The three damage types (This may belong in homebrew, now)

[Yeturs]

I dunno if this belongs in homebrew or not. I wrote this up as a houserule, and I wanted feedback on it. It is intended to give melee a bit of spice in pathfinder. Thus far, I think they could be made simpler, and that would be better. Please, let me know if they are worth tracking or if one is vastly better then the others.

Piercing damage: Your target is considered to have a penalty to his armor bonus to AC equal to your Dex mod. In addition, you ignore Dex mod amount of DR, regardless of the normal method to overcome the targets DR. (Intended to make dex characters, specifically archers, more viable. Would it be better to have the option to add dex to damage, not dex as a penelty?)

Slashing damage: The target takes Str modifier damage as bleed damage each round for ten rounds, until they are targeted by a heal check (DC 15) as a standard action or they are healed by any amount of magical healing. (Seems standard, the typical "Hit it harder" choice. Seems strong, but easy to negate)

Bludgeoning damage: Your target takes a -1 to his attacks, skill checks, reflex, and fortitude saves for a number of rounds equal to your con modifier. This penalty is cumulative and each attack applies it, but may only be applied to a maximum of your con modifier. This penalty is removed if the target receives any amount of magical healing. (Something for the hammer fanatics. This honestly seems the best of the three to me, but I kinda like the idea. Maybe make it once a round?)

Current Version:
Feat: Combat feat.
Prereq: Fighter 2 or BaB +4
Your attacks gains an additional bonus, depending on your weapons damage type. If your weapon has multiple damage types, you may only apply one extra effect per attack, but may freely swap between effects. EX: A fighter 6 wields a morning star. With his first attack, he elects to deal the bludgeoning effect. With his second, he may elect to use the piercing effect.


Piercing damage: Your target is considered to have a penalty to his armor bonus to AC equal to your Dex mod OR You gain either your str or dex to damage when you attack with this weapon. This choice is made on each attack, and you may freely swap between the choices. In addition, you ignore Dex mod amount of DR, regardless of the normal method to overcome the targets DR. (OR means either one or the other will be in the final draft. I like dex to damage, because it is less bookeeping)

Slashing damage: The target takes Str modifier damage as bleed damage at the end of its next turn, unless they are targeted by a heal check (DC 15) as a standard action or they are healed by any amount of magical healing.

Bludgeoning damage: Your target takes a -1 to his d20 rolls for a number of rounds equal to your con modifier. This penalty is cumulative and each attack applies it, but may only be applied to a maximum of your con modifier. This penalty is removed if the target receives any amount of magical healing. This penalty applies to taking ten or twenty.



Thanks playground, please let me know if one is strictly better then another or whatever. Would you play in a game with these rules?

[Ravens_cry]

I don't know, the action cost for slashing makes it not as easy to negate as you might think.

[TopCheese]

I dunno if this belongs in homebrew or not. I wrote this up as a houserule, and I wanted feedback on it. It is intended to give melee a bit of spice in pathfinder. Thus far, I think they could be made simpler, and that would be better. Please, let me know if they are worth tracking or if one is vastly better then the others.

Piercing damage: Your target is considered to have a penalty to his armor bonus to AC equal to your Dex mod. In addition, you ignore Dex mod amount of DR, regardless of the normal method to overcome the targets DR. (Intended to make dex characters, specifically archers, more viable. Would it be better to have the option to add dex to damage, not dex as a penelty?)

Slashing damage: The target takes Str modifier damage as bleed damage each round for ten rounds, until they are targeted by a heal check (DC 15) as a standard action or they are healed by any amount of magical healing. (Seems standard, the typical "Hit it harder" choice. Seems strong, but easy to negate)

Bludgeoning damage: Your target takes a -1 to his attacks, skill checks, reflex, and fortitude saves for a number of rounds equal to your con modifier. This penalty is cumulative and each attack applies it, but may only be applied to a maximum of your con modifier. This penalty is removed if the target receives any amount of magical healing. (Something for the hammer fanatics. This honestly seems the best of the three to me, but I kinda like the idea. Maybe make it once a round?)


Thanks playground, please let me know if one is strictly better then another or whatever. Would you play in a game with these rules?

Nope this doesn't fix anything and just adds in more rules to hurt my character.

Also part of your question does belong on homebrew but not all of it.

[Phelix-Mu]

I agree with the above. Some of this can be useful in builds for characters, but it is more likely to come and hit the player characters, since monsters need to expend exactly zero resources to benefit from this stuff. Bites are piercing, claws slashing. Not all monsters bleed, but 90% of player character races do. In particular, if monster attacks benefit from this, then it spells the end of low level parties fighting multiple opponents. There will be much running, especially from creatures with slam attacks (the penalty is small, but applies to way too much for something that stacks). Admittedly, zombies can't take advantage of slam stuff, but I always liked the clawed zombie variants better (and bites...way more horror flavor than a bunch of body-checking).

[Hand_of_Vecna]

Interesting idea, you might want to consider whether this "spicing up" is worth the bookkeeping especially since the melee your helping will also be soaking up more of these debuffs through damage from big dumb monsters than other characters and these debuffs will be stronger since monster stats often stack up very fast.

You might want to look at the three feats in phb 2 that enhance weapons of each damage type and maybe craft more feats along that line.

[Doorhandle]

Interesting idea, you might want to consider whether this "spicing up" is worth the bookkeeping especially since the melee your helping will also be soaking up more of these debuffs through damage from big dumb monsters than other characters and these debuffs will be stronger since monster stats often stack up very fast.

You might want to look at the three feats in phb 2 that enhance weapons of each damage type and maybe craft more feats along that line.

The bookeeping was my concern as well.

[Cambrian]

I'm not sure this fixes much at all. The problem of the non-casters is a lack of utility and abilities outside of swinging a sword really well. When in combat they tend to out-damage the magic users.

The other issues are skill monkeys get replaced by caster utility and when you have save-or-suck/die doing damage becomes less relevant.

[navar100]

Pathfinder warriors don't need this. Feats exists allowing warriors to apply some penalty affliction upon scoring a critical hit, such as bleed, blindness, and stun. Stunning can already be done at low level without a critical hit, and there are feats to follow-up such an event. Mainly it's for monks. There are also other styles monks can choose, but other warriors can go that route too if they want. All warrior classes plus rogue get class features allowing them to do interesting things. It's not all about getting a +# to something.

[Psyren]

Why does bludgeoning impact Fort saves? If anything, clubbing someone in the noggin should hurt Will or Reflex.

[Yeturs]

Well, the majority of you pointed something out I honestly had not considered. Monsties would get this too!

In my mind it only functioned for the PC's, but I dont have any reasoning for that.

Bookeeping was a big concern as well. Herm... I think I can fix both those issues by making it a feat or a trait? Something optional, most monsters wouldn't have it because they have bad feats, and players who dont care wouldnt take it because its more work then not having it. I dont know if it is balanced as a feat, but something I will mull over.


And honestly, I know this does not "Fix" warrior types. It wasnt really intended to. I just wanted to give a relativly simple and somewhat flavorful way for a fighter to care about the difference in a longsword and a rapier, for instance. This is just a bit of spice, nothing game changing.


Why does bludgeoning impact Fort saves? If anything, clubbing someone in the noggin should hurt Will or Reflex.

A valid point. I pictured it as a bruise on your torso, growing worse with each hit. Perhaps a blanket -1 to d20 rolls would both a) make it seem more powerful, b) now you can bonk their head, as suggested and c) lessen the bookeeping needed for it. Its easier to remember "Right, rolling a d20, take a -x" then when exactly you should take a -x.



You might want to look at the three feats in phb 2 that enhance weapons of each damage type and maybe craft more feats along that line.

Oh really? I hadnt seen those... I will have to give them a look!


I don't know, the action cost for slashing makes it not as easy to negate as you might think.

Noted. Should I revise the duration? perhaps just taking the damage next round, essentially adding an additional str damage, but it can be prevented with a standard action (or maybe a move) ?

Edited version of the above: Piercing damage: Your target is considered to have a penalty to his armor bonus to AC equal to your Dex mod OR You gain either your str or dex to damage when you attack with this weapon. This choice is made on each attack, and you may freely swap between the choices. In addition, you ignore Dex mod amount of DR, regardless of the normal method to overcome the targets DR. (OR means either one or the other will be in the final draft. I like dex to damage, because it is less bookeeping)

Slashing damage: The target takes Str modifier damage as bleed damage at the end of its next turn, unless they are targeted by a heal check (DC 15) as a standard action or they are healed by any amount of magical healing.

Bludgeoning damage: Your target takes a -1 to his d20 rolls for a number of rounds equal to your con modifier. This penalty is cumulative and each attack applies it, but may only be applied to a maximum of your con modifier. This penalty is removed if the target receives any amount of magical healing. This penalty applies to taking ten or twenty.

[nedz]

This reminds me of the table in AD&D where different types of armour had varying bonuses and penalties against the three different attack types.

It was just an added complication which I have never seen used: because it slowed down combat for no real gain.

In the case of your three suggestions: consider tying to DM a large fight with lots of mooks. The DM now needs to track all manner of ongoing effects, none of which make a major difference. If you simply decide not to run such combats then you are definitely loosing more than you gain; moreover the effects themselves now become even less relevant.

[Ashtagon]

Clubbing makes sense for reducing Reflex saves. Will saves? Not so much. That's classically saves vs. spell, and if being asleep doesn't penalise that save, neither should being slightly dazed. It makes even less sense for Fort saves, which are classically either vs. petrification or poison.

I'd seriously consider making these into feats, with BAB prereqs and possibly fighter level prereqs too. Maybe something like: "fighter level 2 or BAB +4". That sidesteps the monster issue, and these are easily better than most of the feats fighters have to choose from.

[Person_Man]

I think your proposed homebrew rules would make book keeping during combat much worse, without any added "fun" benefit. So I would suggest streamlining them, and making them Feats or Maneuvers. (Maybe something Fighter or Weapon Specialization exclusive, since they're a bit stronger then standard Feats).

[Yeturs]

I feel more and more as this thread continues that it should have been posted in the homebrew section. My apologies.

Many of you have expressed concern on the bookeeping of these abilities. You have also suggested making them into feats. I like this idea, especially Ashtagon's suggestion of "Fighter level 2 or BaB +4" as a prereq. I think that is what I will go with. It makes the fighter available to spec into his damage type at level two and to other classes available at level 5. (presuming Pathfinder)

However, I am also toying with the idea of making them combat maneuvers, as person man suggested. How would you go about doing that? as a standard action, make a CMB vs CMD for the a normal attack plus one of the following?

Also, feel free to move this to homebrew, its getting more and more homebrewy each time I look in on it. Thanks for your input, everyone!

[Morph Bark]

What about attacks that have multiple damage types? Bite attacks (or at least some of them) are all three, making them particularly nasty.

[TopCheese]

Perhaps make these feats usable only under formal training... Thus a creature with a bite attack wouldn't gain these unless say the Druid teaches his animal companion this trick.

This keeps all those wonderful chunks of XP really really messing up the fighters and such.

[Yeturs]

It is my fault for not drawing attention to it, but I slyly added this to the "Current version" spoiler without notice. Sorry!

"Feat: Combat feat.
Prereq: Fighter 2 or BaB +4
Your attacks gains an additional bonus, depending on your weapons damage type. If your weapon has multiple damage types, you may only apply one extra effect per attack, but may freely swap between effects. EX: A fighter 6 wields a morning star. With his first attack, he elects to deal the bludgeoning effect. With his second, he may elect to use the piercing effect. "