I absolutely detest Weapon Finesse's status as a feat. Should just be a normal option for wielding certain weapons - and more than are currently listed. I don't think you have to worry about devaluing Strength, since warriors are still going to want it for the 1.5*Str to damage bonus, while stealth-types couldn't really afford Str to begin with, but now aren't unduly penalized for it.

Yes, if you have Dex-to-attack and Dex-to-damage, Str basically does nothing - but ultimately, every character needs to be able to dump something.

Tavar
2010-10-23, 05:17 PM
I thought about letting Weapon Finesse apply Dex to damage instead, but I didn't want to make it strictly better than Shadow Blade. The "non-finesse weapon becomes finesse-able" idea sounds good, though.
Don't worry about it. Shadow Blade isn't that good of a feat to begin with. Plus, it punishes all non-ToB classes that need Dex to damage.



I fail to see how a barbarian can't hit just as hard with a rapier as with anything else. :smalltongue:
Based on how the weapon is designed, it could actually make sense. The rapier just can't be used in the same way as a battle axe, or it would break.

Greenish
2010-10-23, 05:18 PM
I fail to see how a barbarian can't hit just as hard with a rapier as with anything else. :smalltongue:Because he can't two-hand a rapier?

Doesn't explain it for the spiked chain, though. :smallcool:

Nate the Snake
2010-10-23, 05:23 PM
Don't worry about it. Shadow Blade isn't that good of a feat to begin with. Plus, it punishes all non-ToB classes that need Dex to damage.

Well, when you put it that way, it doesn't seem so bad.


Based on how the weapon is designed, it could actually make sense. The rapier just can't be used in the same way as a battle axe, or it would break.

In that case, I think breaking the weapon would be incidental to the successful attack rather than an obstacle.

Good point, though.

Reynard
2010-10-23, 05:24 PM
Because he can't two-hand a rapier?

Doesn't explain it for the spiked chain, though. :smallcool:

I'm not sure. Ever tried swinging something like that around? Manual dexterity helps you avoid a lot more self-inflicted nut shots than being buff would.

And, I guess, makes it easier to hit your opponent in a way that actually hurts them.

grarrrg
2010-10-23, 05:27 PM
I fail to see how a barbarian can't hit just as hard with a rapier as with anything else. :smalltongue:

That's (partially) why I left the "(stat) to damage" open for debate.
He can hit just as HARD with a Rapier, if Str to damage.
But actually HITTING would be a little more difficult.

Defending my point of view from a Flavor Perspective:
Barbarian swings Battle Axe at Guy-in-Full-Plate (GiFP).
Battle Axe is big heavy weapon, it doesn't matter where GiFP gets hit, it will hurt.
Barbarian swings Rapier at GiFP.
Rapier is a light slashing weapon, Full Plate is a good defense against light slashing weapons, and Barbarian lacks technique (10 Dex remember), so the Barbarian would 'connect' with the weapon, but it would just 'bounce off' the thick plating most of the time, doing no damage (effectively a Miss)
Swashbuckler with Rapier (10 Str, 18 Dex) DOES have technique, would be more able to hit GiFP in the vulnerable places.

This is why I suggested that only 'certain' weapons be "Finesse ONLY", you don't need to waste a feat, but you can only apply Dex with fewer weapons.

Xefas
2010-10-23, 05:27 PM
I played in a game a long while ago that had Dex-to-hit as the standard for all weapons. The DM made it so Power Attack also allowed you to use Strength in place of your Dexterity for attack rolls if you wanted to, in addition to its normal benefits.

Seemed kind of an interesting way to do it.

Greenish
2010-10-23, 05:29 PM
I'm not sure. Ever tried swinging something like that around?Obviously not, I'm not suicidal. :smallamused:

Still, I think the weapons should allow for a choice.

Eldariel
2010-10-23, 05:40 PM
Here's a list of feats that are unnecessary core feat tax and should be given for free (or tied to other feats in case of ):

Improved & Greater Two-Weapon Fighting
Weapon Finesse
Point Blank Shot
Endurance
Mobility
Spring Attack (and all variants, though this stems from few stupid mistakes in designing the game mechanics)
Mounted Combat (or Ride-By Attack or some such; overall, the long chain is way too feat intensive)


And of course, stupid stuff that's simply underpowered like Toughness (duh), Dodge (one enemy you gotta announce, yay!), Weapon Focus-tree (bleh), Skill Focus, all the dual skill feats, Combat Casting (wtf is that even supposed to do?), etc. But they don't fall here.

Sufficient to say though, yeah, there's an immense amount of unnecessary feat tax in the Core; there's actually enough that even with all the excess feats a Fighter gets, it's still not really viable to make a Fighter who is proficient in multiple combat styles under like level 12.


Of course, EWP is kinda underpowered too but weapon balance is another matter entirely (and again, game mechanics kinda **** over non-reach weapons due to 5' steps enabling escape from weapons without reach unless you're like Enlarged or an aberration or really, really tall evil).

Trundlebug
2010-10-23, 06:13 PM
Get rid of the feat and have finessable weapons use STR/DEX to hit as the user sees fit. You can stab hard and punch through a surface or precisely stab in between/weakest surfaces with a rapier for example.

Str builds= more damage, CC is better and you get to be buff, maybe with a bushy beard!
Dex Builds= generally more ac and style baby style.

Further penalizing DEX builds is kinda mean in a fantasy game. As for DEX to damage, personally I leave it as is, but have been thinking on what to do with WFinesse and Shadowblade for some time.

Thinking of making WFinesse essentially SB with all finessable wps and maybe turning SB into a SH maneuver DC buffer or something that allows striking incorporeal dudes. Not sure yet.

Greenish
2010-10-23, 06:16 PM
Here's a list of feats that are unnecessary core feat tax and should be given for free (or tied to other feats in case of ):

Improved & Greater Two-Weapon FightingTWF should work like Snap Kick. Every time you attack with the mainhand (assuming you take the penalty), you get an offhand attack too. Imp. TWF could allow it to apply to each attack in a full attack.

Eldariel
2010-10-23, 06:17 PM
Further penalizing DEX builds is kinda mean in a fantasy game. As for DEX to damage, personally I leave it as is, but have been thinking on what to do with WFinesse and Shadowblade for some time.

Honestly, making Weapon Finesse grant Dex to damage is fine. Then Dex-focus has a cost but not such a massive cost it has now. And Str-focus has so many natural bonuses when it comes to melee combat that it's fine really (tripping, two-handed weapons, power attacks, etc.).

Trundlebug
2010-10-23, 06:36 PM
Honestly, making Weapon Finesse grant Dex to damage is fine. Then Dex-focus has a cost but not such a massive cost it has now. And Str-focus has so many natural bonuses when it comes to melee combat that it's fine really (tripping, two-handed weapons, power attacks, etc.).

Yes sir absolutely. Just don't want to displace Shadow Blade completely. As for tripping type stuff, I've borrowed some ideas from PF's CMB (I think they've been thought reading me) to even the pace between DEX/STR.

Eldariel
2010-10-23, 06:50 PM
Yes sir absolutely. Just don't want to displace Shadow Blade completely. As for tripping type stuff, I've borrowed some ideas from PF's CMB (I think they've been thought reading me) to even the pace between DEX/STR.

Replacing Shadow Blade and designing it again is just fine to grant some benefit for Shadow Hand users without pigeonholing every Dex-based melee type into that. Shadow Blade is a bit too restricted as it stands, anyways; makes many iconic Dex-based weapons like Rapier, Kukri and company really niché.

lsfreak
2010-10-23, 06:51 PM
Yes sir absolutely. Just don't want to displace Shadow Blade completely. As for tripping type stuff, I've borrowed some ideas from PF's CMB (I think they've been thought reading me) to even the pace between DEX/STR.

Let Shadow Blade stack with the Dex-to-damage from Weapon Finesse, so that you're getting 2xDex to damage instead of 1x. This puts it a bit more in line with PA 2h'ers, though at a feat cost.

Trundlebug
2010-10-23, 07:32 PM
Let Shadow Blade stack with the Dex-to-damage from Weapon Finesse, so that you're getting 2xDex to damage instead of 1x. This puts it a bit more in line with PA 2h'ers, though at a feat cost.

Seems the most straightforward and solid, so far I'm leaning towards the ghosttouch while in a SH stance but...

You may be right. This could make a good topic, I'll search around the boards to see if it's discussed already. Not tonight as I have stuff to do.

Thanks.

Leon
2010-10-23, 09:38 PM
I find it somewhat annoying that it has the requiremets and that it doesnt Inc DEX to damage as well but most times if i make a PC that has Finesse it also has levels in Swashbuckler so i get it for free.

Runestar
2010-10-23, 09:51 PM
In the very least, weapon finesse should not have that irritating requirement of +1 bab.

As for whether it should cost a feat, I dunno...dex is already quite useful, being factored into a variety of stats. Should it be allowed to modify attack rolls for free as well?

Well for one, ray of enfeeblement would be a lot less useful against animals, since once their str dips below their dex, they can automatically use dex and prevent their to-hit from dropping further. :smallcool:

Tavar
2010-10-23, 10:03 PM
One thing to remember is that after level 1 and until the upper teens, relying more on armor and less on Dex is going to give you a better bonus, as it's easier to rater the former than the latter. Thus, dex builds have worse AC, unless they go for heavy armor.

El Dorado
2010-10-23, 10:14 PM
I like what's been suggested about allowing characters to automatically use their dex with finessable weapons. Also agree with changing the feat so that it adds damage based on dex. Rogues and Swashbucklers will love you for it.

Thorcrest
2010-10-23, 10:32 PM
...So half of your houserule is that Weapon Finesse applies to... all the weapons it already applied to?

While the description does state this, in the weapons table (3.5 PHB Page 91) it has both the 1 and 2 in superscript and the 2 is listed for taking it multiple times as each time it applies to a different weapon... always wondered why they put that there...

Anyways, I would say get rid of the feat for Weapon Finesse, or keep the feat and allow it to add damage from Dexterity.

Siosilvar
2010-10-23, 10:44 PM
While the description does state this, in the weapons table (3.5 PHB Page 91) it has both the 1 and 2 in superscript and the 2 is listed for taking it multiple times as each time it applies to a different weapon... always wondered why they put that there...

Your copy has a holdover from 3.0, where Weapon Finesse did indeed apply to only one weapon.

Thorcrest
2010-10-23, 10:48 PM
That is what I had thought, but I still found it odd that the Description of the feat states it applies to all light weapons and rapier.

Tavar
2010-10-23, 10:50 PM
Well, do note that Description/actual text trumps table if they contradict.

Ravens_cry
2010-10-23, 11:05 PM
I am going to go against the flow and say it should cost a feat. Why? Because feats are all about customizing your character. Going from using primarily your strength to your agility when using a weapon is a rather big leap. I agree that +1 BAB as a prerequisite is rather too high though.

Tavar
2010-10-23, 11:09 PM
But why is using strength the standard. Shouldn't it be Dex is the standard, with Str as a side option?

Tvtyrant
2010-10-23, 11:15 PM
But why is using strength the standard. Shouldn't it be Dex is the standard, with Str as a side option?

But then everyone would play ranger. The reason I support it as a feat is that Weapon Finesse prevents MAD when using archery/melee. If there were a feat to allow you to use bows off of str, then it would be more balanced.

Ravens_cry
2010-10-23, 11:17 PM
But why is using strength the standard. Shouldn't it be Dex is the standard, with Str as a side option?
Because the common, I am not saying this is right, idea of Medieval period European swordsmanship is one that is more about strength compared to the flighty Flynn-ing with rapiers.

Runestar
2010-10-23, 11:59 PM
But why is using strength the standard. Shouldn't it be Dex is the standard, with Str as a side option?

Because learning how to wield a weapon more dexterously should require some training, compared to simply swinging it with all your brute force? :smalltongue:

Zeful
2010-10-24, 12:12 AM
Because learning how to wield a weapon more dexterously should require some training, compared to simply swinging it with all your brute force? :smalltongue:

And telegraphing your attack so badly that against anyone remotely competent, it should miss unless you have them tied down to something. Even Power Attack isn't just swinging with all the force you can muster (which is a lot).

Darrin
2010-10-24, 06:57 AM
There is a way to get the effects of Weapon Finesse without actually taking the feat. If you add the Feycraft template to a light weapon (DMGII), you take a slight ding on damage but can attack as if you had the Weapon Finesse feat.

Iceciro
2010-10-24, 07:31 AM
When I DM, Weapon Finesse and Power Attack are both free feats for chars with the relevant stat above 14.

I don't feel either feat is equivalent to say, Extend Spell or such. Melee classes already get the short end of the stick when it comes to other things, no reason to force them to spend a feat at first level to be moderately useful.

Amiria
2010-10-24, 07:39 AM
In Mongoose Publishing's Conan D20 RPG, Finesse is an attack option and not a feat. You also get Dex instead of Str to Damage with the finessable weapons.

Conan D20 is a system where you get DR from armor and if your attack roll is good enough to hit the enemy Dodge/Parry defense + his DR rating then the hit ignores the DR because you finessed past the armor.

Concerning D&D, I don't think that Weapon Finesse should cost a feat. We'll probably implement that in our group's house rules when we start playing D&D again.

grarrrg
2010-10-24, 05:10 PM
Because feats are all about customizing your character. Going from using primarily your strength to your agility when using a weapon is a rather big leap.

Going from a strictly game mechanics perspective, I agree with you.

Going from a real world stand-point, however, I MUST disagree.
Take for example the Whip (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#whip).

In real life, a Whip is a 'dexterity ONLY' weapon, a whip-user doesn't beneft much, if at all, from higher 'strength'. I conced that STR can help with 'trip' and 'disarm' attempts, but to use a Whip as a weapon, STR has nothing to do with it.

Ravens_cry
2010-10-24, 05:22 PM
Going from a strictly game mechanics perspective, I agree with you.

Going from a real world stand-point, however, I MUST disagree.
Take for example the Whip (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#whip).

In real life, a Whip is a 'dexterity ONLY' weapon, a whip-user doesn't beneft much, if at all, from higher 'strength'. I conced that STR can help with 'trip' and 'disarm' attempts, but to use a Whip as a weapon, STR has nothing to do with it. If you were using a whip as lash, the only way to actually hurt someone with a whip, I can see how by default someone would try to put some strength into it.
Whips are almost totally manoeuvre based weapons anyway, being practically useless from a damage perspective. The rules aren't perfect, far from it, but they do a more then fair job of modelling fantasy combat without getting too bogged down in my view.

Realms of Chaos
2010-10-25, 12:25 AM
One thing to remember is that after level 1 and until the upper teens, relying more on armor and less on Dex is going to give you a better bonus, as it's easier to rater the former than the latter. Thus, dex builds have worse AC, unless they go for heavy armor.

What?

36 Dex is quite possible to pull off in a game for a dedicated Dex fighter, giving the same +13 bonus to AC that +5 full plate provides. Though sword-and-board battlers do get a higher bonus overall with their shield, anyoen fighting with two hands is, at most, going to get an extra +1 from a Dex bonus on top of that.

When you consider, however, that bracers of armor can be added into the mix, however, and that Dex-fighters and Str-fighters have equal reliance of other sources of armor (like amulets of natural armor, ring of protection, etc), the Dex-fighter seems to equal out (the extra +8 from bracers of armor perfectly cancels out the 1 point of dexterity and the +7 shield bonus from the +5 heavy shield some fighters carry around). While there admittedly is a (cheap) armor enhancement that lets fighters use more of their Dex modifier, few fighters actually build themselves so that they can't use their ability scores appropriately until they get very specific equipment (at least that's my experience).

That said, the Dex character is still kind of hosed because they can't get properties like fortification on thier bodies but even those abilities don't tend to come up that often. Still, the source of the hosing doesn't seem to be low AC. :smallconfused:

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 12:37 AM
What?

36 Dex is quite possible to pull off in a game for a dedicated Dex fighter, giving the same +13 bonus to AC that +5 full plate provides. Though sword-and-board battlers do get a higher bonus overall with their shield, anyoen fighting with two hands is, at most, going to get an extra +1 from a Dex bonus on top of that.

When you consider, however, that bracers of armor can be added into the mix, however, and that Dex-fighters and Str-fighters have equal reliance of other sources of armor (like amulets of natural armor, ring of protection, etc), the Dex-fighter seems to equal out (the extra +8 from bracers of armor perfectly cancels out the 1 point of dexterity and the +7 shield bonus from the +5 heavy shield some fighters carry around). While there admittedly is a (cheap) armor enhancement that lets fighters use more of their Dex modifier, few fighters actually build themselves so that they can't use their ability scores appropriately until they get very specific equipment (at least that's my experience).

That said, the Dex character is still kind of hosed because they can't get properties like fortification on thier bodies but even those abilities don't tend to come up that often. Still, the source of the hosing doesn't seem to be low AC. :smallconfused:

Well, Fullplate beats all other Core (mind, out of core Mechanus Gear beats Fullplate but is even more unwieldy) armor save for magical armors in composite AC, so until you can afford Tomes to boost Dex, your maximum AC is probably going to involve a Mithril Fullplate. Which needs 16 Dex to max out your AC. Of course, it's relatively ridiculous that someone with 16 Dex in a Mithril Fullplate has the same AC as someone with 36 Dex in a Mithril Fullplate (it can't constrict your movement that much, especially since all the stuff you're carrying, clothes and such doesn't seem to be a hurdle)..

I have this little houserule in place that beyond the max dex of an armor, you get ½ of any Dex bonus beyond the max dex to your AC too. So if you have like 20 Dex and wear a Mithral Fullplate, you get +4 Dex bonus to AC (instead of the normal +3) and if your Dex is something obscene like 28, you get +6 Dex bonus. This helps with the whole "Regardless of what you wear, being Dexterous increases AC" and balances armor types a bit; now it's choice between faster movement speeds and lower ACPs of the lighter armors vs. the better protection of the heavier ones.

Chambers
2010-10-25, 12:39 AM
Weapon Finesse & Power Attack should both be combat options, not feats.

Then you can have the Improved Weapon Finesse and Improved Power Attack feats.

IWF: Add Dex mod to damage and use Dexterity for combat maneuvers (bull rush, grapple, etc).
IPA: Deal 2:1 with a one-handed weapon, deal 3:1 with a two-handed.

I always combine Point Blank Shot & Precise Shot into a single feat (Precision Shooting). I usually drop all the attack penalties for Two Weapon Fighting as well.

lsfreak
2010-10-25, 01:30 AM
Weapon Finesse & Power Attack should both be combat options, not feats.

Then you can have the Improved Weapon Finesse and Improved Power Attack feats.

IWF: Add Dex mod to damage and use Dexterity for combat maneuvers (bull rush, grapple, etc).
IPA: Deal 2:1 with a one-handed weapon, deal 3:1 with a two-handed.

I don't even like Weapon Finesse as a combat option. It should be outside of that, and you should be able to 'Power Attack' whether you're Str-based or Dex-based, with Str based being the more stereotypical sacrificing accuracy for power, Dex based (also usable with projectile weapons) going after more damaging but more easily countered spots.

Greenish
2010-10-25, 01:48 AM
I don't even like Weapon Finesse as a combat option. It should be outside of that, and you should be able to 'Power Attack' whether you're Str-based or Dex-based, with Str based being the more stereotypical sacrificing accuracy for power, Dex based (also usable with projectile weapons) going after more damaging but more easily countered spots.Agreed. "Power Shot" should exist outside one single weapon in one very obscure sourcebook.

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 01:49 AM
Agreed. "Power Shot" should exist outside one single weapon in one very obscure sourcebook.

And one class's class feature. Really, Vital Aim is one of my favorite additions in Pathfinder.

Susano-wo
2010-10-25, 02:41 AM
not really sure how Shadow Blade is not a good feat for a shadow hand user. you do realize that is doesn't add dex damage instead of STR, but in addition, right? (or is there some errata on it?)

Ravens_cry
2010-10-25, 02:53 AM
not really sure how Shadow Blade is not a good feat for a shadow hand user. you do realize that is doesn't add dex damage instead of STR, but in addition, right? (or is there some errata on it?)
In addition is potentially even better with point buy as two 14's is cheaper then an 18.

ffone
2010-10-25, 03:37 AM
The thing about making certain weapons Dex only is that Conan becomes worse at hitting things with a rapier than with a random improvised weapon (like, say, the hilt of the rapier) if his Str mod exceeds his Dex mod by 5 or more.

Djibriel
2010-10-25, 03:38 AM
Huh. I'm fine with Weapon Finesse as a feat. Dex is far more useful for a Halfling Rogue; Initiative, AC, a lot of Rogue skills all work with Dex. Taking Strength that low was a choice the player made to boost other attributes; for a melee character, low Strength should have disadvantages. Replacing every Str check with a Dex check for free doesn't do justice to a weakness the player him- or herself installed in the character; turning the Rogue more SAD should come at *some* cost. I don't think the "melee casters get the short end of the stick anyway" card really applies here since it seems the characters start at level 1; in my experience low-level 20 Dex Halfling Rogues, with or without WF, have no trouble outshining whatever caster at that level.

Dsurion
2010-10-25, 06:25 AM
I like the way it's done in the Frank and K tomes, where most of the special combat options don't require feats to not suck at.

In other words,

Power Attack
Combat Expertise
Bull Rush
Disarm
etc.

Don't have to eat up a feat each.

Amphetryon
2010-10-25, 07:01 AM
Slippery slope, here.

"Weapon Finesse should not cost a feat; I should be able to swing my rapier gracefully instead of forcefully if I want."

morphs into:

"Power Attack should not cost a feat; I can swing my weapon forcefully, so I should be able to swing harder and less accurately if I want."

which gets followed up by:

"Leap Attack should not cost a feat; I already paid ranks in the Jump skill, so I should be able to swing really hard while jumping if I want."

I could go on, but you see my point.

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 07:26 AM
Slippery slope, here.

"Weapon Finesse should not cost a feat; I should be able to swing my rapier gracefully instead of forcefully if I want."

morphs into:

"Power Attack should not cost a feat; I can swing my weapon forcefully, so I should be able to swing harder and less accurately if I want."

which gets followed up by:

"Leap Attack should not cost a feat; I already paid ranks in the Jump skill, so I should be able to swing really hard while jumping if I want."

I could go on, but you see my point.

Nah. Power Attack argument can be made but anything beyond that is so specialized it does indeed require a feat. Like Leap Attack isn't just jumping and attacking, it's a specialized kind of jump during a charge to increase the momentum of your swing.

Weapon Finesse, on the other hand, is how you wield Rapier anyways. Honestly, you shouldn't be able to wield Rapier with Str; strength has absolutely nothing to do with Rapier combat. The ability is inherent to the weapon; it should be such. Whether you wish to allow Str wielding such weapons or not is another question tho.

Mikka
2010-10-25, 07:47 AM
Dex: +attack +damage +reflex saves +ac +initiativ

str: +attack +damage

. . right

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 07:52 AM
str: +attack +damage

And combat maneuvers (very important for melee types) and 1.5* to damage. Don't worry, world won't end even if you can get Dex to damage and to hit; Str still has a place, especially since it is added to damage too.

lesser_minion
2010-10-25, 07:56 AM
But why is using strength the standard. Shouldn't it be Dex is the standard, with Str as a side option?

Why should there be a standard?

On their own, neither strength nor dexterity stands out as an obvious choice for an ability score to add to attack rolls, and you could make a case for intelligence as well.

And the way hitpoints work, the connection between the strength of a fighter and the damage done by his attacks is a lot more tenuous than it appears -- Hitting hard isn't as important as hitting well (220 J delivered by an ice pick to the neck will kill. 220 kJ delivered by a battleaxe to the little toe will merely hurt).

So why not simply drop the standard altogether -- without a feat, you don't add ability score bonuses to attack or damage rolls. With the right feats, you can add either Strength, Dexterity, or Intelligence.

You'd have to give certain character classes those feats for free, obviously, but once you've done that, I think you actually would be making the D&D combat system a saner place.

I'd prefer not to make this sort of thing inherent to particular weapons, since that gives mental ability scores the shaft, and I'd prefer not to do that.

mangosta71
2010-10-25, 09:28 AM
How much training does every character receive before they even get their first character level? In all that time, dexterous characters never learn to effectively wield their weapons? It's compounded by the BAB requirement for Finesse - a rogue can't even take it at level 1. Having it as a feat makes it mandatory for dex-based classes, meaning that those classes have fewer customization options.

Perhaps, instead of removing the feat, simply make it a class feature for those whose classes make it mandatory. Rogue, ninja, scout, swordsage, etc. get it free at level 1 just like swashbucklers do. Adding dex to damage isn't significant given that all of those classes are adding damage dice from their special abilities anyway (as long as they're doing it right, anyway).

Tavar
2010-10-25, 10:53 AM
And combat maneuvers (very important for melee types) and 1.5* to damage. Don't worry, world won't end even if you can get Dex to damage and to hit; Str still has a place, especially since it is added to damage too.

Very true. Plus, it's much easier to boost str-based damage, so much so that going dex based is noticeably inferior.

Oh, and note that the Dex=Ac fact is...misleading. Dex gives a bonus, yes, but it's much, much, much easier to boost non-dex related sources of AC, so that after the first level it's solidly in the favor of non-Dex reliant builds. Unless those builds put on heavy armor, but then they're not getting their full dex bonus, and it's pretty much a wash.

Zeful
2010-10-25, 11:10 AM
On their own, neither strength nor dexterity stands out as an obvious choice for an ability score to add to attack rolls, and you could make a case for intelligence as well.

You can also make a case for Wisdom, being able to percieve an enemies attack, read their body language, are all important for discovering weakpoints that allow you to attack more effectively (as well as counter and dodge, but that's another discussion entirely). I could probably make a case for Charisma as well if I tried particularily hard, but it's a stretch at best.


So why not simply drop the standard altogether -- without a feat, you don't add ability score bonuses to attack or damage rolls. With the right feats, you can add either Strength, Dexterity, or Intelligence.
It's a competence issue. A wizard at level one is profiecent enough to devote energy to cast level 1 spells without any exceptional talent in the field (compare to a bard, who is not), so why is a fighter (or Rogue, Barbarian, or any non-caster class) not competent enough in his field to fight with a specific style that increases his effectiveness in combat?

kryan
2010-10-25, 11:21 AM
You could give certain classes certain versions of those feats as bonus feats. Fighter gets his pick, Ranger and Rogue get Dex, Paladin and Knight get Str. Cleric with War Domain maybe gets Wis. Normal Clerics, Druids, Sorcerers, and Wizards get none. It could work. Kind of an interesting idea.

Could do something similar with spells, to add an ability modifier to the save DC or something.

ffone
2010-10-25, 04:54 PM
Dex: +attack +damage +reflex saves +ac +initiativ

str: +attack +damage

. . right

+1.

If it's balanced for Weapon Finesse to be free, and Dex to damage to be onr feat.....then it should be 'balanced' to have 1 feat which lets you use Str (instead of Dex) for AC bonus AND Initiative AND Reflex saves AND far more skills (including the ones that are already of most use to rogues, like Hide, Move Silently, Open Locks, and Tumble).

ffone
2010-10-25, 04:59 PM
Weapon Finesse, on the other hand, is how you wield Rapier anyways. Honestly, you shouldn't be able to wield Rapier with Str; strength has absolutely nothing to do with Rapier combat. The ability is inherent to the weapon; it should be such. Whether you wish to allow Str wielding such weapons or not is another question tho.

So if a character's Str mod exceeds his Dex mod by 5 or more, he's more effective using a rapier as an improvised weapon (say, bashing with the hilt) at a -4 penalty (for improvised weapons) than using it as an actual weapon as intended (pointy end goes into the other guy)?

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 05:02 PM
So if a character's Str mod exceeds his Dex mod by 5 or more, he's more effective using a rapier as an improvised weapon (say, bashing with the hilt) at a -4 penalty (for improvised weapons) than using it as an actual weapon as intended (pointy end goes into the other guy)?

Pretty much, yeah. Seems fairly obvious to me; if you're bestially strong but lack the coordination of a mule, you're really best off using weapons with which you can simply smash at the general direction of your opponent and do horrific damage if you land hits (axes, maces, the like) rather than something with which you're supposed to unravel opponent's defenses with a series of small, precise strikes followed by landing hits with the only sharp part of the weapon.

Your strength simply doesn't help with landing that hit (though it will make the blow more telling); as such, you'll probably have an easier time hitting damagingly with the hilt and HULK SMASH than the pointy end.

BRC
2010-10-25, 05:05 PM
Personally, I'm fine with giving Weapon Finesse free, I wouldn't give Dex to Damage though. Maybe with a feat, but not regularly.

Currently, Dex provides bonuses to Ranged attacks, AC, Reflex saves, lots of skills, and some melee attacks (with this rule).
Strength provides Melee attacks, melee damage, very few skills, endurance (rarely comes up in my games) and stuff like grapples, trips, bull rushes, ect, all of which rarely comes up.
Also, my mind has trouble with the idea of adding Dex to damage (I hit them in a more crucial spot) but not Strength (And by doing so the fact that I can bench press a cow is irrelevant!). While applying both of them would be silly from a game standpoint.

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 05:09 PM
Personally, I'm fine with giving Weapon Finesse free, I wouldn't give Dex to Damage though. Maybe with a feat, but not regularly.

Currently, Dex provides bonuses to Ranged attacks, AC, Reflex saves, lots of skills, and some melee attacks (with this rule).
Strength provides Melee attacks, melee damage, very few skills, endurance (rarely comes up in my games) and stuff like grapples, trips, bull rushes, ect, all of which rarely comes up.
Also, my mind has trouble with the idea of adding Dex to damage (I hit them in a more crucial spot) but not Strength (And by doing so the fact that I can bench press a cow is irrelevant!). While applying both of them would be silly from a game standpoint.

I actually have no problem with applying both. Strength gets applied 1.5* with two-handers anyways, so finesse weapons getting like ½ Str and Dex to damage with the feat would work out fine. You can't efficiently pump two stats anyways.

And I find the combat maneuvers are of huge importance. Most solid melee builds want access to some manner of tripping, bull rushing or such all of which is str-based. This has many times dissuaded me from going Dex SAD unless all I care about is damage. Besides, Dex doesn't really increase your AC all that much due to armor caps anyways. Oh, and a vast number of monsters attack with Improved Grab or Trip or some variation there-of; it's very key to have high Str if you wish to fight those.

BRC
2010-10-25, 05:17 PM
I actually have no problem with applying both. Strength gets applied 1.5* with two-handers anyways, so finesse weapons getting like ½ Str and Dex to damage with the feat would work out fine. You can't efficiently pump two stats anyways.
Perhaps, and with a Feat. Iv'e seen some players get lucky rolls and be able to do some nasty stacking.
1/2 Str and Dex maybe. I wouldn't let them do it with finessable 2-handers though.


And I find the combat maneuvers are of huge importance. Most solid melee builds want access to some manner of tripping, bull rushing or such all of which is str-based. This has many times dissuaded me from going Dex SAD unless all I care about is damage. Besides, Dex doesn't really increase your AC all that much due to armor caps anyways. Oh, and a vast number of monsters attack with Improved Grab or Trip or some variation there-of; it's very key to have high Str if you wish to fight those.
That's probably more about the type of game I tend to play then anything. My first group played somewhat rules-light, we didn't keep track of experience, mundane ammo, or weight (we generally just used common sense concerning what our character could lug around). Trips, bull rushes, disarms and grapples rarely showed up in combat, kind of as part of an unspoken agreement between all involved to keep things simple. It streamlined gameplay, and let those who hadn't really studied the rules still have a good time.
I was the only one of my new group who had previously played, so I transmitted the same general philosophy to them.

Skorj
2010-10-25, 07:29 PM
Pretty much, yeah. Seems fairly obvious to me; if you're bestially strong but lack the coordination of a mule, you're really best off using weapons with which you can simply smash at the general direction of your opponent and do horrific damage if you land hits (axes, maces, the like) rather than something with which you're supposed to unravel opponent's defenses with a series of small, precise strikes followed by landing hits with the only sharp part of the weapon.

Your strength simply doesn't help with landing that hit (though it will make the blow more telling); as such, you'll probably have an easier time hitting damagingly with the hilt and HULK SMASH than the pointy end.

Rapiers are not fencing foils, and strength is very much a part of fighting with a rapier. Even with foils, fencers have some of the most demanding conditioning of any sport, and are very succeptable to lifelong sport-related injury. Fencing lets you substitute lower body strengh for some of your upper body strength, but that's still strength.

When rapier-against-rapier DEX plays a large part, because parrying there works differently from other weapons (you stop needing STR to parry). Rapier against a guy in broadsword and fullplate? Strength helps in that case. (But a fantasy feat that lets you substitute DEX for the to-hit portion eben there is quite reasonable.) Also, a rapier blade is pretty strong - they simply weren't used until the quality of steel allowed you to use your full strength in attacking without damaging the weapon.

Strength was quite important to fighting with a gladius or other short sword as well.

kryan
2010-10-25, 07:39 PM
Dex: +attack +damage +reflex saves +ac +initiativ

str: +attack +damage

. . right
+1.

If it's balanced for Weapon Finesse to be free, and Dex to damage to be onr feat.....then it should be 'balanced' to have 1 feat which lets you use Str (instead of Dex) for AC bonus AND Initiative AND Reflex saves AND far more skills (including the ones that are already of most use to rogues, like Hide, Move Silently, Open Locks, and Tumble).
You're both ignoring the other things Str is used on - Trip, Grapple, 1.5x multiplier on damage, etc. And ignoring Dex's limitations - mostly in the form of not being able to take great advantage of high Dex if you're wearing heavy armor.

For Core melee, Str is still better even if you can get Dex to attack and damage for free.

Eldariel
2010-10-25, 07:51 PM
Rapiers are not fencing foils, and strength is very much a part of fighting with a rapier. Even with foils, fencers have some of the most demanding conditioning of any sport, and are very succeptable to lifelong sport-related injury. Fencing lets you substitute lower body strengh for some of your upper body strength, but that's still strength.

When rapier-against-rapier DEX plays a large part, because parrying there works differently from other weapons (you stop needing STR to parry). Rapier against a guy in broadsword and fullplate? Strength helps in that case. (But a fantasy feat that lets you substitute DEX for the to-hit portion eben there is quite reasonable.) Also, a rapier blade is pretty strong - they simply weren't used until the quality of steel allowed you to use your full strength in attacking without damaging the weapon.

Strength was quite important to fighting with a gladius or other short sword as well.

Well, fair enough. Short Swords seem obvious enough, but with Rapier, isn't Str the part you'd use for damage and Dex the part you'd need for landing the hits? I mean, yeah, it's demanding as all manners of combat is, of course, but wouldn't that on the other hand land under Con? What I'm saying is, raising your Rapier above your head and bringing it down on your opponent á la broadsword isn't like to cause all that much damage no matter how strong you are; there's one part in the sword that's designed to deal damage and landing hits with that one part does require finesse.

Str for damage, sure. Armor as DR and all that jazz, then Str counts against penetrating the armor and so on. Seems fine. But Str to hit? I always perceive Str-based hitting as simple taking fast, powerful swings at the opponent; the stronger you are, the faster the hits and the better they hit. Such swings don't really feel useful with a Rapier tho.

kryan
2010-10-25, 08:01 PM
In reality, basically every ability modifier would come into play in a sword swing. The system is abstracting this. The fact that rapiers "seem" more dexterous, then, seems like a valid argument for them using Dex, even if this is not the reality.

ffone
2010-10-25, 08:05 PM
Pretty much, yeah. Seems fairly obvious to me; if you're bestially strong but lack the coordination of a mule, you're really best off using weapons with which you can simply smash at the general direction of your opponent and do horrific damage if you land hits (axes, maces, the like) rather than something with which you're supposed to unravel opponent's defenses with a series of small, precise strikes followed by landing hits with the only sharp part of the weapon.

Your strength simply doesn't help with landing that hit (though it will make the blow more telling); as such, you'll probably have an easier time hitting damagingly with the hilt and HULK SMASH than the pointy end.

What about against creatures whose AC is mostly natural armor...wouldn't strength still help you push through the natural armor, things like that? (Or of a rapier is all about hitting the right 'weak point' of the natural armor character, what if it's an ooze?)

Honestly, discussions like this are doomed to Opinion, b/c

1. Strength, Dexterity, and the other stats are abstractions which 'cluster' high-dimension beings (people and other creatures) into 6 dimensions, and just happen to have names which everyone has their own vernacular interpretation of (esp. with Intelligence vs Wisdom). If they were named Ability A, B, C, D, E, F instead, it would have zero effect on mechanics, but would it change our opinions?

For example, a cleric's melee touch attack spells will (assumign he lacks Weapon Finesse) use Strength. We could complain that this is unrealistic and should clearly be Dexterity, or we could infer from this fact that DnD Strength actually includes some of the attributes (like how quickly your muscles can propel your arm, or however you want to roleplay it) which we otherwise thought of as Dexterity.

2. Attack rolls collapse both the 'targeting' and 'penetration' aspects of attacking into a single roll (with damage also reflecting part of this, perhaps, likewise threat rolls and precision damage) and leave to interpretation questions of misses due to 'missing' the target vs failing to penetrate (natural) armor (and things like slashing attacks which become less-damaging 'crushing' attacks due to impact against armor, etc.)

Attacking probably involves both what most of us think of as vernacular 'strength' and 'dexterity', so the mechanics which simplify an attack to only use one or the other are sort of doomed if you demand too much 'realism' (and 'realism' almost always involves your own personal interpretation of how the rules reflect the game-world reality).

For example, let's say you have the ability to throw weapons without provoking AoOs, from an Arrow Mind spell or whatever. If your Dex >> your Str and you lack WF, and you have Quick Draw and only a bunch of nonmagical weapons, you're better of drawing and 'throwing' them at an adjacent foe (to use Dex) rather than 'melee' attacking (to use Str), odd as it may seem.

BRC
2010-10-25, 08:09 PM
In reality, basically every ability modifier would come into play in a sword swing. The system is abstracting this. The fact that rapiers "seem" more dexterous, then, seems like a valid argument for them using Dex, even if this is not the reality.
Hrmm, lets see...
Strength: penetrating armor, dealing damage, overpowering parries and the like.
Dex: Putting your sword in the right place, avoiding parries and dodges, footwork, ect.
Constitution: Wouldn't really affect an individual swing, but over many swings not getting fatigue would be a big deal (I did a little fencing once ,and it was somewhat tiring. I have a feeling swinging around a big hunk of metal, while wearing a big hunk of metal, is going to tire you out pretty quickly)
Wisdom: Includes being alert and noticing things, so good for reacting, predicting where the enemy is going to go, noticing chinks in armor.
Intelligence: Knowing the particular style the enemy is using, identifying weak points, maybe noticing patterns or making logical decisions (They are holding a big mace and are slightly off balance every time they swing).
Charisma: bluffing and feinting I guess. Charisma is also said to include confidence, so maybe that could help?

ffone
2010-10-25, 08:14 PM
Str for damage, sure. Armor as DR and all that jazz, then Str counts against penetrating the armor and so on. Seems fine. But Str to hit? I always perceive Str-based hitting as simple taking fast, powerful swings at the opponent; the stronger you are, the faster the hits and the better they hit. Such swings don't really feel useful with a Rapier tho.


Also, maybe Str helps you 'crash' through your opponent's would-be parries, or push back from your parries of his attacks to then make your own (trope movie scene - two guys parry each other, and struggle to push each other's swords against each other, yadda yadda).



You're both ignoring the other things Str is used on - Trip, Grapple, 1.5x multiplier on damage, etc. And ignoring Dex's limitations - mostly in the form of not being able to take great advantage of high Dex if you're wearing heavy armor.

For Core melee, Str is still better even if you can get Dex to attack and damage for free.

re: 1.5 Str multiplier - but if Dex can be added to damage, what if you use a 2-hander or TWF? Doesn't that feat for Dex damage in Shadow Hand stances/weapons actually let you apply full Dex to off-hand attacks, in effect making it 2x?

And even if you remove the 1.5x, it's only costing you a few points of Str damage.

re: trip, grapple, etc. The defender in a trip can use Dex instead of Str. A char escaping a grapple can use Escape Artist instead of Str - which, as a skill, can can be improved with ranks and-or cheap skill-boosting, items. Also, Dex improves touch AC, helping you dodge the trip and grapple attempts entirely.
So bringing up grapples and trips might actually favor Dex over Str even more.
At high level play, a ring of Freedom of Movement negates grapples entirely. (And as a corner case for high optimization, there's a skill trick in Complete Scoundrel whichlets you get out of prone for free. Since it requires 12 tumble ranks, this again favors a Dex build for avoiding trips.) I'm not claiming no char would still prefer Str, just that it's being reduced to debatable corner cases, and thus not well balanced for most situations and games.

Yeah, there are advantages to Str....but if you're any character other than one who likes to initiate grapples and trips....are these situational modifiers really better than modifiers to ranged attacks and AC (inc. touch AC), and Reflex, and initiative, and so many skills?

Also, once you can afford to fly at high levels, tripping and grappling become less of an issue, and the Str based skills are mostly redundant.

kryan
2010-10-25, 08:42 PM
You've just highlighted many of the things wrong with Core melee*. I don't disagree with you.

That said, I'm stating, flat-out, that even if you could get Dex to attack and damage for free, Str is better. Because Core melee's options are ubercharging, trip-lockdown, or Dungeoncrashing. Everything else basically doesn't really work all that well. And all three of those depend upon or work better with Str, due the 1.5*Str multiplier and/or the fact that you use Str to use combat maneuvers.

The ability to use Dex in defending yourself from combat maneuvers does nothing for your ability to attack others. Defense is important but offense is more so, in this game. So no, that does not appreciably change things, IMO.

* by Core melee, I mean any class that primarily fights using the Core rules for melee combat. This includes Fighters, but also Ninjas and Swashbucklers. I'm primarily excluding Psychic Warriors, Meldshapers, and Martial Adepts from this.

ffone
2010-10-26, 02:03 AM
That said, I'm stating, flat-out, that even if you could get Dex to attack and damage for free, Str is better. Because Core melee's options are ubercharging, trip-lockdown, or Dungeoncrashing. Everything else basically doesn't really work all that well. And all three of those depend upon or work better with Str, due the 1.5*Str multiplier and/or the fact that you use Str to use combat maneuvers.


The thing is, once you have Dex to damage, you don't really need to be Str based to be an ubercharger. Most of its pieces only require, what, Str 13 (Power Attack) or maybe 15. You can 1:2 power attack with a rapier, I believe (just not add 1-1/2 Str) or there's always the spiked chain for Finesse and two-handedness (which is great for other reasons) or the elven courtblade (also exotic, more damage but otherwise spiked chain is better).

Once the damage modifiers are high enough, a rapier's wide threat range pulls it ahead of most two-handed and reach weapons with less threat-ness and higher base damage (there's the khopesh or scythe for a tiny bit more damage for non-finessers with the same threat-ness).

This is what's so depressing about advice and discussions at GitP in general. They tend to distill to "melee is horrible, primary prepared spellcasters are everything ("Tier 1s"), and anything other than the ubercharging tripper reach Warblade with the following manuevers is beneath consideration" (so we should balance all physical attacking rules around this build, and give it lots of extras to help it vs the Tier 1s.)

Maybe that's correct in some mathematical, game theoretic sense or keeps PvP interesting in 2010. But even if it is, it's not very practical advice. Most groups are not that optimized. And the fact is, lots of people choose to play physical characters and don't get outshined by the party casters (I guess their players just aren't as smart as you guys or whatever). I virtually always find that more people want to play attackers than clerics or wizards, esp. male players, despite the latter supposedly being letter, so rebalance isn't necessary for diversity's sake. And it would be rather boring game design to be steered towards one build for all melee chars, b/c of a 'fix' that improves it even more and leaves the others in the dust. Would we really want one of the six ability scores to only be justified by tripper builds?

Also, I think you and many GitPers tend to underrate defense...perhaps b/c you're all so skilled that PC defeat is almost off the table, whereas for many players it 'still' matters.

And anyway, I disagee about the tradeoff. For the guy who initiates trip and grapples, Str would still be more important (but being good at it would come at a high cost of not achieving Dex SAD, so that it might not seem like 'the way to go' anymore). But for the guy who just deals damage, (and tries to avoid trips and grapples), the Dex build would become better with these rules. Even if you don't care about defense, Dex modifies hide, move silently,and initiative, and uberchargers like to win surprise rounds and-or initiative...

Eldariel
2010-10-26, 09:33 AM
The thing is, once you have Dex to damage, you don't really need to be Str based to be an ubercharger. Most of its pieces only require, what, Str 13 (Power Attack) or maybe 15. You can 1:2 power attack with a rapier, I believe (just not add 1-1/2 Str) or there's always the spiked chain for Finesse and two-handedness (which is great for other reasons) or the elven courtblade (also exotic, more damage but otherwise spiked chain is better).

Rapier is only one-handable. And it's still not worth a feat. Besides, the advantages of Dex-focus are pretty much lost in a Charger build since you use Shock Trooper anyways, let alone the fact that you're giving up portion a base damage which can grow notably with multiplies (.5*Str) and you can't use e.g. Trips (rather easy to add to a charger) with it. You're pretty much reduced to an Initiative bonus.


Once the damage modifiers are high enough, a rapier's wide threat range pulls it ahead of most two-handed and reach weapons with less threat-ness and higher base damage (there's the khopesh or scythe for a tiny bit more damage for non-finessers with the same threat-ness).

Uh, what? There are high crit range weapons at all sizes and shapes; what about Falchion?


This is what's so depressing about advice and discussions at GitP in general. They tend to distill to "melee is horrible, primary prepared spellcasters are everything ("Tier 1s"), and anything other than the ubercharging tripper reach Warblade with the following manuevers is beneath consideration" (so we should balance all physical attacking rules around this build, and give it lots of extras to help it vs the Tier 1s.)

Wait, what?


And anyway, I disagee about the tradeoff. For the guy who initiates trip and grapples, Str would still be more important (but being good at it would come at a high cost of not achieving Dex SAD, so that it might not seem like 'the way to go' anymore). But for the guy who just deals damage, (and tries to avoid trips and grapples), the Dex build would become better with these rules. Even if you don't care about defense, Dex modifies hide, move silently,and initiative, and uberchargers like to win surprise rounds and-or initiative...

Nobody plays an Übercharger. If someone plays a Charger, I can promise you he'll want access to Trips and Grapples. The builds involve Rage, for example, and Enlarge Person; things that are awesome but don't really synergize with Dex focus. Further, Trips in particular provide a melee type with great BFC aspects he'd otherwise miss. I'm pretty darn sure optimization level has nothing to do with Dex vs. Str as base-melee. People not optimizing will go with whatever fits their fancy anyways, and optimizers will use whichever is more convenient for their build; there are builds where Str-focus is optimal and ones where Dex-focus is optimal just as it should be. Right now, everything but precision damage builds are Str-focus simply because it's better (sans Shadow Blade).

Coidzor
2010-10-26, 09:36 AM
This is what's so depressing about advice and discussions at GitP in general. They tend to distill to "melee is horrible, primary prepared spellcasters are everything ("Tier 1s"), and anything other than the ubercharging tripper reach Warblade with the following manuevers is beneath consideration" (so we should balance all physical attacking rules around this build, and give it lots of extras to help it vs the Tier 1s.)

We must not frequent the same threads very often because the melee discussions I've run into are not at all like what you describe, even accounting for the hyperbole.


And anyway, I disagee about the tradeoff. For the guy who initiates trip and grapples, Str would still be more important (but being good at it would come at a high cost of not achieving Dex SAD, so that it might not seem like 'the way to go' anymore). But for the guy who just deals damage, (and tries to avoid trips and grapples), the Dex build would become better with these rules. Even if you don't care about defense, Dex modifies hide, move silently,and initiative, and uberchargers like to win surprise rounds and-or initiative...

Heck, if SAD is really that big of a thing, just be a Factotum with font of Inspiration a couple of times and a bumped up Intelligence. Then you can do all kinds of tricks too in addition to tripping with your int and getting int to hit and damage.

Ways and means and things.

Greenish
2010-10-26, 09:45 AM
(And as a corner case for high optimization, there's a skill trick in Complete Scoundrel whichlets you get out of prone for free. Since it requires 12 tumble ranks, this again favors a Dex build for avoiding trips.)Your Dex score doesn't affect your Tumble ranks in any way. Also, getting up from prone as a free action doesn't protect you from being tripped in the first place.

Coidzor
2010-10-26, 10:04 AM
Having high enough ranks to get in through someone's guard with tumble and thus avoid being tripped though, that can be handy.

kryan
2010-10-26, 10:34 AM
The thing is, once you have Dex to damage, you don't really need to be Str based to be an ubercharger. Most of its pieces only require, what, Str 13 (Power Attack) or maybe 15. You can 1:2 power attack with a rapier, I believe (just not add 1-1/2 Str) or there's always the spiked chain for Finesse and two-handedness (which is great for other reasons) or the elven courtblade (also exotic, more damage but otherwise spiked chain is better).
An ubercharger uses a Lance. That's... kind of the point. You want as many multipliers as you can get.


Once the damage modifiers are high enough, a rapier's wide threat range pulls it ahead of most two-handed and reach weapons with less threat-ness and higher base damage (there's the khopesh or scythe for a tiny bit more damage for non-finessers with the same threat-ness).
Hmm, I had never considered that. Not that it has anything to with the argument at hand (criticals are never frequent enough to justify investment into them, really), but it's an interesting idea.


This is what's so depressing about advice and discussions at GitP in general. They tend to distill to "melee is horrible, primary prepared spellcasters are everything ("Tier 1s"), and anything other than the ubercharging tripper reach Warblade with the following manuevers is beneath consideration" (so we should balance all physical attacking rules around this build, and give it lots of extras to help it vs the Tier 1s.)
Fighters are a terrible class. Not just because they are imbalanced (which they are, they fail utterly at keeping up with CR), they're also hideous design. The Monk and Paladin have other, less egregious, design flaws, as well (even though the Monk is undeniably the weakest of the three, they at least get class features; the Fighter's lack thereof is almost insulting).

Warblades do not need to be an ubercharger or a tripper - because the Warblade class is well designed. It has options. The Fighter does not. It seems to have options, but almost all of them are awful. Thus, you're left with charging, tripping, or Dungeoncrashing. Maybe Intimidating with that Zhentarim ACF; I'm not really familiar with that.

People use the Tier system because they are accurate for many people's games. Even the first game I played, where only the DM had played before - the Fighter and Rogue were, thankfully in good humor, commenting on how the Druid's wolf (not even the best choice for Animal Companion) was easily the best fighter in the group after two battles.

The Fighter, Monk, and Paladin, as well as the Ninja, Swashbuckler, Scout, Samurai, Knight, and any other classes I'm forgetting that rely on the basic melee combat rules, are all underpowered and poorly designed. You should not balanced to their level because their power level is less than that intended by the designers. We have a reasonable standard here - the CR system. There are plenty of terrible things about the CR system, but the fact remains that the lower-tier classes cannot keep up with CR unless heavily optimized.

Also, you're offering a massively false dichotomy. Just as we should not balance towards Tier 5's, we should not balance towards Tier 1's. Tier 3 is a pretty commonly accepted "ideal" spot (though some prefer more Tier 4 and others more Tier 2 - and of course, a few do prefer Tier 1 and a few do prefer Tier 5), and is widely used on these boards. Why? Because it's reasonable. Tier 3 is defined as "excelling in their specialized field, without being useless in other fields; capable of performing capably in all situations, but rarely able to completely dominate a problem based on simple mechanical 'win' buttons". That sounds to me to be what people expect from their fantasy characters.

Finally, ragging on GitP for this is absurd. I'm sorry, it just is. This community is, in the grand scheme of things, vaguely anti-optimization. There are boards that hold up Tier 1's as the gold standard - this isn't one of them.


Maybe that's correct in some mathematical, game theoretic sense or keeps PvP interesting in 2010. But even if it is, it's not very practical advice. Most groups are not that optimized. And the fact is, lots of people choose to play physical characters and don't get outshined by the party casters (I guess their players just aren't as smart as you guys or whatever). I virtually always find that more people want to play attackers than clerics or wizards, esp. male players, despite the latter supposedly being letter, so rebalance isn't necessary for diversity's sake. And it would be rather boring game design to be steered towards one build for all melee chars, b/c of a 'fix' that improves it even more and leaves the others in the dust. Would we really want one of the six ability scores to only be justified by tripper builds?
See, no. Maybe that's your group, but it isn't everyone's. Like my group above - we did notice the disparities between classes, even though we didn't know what we were doing. And in the second game, every one chose a class that was a bit higher Tier - even though most of the group still doesn't know what a Tier is. They recognized that 3.5 requires some form of magical or special abilities, that Fighters and Monks just had nothing particular to offer. Two, IIRC, dipped Cleric; one's using Travel Devotion. Another's going for Sorcerer/Shadowcaster/Noctumancer, which is a pretty big step up from the Ranger/Wizard/Arcane Archer he had before. We have a Psychic Warrior who was previously a Fighter. Etc.

This is not theoretical or made up. This is not about PvP. It is about imbalances in the game, and rampant poor design in Core. This thread is discussing a fix to part of that: which is to say, to enable Dex-based fighters to work, which they currently only do if you work really hard at it (or you use Tome of Battle).

Is it right for every group? Of course not. Is it right for "most" groups? I have no idea - but neither do you. It works for most people on this forum. The average person on this forum might be better versed in 3.5 than the average player, but that is not a bad thing.

Strength, under these rules, would remain "The One True Ability" for trippers, chargers, and dungeoncrashers. It would also be better than Dex for Paladins, Knights, Samurai, Crusaders, etc - anyone who wants to wear Heavy Armor is better off using Strength than Dexterity. But yes, Rogues, Swashbucklers, and Monks, etc., would have no use for Strength at all. This is a good thing. D&D 3.5 does not handle MAD well; you can only really afford to pump one or two ability scores. Classes need to be able to drop things. Armored chars with two handed weapons can drop Dex; finesse characters can drop Str. This is a good thing.


Also, I think you and many GitPers tend to underrate defense...perhaps b/c you're all so skilled that PC defeat is almost off the table, whereas for many players it 'still' matters.
That's vaguely insulting, you realize?

No, defense is poorly rated because it does not help your group stay alive. A highly defensive character is good at only one thing - being ignored until his entire party is dead, and then running away or being focus-fired down. You need offense far more than defense. Basic defensive items can cover most of your needs; feats and class levels shouldn't be spent on what money can buy.

Also, it's not that defenses are necessarily worthless - it's that they're prohibitively expensive. It's a matter of opportunity cost - you can get a lot more bang for your buck on offense than you can on defense. Having very high AC is possible - but it's difficult. And if you don't have very high AC, then it doesn't really matter what your AC is. You rely on other ways of staying alive - avoiding hits, miss chances, or just killing them before they kill you.


And anyway, I disagee about the tradeoff. For the guy who initiates trip and grapples, Str would still be more important (but being good at it would come at a high cost of not achieving Dex SAD, so that it might not seem like 'the way to go' anymore). But for the guy who just deals damage, (and tries to avoid trips and grapples), the Dex build would become better with these rules. Even if you don't care about defense, Dex modifies hide, move silently,and initiative, and uberchargers like to win surprise rounds and-or initiative...
No. Damage is still all about multipliers, and every multiplier in the game requires two-handing a weapon and using Str.

lesser_minion
2010-10-26, 10:37 AM
It's a competence issue. A wizard at level one is profiecent enough to devote energy to cast level 1 spells without any exceptional talent in the field (compare to a bard, who is not), so why is a fighter (or Rogue, Barbarian, or any non-caster class) not competent enough in his field to fight with a specific style that increases his effectiveness in combat?

As they would get those feats for free, what about my suggestion implies that they aren't?

As for charisma to attack rolls... well, if you can buy charisma as one's aptitude for dance, and you're willing to let people dance-fight, then the people who are naturally better at dancing are going to have an advantage. Sure, Dex is still a better fit, but you can at least see where it's coming from.

Tavar
2010-10-26, 10:45 AM
Just to talk about defense more, here's a common situation in a real life game I've been going to. We're slightly under wealth by level at the moment (we have equal amounts gold and xp after every adventure), though the gap is beginning to become substantial. Against most challenges we fight, foes are only missing on a 1 or 2, though sometimes circumstantial modifiers come into play and raise that a bit. Still, that's with fairly even spending on offense and defense for the front-liners.As a result we're more and more focusing on bringing down enemies as fast as we can, not because we're so strong that death isn't going to happen, but because the front-liners can only take 3-4 attacks, and pretty much each attack is going to hit. And this is with the monsters played only somewhat strongly.

BRC
2010-10-26, 11:05 AM
You have alot of post there. I'd disagree with you on some points, but your principles are all correct. The Fighter IS a poorly designed class. I have played in games that run the gamut of levels, from lowest of low to epic, where Fighters have still been useful and everybody has had fun. But, being on these forums has taught me that my experience, low optomization groups where the optimizers tended to be more interested in building unique concepts than being Batman, and a DM with a knack for building powerful melee types for newbies.

All it would have taken for that to be broken would be for one of the groups optimizers to say "Screw it" and play a straight wizard instead of messing around with Duskblades or Factotums while the players not interested in digging through the spell compendium played our full casters.

Unfortunetally, these discussions tend to simplify things, and they can't help it. It's often impossible to know what level of optimization is necessary without actually playing the campaign.


No, defense is poorly rated because it does not help your group stay alive. A highly defensive character is good at only one thing - being ignored until his entire party is dead, and then running away or being focus-fired down. You need offense far more than defense. Basic defensive items can cover most of your needs; feats and class levels shouldn't be spent on what money can buy.

Also, it's not that defenses are necessarily worthless - it's that they're prohibitively expensive. It's a matter of opportunity cost - you can get a lot more bang for your buck on offense than you can on defense. Having very high AC is possible - but it's difficult. And if you don't have very high AC, then it doesn't really matter what your AC is. You rely on other ways of staying alive - avoiding hits, miss chances, or just killing them before they kill you.

I think it's largely because there are simply so many different types of Defense one has to cover, and as you level up, that gets more and more so.

You have Armor Class, which one could easily pump by buying better armor. That's not so bad, but that suit of fancy plate won't help you against touch attacks, so you need to protect yourself from those too. And since Monsters attack rolls tend to skyrocket, you need to invest a lot of money into boosting AC
Then you need to boost your saves as well. Even if you have a nigh-untouchable AC, just one bad save can easily lead to your undoing.

Meanwhile, outside of the Knight's class feature, DnD has no real "Tanking" ability. One could build a character with high AC, loads of hit points, and great saves, but you can't really make the bad guys attack you instead of the squishy wizard. All you can be is the last man standing, laughing at their claws while the rest of your party dies a horrible death around you.

Meanwhile, offense is easier to focus on, since you can boost a single offensive option and not have it easily overcome. Offense works with the rest of the party. The Power attacking ubercharger, the blasting wizard, and the stabbing rogue are all dealing damage, so their efforts support each other in a way that the Wall of Steel fighter dosn't.
And finally, playing offensive characters is far more FUN! Being "The guy who can take a hit" is boring. Charging forward and smashing the ogre's face in is fun.

Iceciro
2010-10-26, 11:22 AM
BRC makes a great post there. IMHO, there's only one kind of reliable way to stay alive, and it isn't AC, its making sure all attacks either hurt less or just don't function. DR, for example, is fantastic, as is fortification. AC sucks.

This is what my group feels is the primary problem of the monk class, actually. Decent AC, fast movement - and its like you're swatting a fly. You're better off tripping/grappling and playing a control monk than punching things to death - unless you optimize it.

Always remember: Against a dead/incapacitated mob, your AC is infinite.

kryan
2010-10-26, 11:34 AM
You have alot of post there. I'd disagree with you on some points, but your principles are all correct. The Fighter IS a poorly designed class. I have played in games that run the gamut of levels, from lowest of low to epic, where Fighters have still been useful and everybody has had fun.
I know it sounds silly since this a game we're talking about, but "having fun" is not really the best way to justify class design. I mean, I've had fun doing very stupid things. Having fun is primarily about the group dynamic, which a good game system can facilitate but ultimately cannot produce if it's not there, and even a terrible game system probably won't ruin a great group dynamic.

The problem for 'fun' comes in when there's a disparity of expectations. When you expect your hero to be heroic and dashing and capable, but at the same time have to work really hard for it (wouldn't be heroic otherwise), and you find yourself playing clean-up crew for the wizard, or having to hold off on certain spells to avoid marginalizing the fighter, there's a problem, and that's the sort of problem that can ruin fun.

Blaming the Internet, Magic: The Gathering, fanboyism, or theoretical optimization for these problems is similarly inaccurate: none of these things caused the problem, they only illuminated it. Knowledge is a good thing. Complaining about people who have learned and taught others that the game has glaring flaws is just ridiculous to my mind (this thread, thankfully, seems relatively clear of such things, but I've seen it in other threads and it bothers me).

In terms of this thread, we're talking about a situation where someone builds a finesse fighter, expecting to be Errol Flynn or Jack Sparrow or whatever - and he's not. Maybe he took the Duelist prestige class (oh dear gods), maybe he took Fighter and just loaded up on appropriate feats, maybe he even went the way Core assumed Dex-based fighters would go and took Rogue and is TWF-ing. But he didn't load up on UMD, making his Rogue quite a bit weaker than the Tier 4 it could be, because he primarily wanted to be a combat character.

Problem is, the Barbarian does massively more damage, and has a lot more HP. Why? Because the game is poorly designed.

This thread is about working to fix that. It's only one of many many problems, and it's only one part of it, but one of the myriad issues facing Dex-based warriors in 3.5 is an over-abundance of necessary Feats. Weapon Finesse is one of them; the TWF/ITWF/GTWF are three more; Improved Critical, Disarm, and Feint would seem fitting even though none of them are actually all that good. Rolling the TWF line into one feat is a common choice; eliminating Weapon Finesse as a feat, and turning it into a basic combat option (possibly retaining the name for a Dex-to-damage feat) seems like a decent move. That's primarily my point.

The last couple of posts I've made have been to go a step further and say "even if Dex to attack and damage was free, Str would still be better for straight damage" - which is true, in 3.5. Now, personally, I probably wouldn't give both for free - but I'd be implementing other fixes so that this statement wouldn't be true.


But, being on these forums has taught me that my experience, low optomization groups where the optimizers tended to be more interested in building unique concepts than being Batman, and a DM with a knack for building powerful melee types for newbies.

All it would have taken for that to be broken would be for one of the groups optimizers to say "Screw it" and play a straight wizard instead of messing around with Duskblades or Factotums while the players not interested in digging through the spell compendium played our full casters.
You seem to imply that "building unique concepts" is incompatible with "being Batman", and by extension, with powerful characters. I know it's not quite what you're saying, but you're straying a bit close to the Stormwind Fallacy there. I bring this up only because I want to point out that those who believe the Stormwind Fallacy (that is, they do not think it to be fallacious) tend to offend me; not every character I create is especially powerful (most are not; I've never actually played a Tier 1 character that actually engaged in any combats - the one game I was playing a Wizard in died before we ever saw a fight), but every character I create, at the very least, tries to be a unique concept, and I don't appreciate it when people suggest that my admitted optimizing (which is a good thing to my mind) somehow mars the characters.


I think it's largely because there are simply so many different types of Defense one has to cover, and as you level up, that gets more and more so.

You have Armor Class, which one could easily pump by buying better armor. That's not so bad, but that suit of fancy plate won't help you against touch attacks, so you need to protect yourself from those too. And since Monsters attack rolls tend to skyrocket, you need to invest a lot of money into boosting AC
Then you need to boost your saves as well. Even if you have a nigh-untouchable AC, just one bad save can easily lead to your undoing.

Meanwhile, outside of the Knight's class feature, DnD has no real "Tanking" ability. One could build a character with high AC, loads of hit points, and great saves, but you can't really make the bad guys attack you instead of the squishy wizard. All you can be is the last man standing, laughing at their claws while the rest of your party dies a horrible death around you.

Meanwhile, offense is easier to focus on, since you can boost a single offensive option and not have it easily overcome. Offense works with the rest of the party. The Power attacking ubercharger, the blasting wizard, and the stabbing rogue are all dealing damage, so their efforts support each other in a way that the Wall of Steel fighter dosn't.
And finally, playing offensive characters is far more FUN! Being "The guy who can take a hit" is boring. Charging forward and smashing the ogre's face in is fun.
I completely agree with this; there's some homebrew that I've seen that helps the tanking situation somewhat, and I've been actively looking for more (is, in fact, the reason I joined this forum; I needed to use the Search function in the homebrew section). But WotC provided extremely little support for that in 3.5. One of the few things I do like about 4e is that they got that right; the system of Marks or whatever they're called is pretty good. 3.5 needs more of that. The Knight's Test of Mettle ability has a ton of limitations on it, as does Devoted Spirit's Defensive Rebuke, which is the only other "you really want to be attacking me and not him" ability I'm aware of (Iron Guard's Glare also helps along these lines, though it's a bit more passive).

Rebis
2010-10-26, 12:06 PM
Well, Shadow Blade does it, though...it's just not worth a feat to bump up your damage by such a small amount.

Give it to a swordsage with a 22 Dex, and all of a sudden it's not such a small amount anymore, is it? I have a goblin ninja/swordsage with that going on. Gets in his stance, clenched his fist, blue flames start flickering around his fists (two weapon fighting), and he's doing 1d2+1d6+6 damage. That's one scary little goblin dropping down from the ceiling in the dark...

kryan
2010-10-26, 12:22 PM
22 Dex at level 1 is kind of highish, but don't you have an LA?

Anyway, +6 isn't really that big a deal. I mean, you'd only need an 18 in Str to do the same...

BRC
2010-10-26, 12:37 PM
I know it sounds silly since this a game we're talking about, but "having fun" is not really the best way to justify class design. I mean, I've had fun doing very stupid things. Having fun is primarily about the group dynamic, which a good game system can facilitate but ultimately cannot produce if it's not there, and even a terrible game system probably won't ruin a great group dynamic.

The problem for 'fun' comes in when there's a disparity of expectations. When you expect your hero to be heroic and dashing and capable, but at the same time have to work really hard for it (wouldn't be heroic otherwise), and you find yourself playing clean-up crew for the wizard, or having to hold off on certain spells to avoid marginalizing the fighter, there's a problem, and that's the sort of problem that can ruin fun.

Blaming the Internet, Magic: The Gathering, fanboyism, or theoretical optimization for these problems is similarly inaccurate: none of these things caused the problem, they only illuminated it. Knowledge is a good thing. Complaining about people who have learned and taught others that the game has glaring flaws is just ridiculous to my mind (this thread, thankfully, seems relatively clear of such things, but I've seen it in other threads and it bothers me).


As I said, that is my personal experience, which is the only way to gauge Fun. Anybody who says they know how much fun somebody is having/will have without having been there and is a liar. My point there was to prove that you can have a successful game with both a Fighter and a Wizard, without either one jumping through hoops to keep things balanced.
Which isn't to say the problem doesn't exist, or that it wouldn't exist without the Internet to create a gestalt hive mind capable of producing builds the likes of which the original designers never dreamed of. Something as simple as the druid's natural spell feat or a fly spell can lead to the same problems.

Now, the internet does make the problem worse in some ways. People can go online and have powerful builds spoon-fed to them. However, it does as much good as it does harm, since those same communities can provide less optimization minded players a chance to keep up with their min-maxing teammmates. DM's faced with party imbalance can seek advice, and potential powergamers are frequently cautioned against building characters that would unbalance the party.
The ultlimate goal of the game is to have Fun. Party imbalance only becomes a problem when it gets in the way of that. In my experience, if the entire party deals damage to the monster, everybody is having fun, even if three members dealt 10 damage, and the fourth dealt 35. Of course, different parties will have different tolerances for party imbalance, and part of DMing is identifying when party imbalance is becoming a problem worth your intervention.


You seem to imply that "building unique concepts" is incompatible with "being Batman", and by extension, with powerful characters. I know it's not quite what you're saying, but you're straying a bit close to the Stormwind Fallacy there. I bring this up only because I want to point out that those who believe the Stormwind Fallacy (that is, they do not think it to be fallacious) tend to offend me; not every character I create is especially powerful (most are not; I've never actually played a Tier 1 character that actually engaged in any combats - the one game I was playing a Wizard in died before we ever saw a fight), but every character I create, at the very least, tries to be a unique concept, and I don't appreciate it when people suggest that my admitted optimizing (which is a good thing to my mind) somehow mars the characters.

That was not my intended implication. What I meant to say is that, in my group, the people who had the ability to break the game (Read, the knowledge, skill at character building, and drive to dig through the rulebooks) had no interest in doing so, or even coming anywhere close. Basically, those that could have torn up the game as a Wizard, Druid, or Cleric played Fighters and Rogues. Those who were less optimization inclined played the higher-tier classes, or had their characters boosted by the other members of the group. Throw in a large group, and a high tolerance for party imbalance, and you got a situation where alot of the problems people talk about here (Fighters being weak for example) rarely showed up.

ffone
2010-10-26, 12:40 PM
Your Dex score doesn't affect your Tumble ranks in any way. Also, getting up from prone as a free action doesn't protect you from being tripped in the first place.

Yeah, but a Dex oriented character is more likely to put ranks in Tumble.





Uh, what? There are high crit range weapons at all sizes and shapes; what about Falchion?


'khopesh and scythe' I said -> meant 'falchion and scythe'. Sorry it wasn't obvious from context.



We must not frequent the same threads very often because the melee discussions I've run into are not at all like what you describe, even accounting for the hyperbole.



Heck, if SAD is really that big of a thing, just be a Factotum with font of Inspiration a couple of times and a bumped up Intelligence. Then you can do all kinds of tricks too in addition to tripping with your int and getting int to hit and damage.

Ways and means and things.

Actually you just made a nice example of my point - the sort of 'endless arms race' reasoning that goes "Here's some other build with even more SAD, so let's buff up the Dex guys."




That's vaguely insulting, you realize?


It was a compliment, if anything! (What makes you ask - are compliments given around here usually sarcasm?) To wit, 'You guys are much higher-opt than most players I've seen, so you tend to have a different evaluation of balance and what matters'.


An ubercharger uses a Lance. That's... kind of the point. You want as many multipliers as you can get.

That's only for mounted charges.



Hmm, I had never considered that. Not that it has anything to with the argument at hand (criticals are never frequent enough to justify investment into them, really), but it's an interesting idea.


If you do the math, the more your damage, the more likely it is that a wider threat range will be better than a fixed add'l increase to damage (from,say, rapier's 1d6 vs greatsword's 2d6 and extra 1/2 Str) in terms of average damage per attack or per round. It's basically

(rapier base + mods) * (1 + prob of doubling with a rapier)
vs
(greatsword base + mods) *(1 + prob of doubling with a greatsword)

Crit-immune enemies will decrease the doubling prob (by whatever percentage of your attacks are against those), but nevertheless, with enough damage, the higher threat range (or multiplier) is worth it.

Of course, the rapier will always be behind the falchion or scythe (although the 4x might be valued at less than the 18-20 b/c of 'overflow' damage), but by a small amount (1d6 vs 2d4 + 1/2 Str) which, if you have a lot of other modifiers, is probably a worthy sacrifice for the AC + Reflex + Initiative + more skills of the Dex build if you allow Dex to damage.

And then there's the spike chain, which is finesseable, a 'regular' two handed weapon, and already popular (i.e. worth the exotic feat) with many people for other reasons.

(And if you're using something like the shadow hand Dex to damage, IIRC a TWFer gets the full bonus to both weapons, so it's like 1.5 Str vs 2 Dex).

kryan
2010-10-26, 01:13 PM
@BRC: Generally agreed; despite quoting you, my post didn't really end up being very much in response to what you said, just more a general ramble that had started based on your post. No worries.


Yeah, but a Dex oriented character is more likely to put ranks in Tumble.
From an optimization stand-point, pretty much everyone who expects to be in close quarters ever should put ranks in Tumble.



Actually you just made a nice example of my point - the sort of 'endless arms race' reasoning that goes "Here's some other build with even more SAD, so let's buff up the Dex guys."
And that ignores my point - which is that while you have to choose some standard of balance, the Fighter et al. are a poor choice. They don't keep up with CR. They are objectively underpowered. The Factotum is a good example - because the Factotum is a well-designed class. It's not an arms "race", certainly - the most powerful class in the game was arguably printed in the first book, so it's not really a race. We're not improving Dex-based fighters because of the wizard or the factotum - we're improving Dex-based fighters because they are weaker than they should be.


It was a compliment, if anything! (What makes you ask - are compliments given around here usually sarcasm?) To wit, 'You guys are much higher-opt than most players I've seen, so you tend to have a different evaluation of balance and what matters'.
Fair enough; to me it sounded like "you guys don't play in real, dangerous games, so you guys don't know what danger really is," or whatever.


That's only for mounted charges.
Which is a pretty good way to build a charger. Still, you're right, I had missed that point.


If you do the math, the more your damage, the more likely it is that a wider threat range will be better than a fixed add'l increase to damage (from,say, rapier's 1d6 vs greatsword's 2d6 and extra 1/2 Str) in terms of average damage per attack or per round. It's basically

(rapier base + mods) * (1 + prob of doubling with a rapier)
vs
(greatsword base + mods) *(1 + prob of doubling with a greatsword)

Crit-immune enemies will decrease the doubling prob (by whatever percentage of your attacks are against those), but nevertheless, with enough damage, the higher threat range (or multiplier) is worth it.

Of course, the rapier will always be behind the falchion or scythe (although the 4x might be valued at less than the 18-20 b/c of 'overflow' damage), but by a small amount (1d6 vs 2d4 + 1/2 Str) which, if you have a lot of other modifiers, is probably a worthy sacrifice for the AC + Reflex + Initiative + more skills of the Dex build if you allow Dex to damage.

And then there's the spike chain, which is finesseable, a 'regular' two handed weapon, and already popular (i.e. worth the exotic feat) with many people for other reasons.

(And if you're using something like the shadow hand Dex to damage, IIRC a TWFer gets the full bonus to both weapons, so it's like 1.5 Str vs 2 Dex).
You're ignoring attack bonus issues (TWF has a -2 penalty, finesse classes often have 3/4 BAB, etc), Power Attack, and things like Leap Attack et al., and your analysis is thus invalid.

Also, your assumption that 1/2 Str is small compared to the occasional boost from a critical hit seems incorrect. Conservatively speaking, a charger's Str should be around 30 - 18 to start, +5 from levels, +6 from an item would be 29; a Tome is pretty likely so 34 would not be unreasonable, nor would a +2 Str race - which makes that a +10. Which is then multiplied by x2 (Leap Attack), x3 (Lance), x4 (Valorous Lance), etc., none of which you can do on a Dex-based TWF build.

Again, pure-damage-wise, Str wins out, and thus Dex-based fighting needs a boost.

Hell, Strength-based fighting needs a boost too, because even though it's better than Dex-based, it's still underpowered. Unless we're talking about Tome of Battle, in which case a lot of this becomes moot.

Greenish
2010-10-26, 03:02 PM
Yeah, but a Dex oriented character is more likely to put ranks in Tumble.I don't see no reason for any melee character to not invest in it (assuming they have skill points).

'khopesh and scythe' I said -> meant 'falchion and scythe'. Sorry it wasn't obvious from context.Scythe only crits on 20.

mangosta71
2010-10-26, 03:12 PM
Not to mention that the finesse weapons have smaller damage dice to begin with.

Your example uses a rapier vs. a greatsword. Sure, a rapier crits 50% more often than a greatsword, but a greatsword deals twice as much damage as a rapier. The greatsword hits as hard on a non-crit as the rapier does on a crit. The greatsword also gets 1.5* damage from str and double the bonus damage from power attack.

A fighter with 18 str wielding a greatsword deals 2d6 + 6 (strength) + 10 (power attack) and crits on 10% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 25.3.
A swashbuckler with 18 dex wielding a rapier deals 1d6 + 4 (assuming we allow dex to apply to damage) + 5 (power attack) and crits on 15% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 14.375.
(For my own amusement, and to illustrate that adding dex to damage for finesse weapons won't make them overpowered) A paladin with 18 str wielding a longsword deals 1d8 + 4 (strength) + 5 (power attack) and crits on 10% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 14.85.

ffone
2010-10-28, 04:40 PM
Not to mention that the finesse weapons have smaller damage dice to begin with.

Your example uses a rapier vs. a greatsword. Sure, a rapier crits 50% more often than a greatsword, but a greatsword deals twice as much damage as a rapier. The greatsword hits as hard on a non-crit as the rapier does on a crit. The greatsword also gets 1.5* damage from str and double the bonus damage from power attack.

A fighter with 18 str wielding a greatsword deals 2d6 + 6 (strength) + 10 (power attack) and crits on 10% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 25.3.
A swashbuckler with 18 dex wielding a rapier deals 1d6 + 4 (assuming we allow dex to apply to damage) + 5 (power attack) and crits on 15% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 14.375.
(For my own amusement, and to illustrate that adding dex to damage for finesse weapons won't make them overpowered) A paladin with 18 str wielding a longsword deals 1d8 + 4 (strength) + 5 (power attack) and crits on 10% of his attacks. Average damage per hit = 14.85.

The rapier wielder can hold it two-handed to get 1:2 power attack. Looks weird? Yeah. BUT AFAIK the rapier's inability to get 1.5x Str doesn't affect its PAness.

Her'es how the math works out more generally:

- Your threat range acts as a multiplier, multiplying your base damage B by (1+p) where 'p' is the probability that a hit is a crit (after accounting for the chance that at that roll misses, the enemy is immune, whatever).

- The greatsword or other 2h weapon will have a higher B than a rapier. Most will have a lower 'p'.

Let's say the rapier has base dmg A and crit prob 'p', the greatsword has base dmg B and crit prob 'q'. A < B and p > q.

IF we start adding fixed values 'C" to A and B, such as from power attack, weapon enhancements, etc. there will be some value of C for which (A+C)(1+p) > (A+B)(1+q).

So a rapier is probably less damage in a low level or unoptimized case, but potentially higher in high damage cases.




From an optimization stand-point, pretty much everyone who expects to be in close quarters ever should put ranks in Tumble.

But if it's cross class it'll take 21 levels to get 12 ranks.

It's not that high Dexterity directly helps with that trick, it's that there's better synergy for a DEx build due to the types of classes that have it as a class skill already getting more out of Dex.

Anyway, that skill trick is an extreme corner case. I'm just making the point that Dex builds are better for defense against trips.



And that ignores my point - which is that while you have to choose some standard of balance, the Fighter et al. are a poor choice. They don't keep up with CR. They are objectively underpowered. The Factotum is a good example - because the Factotum is a well-designed class. It's not an arms "race", certainly - the most powerful class in the game was arguably printed in the first book, so it's not really a race. We're not improving Dex-based fighters because of the wizard or the factotum - we're improving Dex-based fighters because they are weaker than they should be.


Okay, and the guy who invests in having Dex 30 instead now has a +10 initiative and reflex save modifier, and a better AC, and lots of important skill bonuses. And he can probably make the DC 25 check to full speed tumble and charge more often, or at least not get tripped or grappled by enemy AoOs. And he can short Strength (let's say a halfling with point buy minmaxing for Str 6) whereas the Str guy who shorts Dex will have a mod of maybe -1 with the same point buy value.

Meanwhile, the Str guy has +5 damage and is good at tripping. Woo. To get nearly the same AC he'll use full plate, and thus be slower and have fewer charging and/or full attack opportunities.



You're ignoring attack bonus issues (TWF has a -2 penalty, finesse classes often have 3/4 BAB, etc), Power Attack, and things like Leap Attack et al., and your analysis is thus invalid.

The issue with much of the reasoning in this thread is that it's staying too close to the traditional ubercharger/tripper build. My point is that with Dex-damage you can go another direction entirely - like a halfling ubercharger (net +2 attack bonus from Dex bonus and size, which can now be exchanged for some power attack, although ) and almost any attacking class becomes a great finesse class. You give up maybe 1d6 of base weapon damage and 5 points of Str damage and get tons of other stuff instead.



Also, your assumption that 1/2 Str is small compared to the occasional boost from a critical hit seems incorrect. Conservatively speaking, a charger's Str should be around 30 - 18 to start, +5 from levels, +6 from an item would be 29; a Tome is pretty likely so 34 would not be unreasonable, nor would a +2 Str race - which makes that a +10. Which is then multiplied by x2 (Leap Attack), x3 (Lance), x4 (Valorous Lance), etc., none of which you can do on a Dex-based TWF build.

I don't think the Valorous enhancement requires being mounted? I remember its description says it's like Spirited Charge but IIRC it specifically says it doesn't requre being mounted (and is otherwise like SC.)

And the mounted charge is a corner case (and prevents some other things like Leap Attack), and Ride is a Dex based skill that has armor check penalties, so....

[quote]
Again, pure-damage-wise, Str wins out, and thus Dex-based fighting needs a boost.

It's certainly possible to make a weak Dex oriented fighter, and I've seen tons of players do it (it's always the same character - Sexy Agile Fighter Girl Whose Brawnier Coeds Underestimate Her), and I have seen characters where Dex-to-damage would have brought them up into a normal 'fair' range, but I don't think easy Dex-to-damage is necessary a good idea because it does have its place.

kryan
2010-10-28, 04:54 PM
Your math ignores the reality of 3.5. There are more opportunities to optimize two-handed damage than there are opportunities to optimize one-handed damage. The higher chance of criticals never overtakes the damage out-put of a two-hander for any even amount of investment into either.

Mathematically, high-crit weapons could deal more damage. Realistically, within the rules of 3.5, they don't.

ffone
2010-10-28, 04:58 PM
Your math ignores the reality of 3.5. There are more opportunities to optimize two-handed damage than there are opportunities to optimize one-handed damage. The higher chance of criticals never overtakes the damage out-put of a two-hander for any even amount of investment into either.

Mathematically, high-crit weapons could deal more damage. Realistically, within the rules of 3.5, they don't.

That's why I've been using the rapier as a two-handed weapon in this analysis.

And I'm not claiming it'll do more damage than the right two-handed weapon for the character - that's obviously false, with the falchion. Just that losing a maybe 1d6+5 damage in exchange for being able to min your Str and get huge modifiers to Initiative, AC, Reflex, etc. seems like a really really good deal. Especially since a higher Initiative means you might get more turns in that fight (= more damage!) and charge your foe rather than him charging you (and Str based characters always seem to want to charge).

Oh, and more extra AoOs with Combat Reflexes, which the trippers always seem to have.

And of course there's the spiked chain or elven courtblade (the former is worth the feat to a lot of people) for genuine two-handed finesse.

It's also worth noting that for the Str 1.5x to pull it further ahead, you need a high ability score, which gives the high-threat weapon more to multiply (From the damage-modding abiltiy score itself, and indirectly in that a high ability score suggests a high level suggests lots of wealth and feats and class features for increasing damage.)



BRC makes a great post there. IMHO, there's only one kind of reliable way to stay alive, and it isn't AC, its making sure all attacks either hurt less or just don't function. DR, for example, is fantastic, as is fortification. AC sucks.

This is what my group feels is the primary problem of the monk class, actually. Decent AC, fast movement - and its like you're swatting a fly. You're better off tripping/grappling and playing a control monk than punching things to death - unless you optimize it.

Always remember: Against a dead/incapacitated mob, your AC is infinite.

Sounds like you highly value winning initiative.

(And maybe getting a surprise round b/c your Hide and Move Silently were good.)

Also, if your battles are going so well that your defense doesn't matter...then it's moot! The game's clearly already easy for you, why do you need houserules to make chars even more powerful?
{{scrubbed}}

kryan
2010-10-29, 11:48 AM
That's why I've been using the rapier as a two-handed weapon in this analysis.

And I'm not claiming it'll do more damage than the right two-handed weapon for the character - that's obviously false, with the falchion. Just that losing a maybe 1d6+5 damage in exchange for being able to min your Str and get huge modifiers to Initiative, AC, Reflex, etc. seems like a really really good deal.
It's a fair deal, whereas spending a feat to do the same thing is a raw deal. By doing so, you're giving up the opportunity to use combat maneuvers, you're essentially saying "No, thank you," to Enlarge Person, etc. Also, 5 damage seems, to me, to be wrong, since you'll have something like a +10 ability modifier (so the 50% loss is itself 5), plus the other 1d6 for an average of 3.5, so more like 8.5 - and again, you want mulitipliers. At the very least, 2x (from Battle Jump or Leap Attack or whatever it was), so 17 damage, but more likely 3x or 4x (and in some cases quite a bit more than that), so we're looking at 25+ damage. A 10% higher chance of doubling your damage versus 25+ damage on every swing? You might be able to make it worthwhile, but generally the consistency alone is worth something.

As for the bonuses, the AC thing is easily replaced with armor for a Str-based fighter - and Max Dex limits are going to prevent a Dex-based fighter from using the best armors. Reflex saves are just not that important - for the most part Reflex saves against damage (and damage-based spell effects are notably underpowered), and most Reflex save based effects deal half damage on a successful save anyway. Meeting the necessary Tumble DCs without high Dex is not difficult, and stealth skills have extremely little combat application unless your entire party has them.


Especially since a higher Initiative means you might get more turns in that fight (= more damage!)
No, no it doesn't. It means you go first. After that, you wait your turn like everybody else. Winning initiative is important, but unless we're talking about pure rocket tag (which, frankly, I'm uninterested in discussing), it's not everything.


and charge your foe rather than him charging you (and Str based characters always seem to want to charge).
Charge is the way to go. It's a rare combat, though, where you don't have someone to charge unless your opponent has taken specific steps to prevent it. Sure, like I said, winning initiative is important - but unless we're talking about very late-game, most of your initiative is going to be the d20 anyway.


Oh, and more extra AoOs with Combat Reflexes, which the trippers always seem to have.
Very rarely necessary to make more than two or three AoOs in a round. That's just not important.


And of course there's the spiked chain or elven courtblade (the former is worth the feat to a lot of people) for genuine two-handed finesse.
Still don't get the +50% damage for two-handing when you use Dex.


It's also worth noting that for the Str 1.5x to pull it further ahead, you need a high ability score, which gives the high-threat weapon more to multiply (From the damage-modding abiltiy score itself, and indirectly in that a high ability score suggests a high level suggests lots of wealth and feats and class features for increasing damage.)
Of course. But you're still ignoring the fact that for a similar level of investment, the two-hander does more damage.


Look, I'm done with this. You're making a bunch of assertions, I'm making a bunch of counter-assertions, and I, for one, just don't care enough to go through the effort of backing up my assertions with analysis, because that would mean looking up all the feats and items and features that a Core melee character uses, and there's nothing that would bore me more.

mangosta71
2010-10-29, 01:48 PM
The rapier wielder can hold it two-handed to get 1:2 power attack. Looks weird? Yeah. BUT AFAIK the rapier's inability to get 1.5x Str doesn't affect its PAness.

Her'es how the math works out more generally:

- Your threat range acts as a multiplier, multiplying your base damage B by (1+p) where 'p' is the probability that a hit is a crit (after accounting for the chance that at that roll misses, the enemy is immune, whatever).

- The greatsword or other 2h weapon will have a higher B than a rapier. Most will have a lower 'p'.

Let's say the rapier has base dmg A and crit prob 'p', the greatsword has base dmg B and crit prob 'q'. A < B and p > q.

IF we start adding fixed values 'C" to A and B, such as from power attack, weapon enhancements, etc. there will be some value of C for which (A+C)(1+p) > (B+C)(1+q).

So a rapier is probably less damage in a low level or unoptimized case, but potentially higher in high damage cases.
Even allowing 2-handed rapiers, you're leaving out the bonus damage from the ability score. It should be (A+C+X)(1+p) > (B+C+1.5X)(1+q). We can make the following substitutions: p=0.15, q=0.1, and B=2A (values for p and q assume that all critical threats are confirmed for simplicity). In addition, given that A=1d6, the average value is 3.5. If we're using 30 as the relevant ability score, the modifier (X) is 10. Solving that inequality gives us C > 173.5 as the breaking point. In other words, until you're adding 173.5 points of damage through PA, enhancements, etc., a str-based build deals more damage than a dex-based build, even allowing dex to increase damage for finesseable weapons.

{{scrubbed}}
In combat, the goal is usually to reduce your opponent to 0 hp. The easiest way to do that is dealing damage. A character who can drop his opponent in 4 rounds has a higher survival rate than a character that needs 6 or 8 rounds to do the same job.

Damage isn't everything, but it is an awful lot. Particularly when it comes down to combat. Granted, the rapier/greatsword example ignores things like reach and special attacks which make things a bit more interesting.

Eldariel
2010-10-29, 01:57 PM
Damage isn't everything, but it is an awful lot. Particularly when it comes down to combat. Granted, the rapier/greatsword example ignores things like reach and special attacks which make things a bit more interesting.

And yet the most effective attacks don't even deal damage, and the most powerful characters can't be damaged :smallwink:

JaronK
2010-10-30, 12:40 AM
I would see no problem in giving the bonuses of Weapon Finesse for free. Strength does plenty anyway, and the classes that tend to need Weapon Finesse (such as the Rogue) are often both lower powered and feat starved anyway.

Having used large weapons in real life (such as Claymores and Naginatas) I'd say it would be reasonable to have the Weapon Finesse feat apply to all weapons, with the default being that currently finessable weapons have that ability without a feat cost. Thus, anybody could use dex to hit with a rapier, but only those with the feat could use it with a Greatsword.

I also think Shadow Blade should work for all Finessable weapons.

JaronK

jpreem
2010-10-30, 05:28 AM
maybe give it as a class abiltiy. For rogues and rangers for example.
I personaly have a houserule that rogues get an automatic weapon finesse but with daggers only. (For the classic backstabber image)

Skorj
2010-11-01, 03:45 PM
I would see no problem in giving the bonuses of Weapon Finesse for free. Strength does plenty anyway, and the classes that tend to need Weapon Finesse (such as the Rogue) are often both lower powered and feat starved anyway.

Having used large weapons in real life (such as Claymores and Naginatas) I'd say it would be reasonable to have the Weapon Finesse feat apply to all weapons, with the default being that currently finessable weapons have that ability without a feat cost. Thus, anybody could use dex to hit with a rapier, but only those with the feat could use it with a Greatsword.

I also think Shadow Blade should work for all Finessable weapons.

JaronK

Seems like that could be rolled up with "oversize two-weapon fighting" (eliminate the penalty for TWF with a non-light weapon in the offhand) into a single worthwhile feat.