Crit Substitution Idea (PEACH)

[nonsi]

.
This idea is something I’ve played with in the past.
I didn’t have it quite figured out back then, but I believe I got it right this time.
Tell me what you think.



- There are no longer Critical Hits. You no longer roll extra dice to calculate critical damage.
- Instead of crit threat/confirmation and damage-multipliers, a successful attack would deal extra damage according to how much it was successful beyond the to-hit DC (zero extra damage when attack-roll = AC). This value cannot exceed the attacker's BAB (prevents True Strike abuse and other loopholes).
- Each officially noted modifier in crit threat/multiplier attributed to a given weapon or the Keen property increases the extra damage by 50% (calculate fractions and round the result up).
- Rolling a natural 20 automatically maximizes the weapon's bace damage without rolling the dice.
- Power Attack is an open option rather than a feat, and it is capped at 1/4 BAB (rounded up), so that 2-handers wouldn't have too obvious an advantage over other weapon styles.


So, for instance, a 5th level bard attacking with a Keen Rapier and scoring an attack roll of 18 vs. AC 15 would result in damage as follows:

Step 1:
=====
Calculate damage normally – as you did in the past (1d6 + Str-mod + extra from feats + magical enhancements).

Step 2:
=====
The extra damage = 3 (18 - 15).
Since the Rapier is stated to have increased threat (18-20 instead of 20), you add 50% of 3 twice, meaning those 3 extra points become 6 (3 + 2 x 1.5).
Since the Rapier is Keen, you add 50% of 3 yet again.
You get a total extra damage of 7.5 (2.5 x 3) and you round it up to 8.

So the total damage equals 1d6 + 8 + Str-mod + extra from feats + magical enhancements.

That same, attack made with a regular quarterstaff, would leave that extra damage at 3 (1d6 + 3 + . . .)

Special: When attacking objects or opponents with no discernible anatomies, except for the Keen enhancement, you treat your attack roll as if it’s equal the target’s AC.


If that same 5th level bard would score 19 or more on his attack roll, the extra damage, being capped by the bard's +3 BAB, is calculated as if scoring 18 on the d20 roll.
If he scores 20, the damage calculation = 6 + 8 + Str-mod + extra from feats + magical enhancements (maximizing the d6 roll).


Think of it. It would...:
1. Reduce dice-rolls dramatically. You don’t cinfirm crit and you don’t roll for extra damage. You just need to do some arithmetics in your head (something that’s gonna come naturally after a few times – 2 sessions at most). It’s easy because the extra damage multiplier never changes for a given weapon (by type + whether or not it has the Keen enhancement).
2. Promote better weapon balance.
3. Scale nicely with BAB.
4. Spare those precious feat slots previously spent on PA, Improved Crit and other damage enhancers.
5. Eliminate every single melee character in the universe optimizing Str & taking PA.
6. Make Keen enhancement relevant all the time – including vs. creatures with no discernible anatomies.
7. Make a lot of sense. The better your attack roll is, the more you hurt your enemy. That’s why a single attack from a dagger could result in a scratch on your shoulder or a stab straight through the heart, even though its base damage is 1d4.
8. Make archery benefit just as much as melee would.
9. Make all crit rules/feats/features etc fly out the window – and that’s a lot of load on your head taken off. Anything (feat/feature/enhancement) that multiplies your weapon’s damage is calculated separately from the above (multiple multiplies are added rather than multiply further on, as usual).
10. Str-modifiers & enhancements are not calculated more than once. For 2-handers you could just add Str-bonus twice rather than 1-1/2.
11. There’s no more need for separation between enhancement bonuses to-hit and bonuses to damage. You just need enhancement bonuses to-hit.
.

[TuggyNE]

This is a pretty interesting idea, although I'd need to consider its ramifications some more.

6. Make Keen enhancement relevant all the time – including vs. creatures with no discernible anatomies.

I assume you're including keen edge, weapon of impact, and the impact weapon ability as well?

Also, I think keeping Improved Crit around would be useful to represent weapon masters that are good enough they don't need a special rapier to get extra damage.

[Othesemo]

I like it, personally, though I'm not certain about the balance. This seems like it would be very, very deadly in the hands of monsters with high HD. While it seems fine for PC use, I'd be hesitant to give it to a dragon.

[nonsi]

I assume you're including keen edge, weapon of impact, and the impact weapon ability as well?

Hard to tell right now. Can't remember what Impact stands for.
If it's corresponding to Keen Edge but for bludgeoning weapons, then yes.

Also, I think keeping Improved Crit around would be useful to represent weapon masters that are good enough they don't need a special rapier to get extra damage.

No need - high BAB +Weapon Spec. already cover that angle quite nicely.
You wouldn't wanna take the sting out of Rapier, would you ?
Edit:
I didn't read that one correctly.
But still, my answer would still be "No".
There are already far too many combat options that cost you feats and most inexperienced players don't know that options are more valuable than a bit more damage.
Remember that with this revision, most hits would produce extra damage anyway.

This seems like it would be very, very deadly in the hands of monsters with high HD.

High BAB you mean. Certainly. If that's their shtick - it should be.

While it seems fine for PC use, I'd be hesitant to give it to a dragon.

I'm quite ok with this.
When you're fighting a dragon 4 stories high that weighs 10 tons - expect it to hurt bigtime when it takes a bite at you.
Dragons are spooned to be very scary.

[Amnoriath]

An interesting idea, however keen doubles your threat range so you would have a threat range of 17-20. While it is a small change I don't think you need to modify keen or impact as such. Maybe make another property to add to the multiplier? I haven't found one yet and it would be very welcome.
I don't like that you took away multiplication of base damage. It gives less of a reason to find bonuses to damage because not only are they less likely to stack it no longer multiplies, bonus die damage always stack. In general it throws favor to two-weapon builds because manufactured weapons mostly have better critical scores than natural weapons but also extra attacks.
Power attack is core to so many brute melee builds and a back up for other kinds of melee if they aren't lucky. If you remove this it shoves away some very good options needed to deal damage in many situations as they ascend in level. This is what fighting types are best at so majorly nerfing one kind of weapon style to benefit another just isn't a good fix.
I do think this could be an interesting feat for a duelist and/or archer though. These types often have more attack than they know what to do with.

[Yitzi]

An interesting idea, and vaguely similar to something I've been playing with for my own rebuild. Some other ideas that could go well with it:

1. Precision damage effects (e.g. sneak attack) increase the multiplier instead of adding separate dice of damage.
2. Use the armor-as-DR variant. This DR is applied before the extra damage, and if it reduces base damage to 0 then there is no extra damage. Weapon Finesse allows you to use the armor-to-AC version instead.
3 (this really is meant for if you're using idea 2 as well). All attack rolls are based on DEX, but the STR bonus to damage is doubled.

[RedWarlock]

I like it, it's a general concept I've used before. My own mostly scratch-built non-D&D system uses this on top of a 3d6x6 (on a 6, reroll and add) base attempt roll. No fixed upper end.

It does add a little more complexity to checks for individual attacks, meaning you can't just shoot for 'this-or-over' rolling any more. (I also use a lot less standard attacks, averaging only one or two, with no full attacks.) Keep that in mind.

I can't say for how expanded crits vs multipliers would work. Depends on what you feel needs upgrading. Maybe include base +damage, such as str bonus and enhancement and such, in what gets multiplied? Or rebalance the weapons.

It's probably not going to be a simple fix. (It never is..) If it was simple, they probably would've done it already.

[nonsi]

An interesting idea, however keen doubles your threat range so you would have a threat range of 17-20. While it is a small change I don't think you need to modify keen or impact as such. Maybe make another property to add to the multiplier? I haven't found one yet and it would be very welcome.

I know what Keen does according to the RAW, but why should I find another property. What's wrong with this modification ?

I don't like that you took away multiplication of base damage. It gives less of a reason to find bonuses to damage

Correct. Less of a reason to burn feats on numeric modifiers and more of a reason to invest feats on combat options.
This is a desired result in my view.

In general it throws favor to two-weapon builds because manufactured weapons mostly have better critical scores than natural weapons but also extra attacks.

two-weapon builds suck (less damage each, inferior attack rolls, require tons of feats...). They need all the love they can get.
Also, I don't see how that relates to natural attacks.

Power attack is core to so many brute melee builds and a back up for other kinds of melee if they aren't lucky. If you remove this it shoves away some very good options needed to deal damage in many situations as they ascend in level.

Ok, either you didn't fully grasp my concept or I didn't understand what you're describing here.
So let's use my rules and compare 2 regular weapons to one another: Greatsword vs. Rapier (please tell me if my example is of no relevance to your claim).
If on the average your attack beats your opponents' AC by less than 6, you'd gain better results by using the brute force weapon: the Greatsword.
If on the average your attack beats your opponents' AC by more than 7, you'd gain better results by using the weapon with the better multipliers: the Rapier.
At +6/+7 they even out: +3 or +4 in favor of the Rapier, but +1d6 in favor of the Greatsword.
This swap could be relevant throughout a warrior's adventuring career and change from one opponent to another.

This is what fighting types are best at so majorly nerfing one kind of weapon style to benefit another just isn't a good fix.
I do think this could be an interesting feat for a duelist and/or archer though. These types often have more attack than they know what to do with.

Could you give an example where my rules would consistently nerf one kind of weapon style ?

[nonsi]

1. Precision damage effects (e.g. sneak attack) increase the multiplier instead of adding separate dice of damage.

This will damage the vision of sneak attack, where the rogue's attack roll of 18 is better than the bard's attack roll of 18, because the rogue got to catch his opponent off-guard.
I don't see a way to capitalize on your suggestion without losing that flavor.

2. Use the armor-as-DR variant. This DR is applied before the extra damage, and if it reduces base damage to 0 then there is no extra damage. Weapon Finesse allows you to use the armor-to-AC version instead.

I haven't tried to use armor-as-DR, but I've seen quite a few discussions that said that it messes up balance quite a bit (too strong at low levels and too weak at high levels), so I got cold feet on that angle.

3 (this really is meant for if you're using idea 2 as well). All attack rolls are based on DEX, but the STR bonus to damage is doubled.

I'm a strong supporter for Dex to hit & Str to damage, but if you make it Str-mod x 2, then what in the game is left for using Str-mod x 1 ?

[nonsi]

I like it, it's a general concept I've used before. My own mostly scratch-built non-D&D system uses this on top of a 3d6x6 (on a 6, reroll and add) base attempt roll. No fixed upper end.

Probably my bad, but I haven't the faintest idea what the above describes.

It does add a little more complexity to checks for individual attacks, meaning you can't just shoot for 'this-or-over' rolling any more.

Yes, but working with your head is always way faster than rolling dice.

I can't say for how expanded crits vs multipliers would work. Depends on what you feel needs upgrading.

My suggestion has nothing to do with a need for upgrading.
The purpose is game-speedup and streamlining.
The other advantages I noted are basically just desirable by-products that I happened to notice later on.

Maybe include base +damage, such as str bonus and enhancement and such, in what gets multiplied? Or rebalance the weapons.

I don't understand the mechanics your proposing.
Could you rephrase.

[Amnoriath]

I know what Keen does according to the RAW, but why should I find another property. What's wrong with this modification ?



Correct. Less of a reason to burn feats on numeric modifiers and more of a reason to invest feats on combat options.
This is a desired result in my view.



two-weapon builds suck (less damage each, inferior attack rolls, require tons of feats...). They need all the love they can get.
Also, I don't see how that relates to natural attacks.



Ok, either you didn't fully grasp my concept or I didn't understand what you're describing here.
So let's use my rules and compare 2 regular weapons to one another: Greatsword vs. Rapier (please tell me if my example is of no relevance to your claim).
If on the average your attack beats your opponents' AC by less than 6, you'd gain better results by using the brute force weapon: the Greatsword.
If on the average your attack beats your opponents' AC by more than 7, you'd gain better results by using the weapon with the better multipliers: the Rapier.
At +6/+7 they even out: +3 or +4 in favor of the Rapier, but +1d6 in favor of the Greatsword.
This swap could be relevant throughout a warrior's adventuring career and change from one opponent to another.



Could you give an example where my rules would consistently nerf one kind of weapon style ?

1. The property already boosts damage and increases the chance of it happening under your rule. There isn't any need for more damage and just throws in more favor on a cheap property which is already good for builds that want to have a good critical score.
2. The point is that additional die damage is far more valuable now than bonuses because they always stack and deal more damage most of the time now because bonuses now don't and they don't always stack.
3. Yes two-weapon builds need feats but this doesn't change that at all. All you are doing is changing the damage system not how attacks are made or how many can be dealt at a specific time. You are comparing a duelist rapier vs. a greatsword, the worst kind of form against a good one with no extra abilities tied to it. In a two-weapon build you have more attacks to deal additional die of damage and higher chance of occurrence over all in the growth of characters. It relates because natural weapons have crappy critical scores and they almost always have to expend item slots to enhance them which can be used to fuel other abilities. Before they had an advantage of good base damage(INA..etc) and power attack but now they don't have power attack or multipliers from such.
4. Power attack gives a certain measure of higher damage to weapons with lower critical rating here though high critical chances, bonus die, and high attack become the name of the game in damage. Hundreds of points of damage gone which can apply to any weapon except for light manufactured weapons with one feat. It hurts the party and most melee builds everywhere by eliminating it. I sense ubercharger envy going on here keep in mind they need to be able to charge to use Power Attack with impunity without magical/supernatural abilities.

[nonsi]

1. The property already boosts damage and increases the chance of it happening under your rule. There isn't any need for more damage and just throws in more favor on a cheap property which is already good for builds that want to have a good critical score.

I'm not sure what you mean by "already". By RAW, it increases crit threat chances but has no effect on multipliers. With my approach it increases damage and has no effect on chances for extra damage.
Anyway, now I'm considering making Keen/Impact add 100% extra damage rather than 50%, because it's a one-time addition.

2. The point is that additional die damage is far more valuable now than bonuses because they always stack and deal more damage most of the time now because bonuses now don't and they don't always stack.

1. I believe that my example illustrated that it depends.
2. I'm not aware of cases where bonuses don't stack, unless you're talking about the same type of bonus gained for multiple sources, which I'm quite ok that they wouldn't stack.

3. Yes two-weapon builds need feats but this doesn't change that at all. All you are doing is changing the damage system not how attacks are made or how many can be dealt at a specific time. You are comparing a duelist rapier vs. a greatsword, the worst kind of form against a good one with no extra abilities tied to it. In a two-weapon build you have more attacks to deal additional die of damage and higher chance of occurrence over all in the growth of characters. It relates because natural weapons have crappy critical scores and they almost always have to expend item slots to enhance them which can be used to fuel other abilities. Before they had an advantage of good base damage(INA..etc) and power attack but now they don't have power attack or multipliers from such.
4. Power attack gives a certain measure of higher damage to weapons with lower critical rating here though high critical chances, bonus die, and high attack become the name of the game in damage. Hundreds of points of damage gone which can apply to any weapon except for light manufactured weapons with one feat. It hurts the party and most melee builds everywhere by eliminating it. I sense ubercharger envy going on here keep in mind they need to be able to charge to use Power Attack with impunity without magical/supernatural abilities.

I don't get it. Now one-handed weapons get bonus damage automatically. The previous PA additions are now automatic - how does that constitute as getting shafted ?

But yes, now PA needs to stay so that 2-handers don't get shafted. At least now it is not essential at all times.
Now you'd take it only if you build a 2-hander.

[Othesemo]

So, let's say that somebody had a keen rapier. True strike would suddenly grant approximately 50 extra damage per hit, and this combo would be available at, what, 5th level? At first level, one spell can grant about 40 extra damage. This strikes me as a problem.

[nonsi]

So, let's say that somebody had a keen rapier. True strike would suddenly grant approximately 50 extra damage per hit, and this combo would be available at, what, 5th level? At first level, one spell can grant about 40 extra damage. This strikes me as a problem.

Actually, the only real abuse in in the hands of a Duskblade, since full arcanes have tough time hitting anyway.
But if I have to choose between significant game mechanics and a single spell... the spell will go.

[Woodzyowl]

I hate to be nit-picky, but...

Step 2:
You get a total extra damage of 7.5 (2.5 x 3) and you round it up to 8.

does this rule specifically get an exception to the "Always round down" rule? Anyways, I do like the idea, though it seems like it makes buffing your to-hit the same as buffing your damage (which is interesting, but completely blows up several feats/chains, classes, etc.).

[Othesemo]

Actually, the only real abuse in in the hands of a Duskblade, since full arcanes have tough time hitting anyway.
But if I have to choose between significant game mechanics and a single spell... the spell will go.

And I assume that all of this will have to go as well?

[nonsi]

I hate to be nit-picky, but...

does this rule specifically get an exception to the "Always round down" rule?

I just wanted players to get the feeling they're getting their money's worth.
Rome will not rise or fall on that issue.
If its of any significance to anybody, round it down.

Anyways, I do like the idea, though it seems like it makes buffing your to-hit the same as buffing your damage (which is interesting, but completely blows up several feats/chains, classes, etc.).

With the elimination of crit multipliers, it might not be too terrible.

[nonsi]

And I assume that all of this will have to go as well?

Not necessarily. None of them comes anywhere near the abuseability of True Strike.
I mean, how many of them can you pile up together for prolonged periods ?

[Amnoriath]

Not necessarily. None of them comes anywhere near the abuseability of True Strike.
I mean, how many of them can you pile up together for prolonged periods ?

Tome of Battle, Kensai
Through the use of battle meditation, Swordsage weapon focus, blade meditation you can have an array of weapons which of strict buff characteristics for a cheap price that doesn't even cut into your gold.
Martial Discipline is one of them as it doesn't require you to use it to get the +1 bonus for having the ascribed discipline or the +3 when using a maneuver from that discipline.
Allow me to show you Shadow Hand or Tiger claw have an array of light discipline weapons including unarmed strike. Unarmed strike has at least 9 realistic strike zones(head, elbows, hands, knees, and feet) to add properties to. That means +1 property while just in a stance of said discipline gives you 27 bonus to attack from just the unarmed strike alone. Then get another martial discipline property another +27 on a boost. Then why not another for a strike. This doesn't include any other small weapons or natural attacks that may conveniently have aptitude as well. Equip a keen scimitar with a bloodstorm blade you just created instant death.

[Othesemo]

Not necessarily. None of them comes anywhere near the abuseability of True Strike.
I mean, how many of them can you pile up together for prolonged periods ?

Point is, it is much, much easier to break/abuse this system than the previous one. I can't recall ever seeing a terribly powerful crit fisher build, but with this system it would be quite possible to stack to hit up to absolutely ludicrous levels and then go about killing things by poking them softly.

Or what about touch attacks? For example, take Emerald Razor from ToB (lets you make a single attack with your weapon as a melee touch attack). Off of the top of my head (using the elite array for simplicity)-

Spoiler

Show

Strongheart Halfling Swordsage 4/Rogue 1

Str 10
Dex 17+1+2
Con 14
Int/Cha to taste
Wis 13

Feats: Weapon Finesse, Shadow Blade, Adaptive Style, WF (Rapier) (From Swordsage)

Items: +1 Rapier, Gloves of Dex +2, 3,000 gp misc. gear

Attack: +1 Rapier +13 Melee (1d4+7 (1 wis, 5 dex, 1 magic))

So, let's say the halfling uses Cloak of Deception at the beginning of his turn. He now has +15 to hit, and his enemy is flatfooted (he uses Assassin's Stance, incidentally). He then uses Emerald Razor on his enemy (let's say a winter wolf). He now has a +15 to hit AC 9, and deals an extra 3d6 sneak attack damage.

Let's say he rolls a modest 10 on his attack roll. He deals 1d4+7 base damage, or 8.5. He then gets an extra 32 damage from the crit rules, bumping it up to 33.5 damage on average. He also gets 3d6 sneak attack damage, for an extra 9.5, bringing the total up to 51, or enough to bring the winter wolf down to exactly 0 hp.

Glancing through an index of CR 5 creatures, there are very few who can survive being hit that hard more than once, and a fair number who can't survive it at all. Of course, CR 5 is meant to be an appropriate challenge for 4 5th level adventurers, not one, so this guy's already a bit ahead of the power curve.

This took about 30 minutes to completely write, and I didn't actually have to use Person_Man's thread on optimizing. Hell, I've probably missed dozens of options that I would have used if I were actually making a character.

[nonsi]

Allow me to show you Shadow Hand or Tiger claw have an array of light discipline weapons including unarmed strike. Unarmed strike has at least 9 realistic strike zones(head, elbows, hands, knees, and feet) to add properties to. That means +1 property while just in a stance of said discipline gives you 27 bonus to attack from just the unarmed strike alone. Then get another martial discipline property another +27 on a boost. Then why not another for a strike. This doesn't include any other small weapons or natural attacks that may conveniently have aptitude as well. Equip a keen scimitar with a bloodstorm blade you just created instant death.

1. And you're ok with this ?
2. You can google it (or apply whatever smart search mechanism you can dream of) from here to kingdom come, but you won't find me saying anything in favor of ToB, so it's not really a factor to regard in this discussion.

[Othesemo]

1. And you're ok with this ?
2. You can google it (or apply whatever smart search mechanism you can dream of) from here to kingdom come, but you won't find me saying anything in favor of ToB, so it's not really a factor to regard in this discussion.

I used two books, both of which are freely available, to create my example. Not exactly googling to kingdom come.

And whatever you think of ToB, you can't just wave your hand and hope that it goes away.

[Amnoriath]

1. And you're ok with this ?
2. You can google it (or apply whatever smart search mechanism you can dream of) from here to kingdom come, but you won't find me saying anything in favor of ToB, so it's not really a factor to regard in this discussion.

1. I am okay in pointing out how it exploits your system far better because that extra attack is at least 1 attack to 2 damage now at full efficiency.
2. Actually I discovered it on my own before in just looking at the books. I just chimed in on the internet when I wrote the response. Also ToB is very popular and is used a lot because fighting types need a bit more flexibility than just damage. It should be taken into consideration when you offer a fix even if you don't like it. Fixes are suppose to accommodate what is wrong in the system, having a fix that requires banning other official material just so it works fairly isn't a good fix.

[Seerow]

Allow me to show you Shadow Hand or Tiger claw have an array of light discipline weapons including unarmed strike. Unarmed strike has at least 9 realistic strike zones(head, elbows, hands, knees, and feet) to add properties to. That means +1 property while just in a stance of said discipline gives you 27 bonus to attack from just the unarmed strike alone. Then get another martial discipline property another +27 on a boost. Then why not another for a strike. This doesn't include any other small weapons or natural attacks that may conveniently have aptitude as well. Equip a keen scimitar with a bloodstorm blade you just created instant death.

I'm pretty sure unarmed strike doesn't work that way. You can't declare every part of your body you strike with as a separate weapon. You have a single unarmed strike.

[Amnoriath]

I'm pretty sure unarmed strike doesn't work that way. You can't declare every part of your body you strike with as a separate weapon. You have a single unarmed strike.

Which can be used with any of those regions, some weapon properties do not apply specifically to weapons. A classic example is defending.

[Seerow]

Which can be used with any of those regions, some weapon properties do not apply specifically to weapons. A classic example is defending.

Point is you can't enchant one hand separately from another. In fact I'm pretty sure by default you can't even enchant your unarmed strikes (hence the amulet of natural attacks).

Trying to say you can enchant each part of your body separately to get a bunch of stacking bonuses is pure munchkinry. You can achieve similarly silly results even in core only (say doing the same thing but with the Defending property).

[Amnoriath]

Point is you can't enchant one hand separately from another. In fact I'm pretty sure by default you can't even enchant your unarmed strikes (hence the amulet of natural attacks).

Trying to say you can enchant each part of your body separately to get a bunch of stacking bonuses is pure munchkinry. You can achieve similarly silly results even in core only (say doing the same thing but with the Defending property).

I used the kensai for this example it has specific and very favorable rules in enhance natural attacks(100% cost+10% per additional natural weapon). It gives an example of monk imbuing multiple parts of his body.
As I said before here he gets return in damage for the extra boost in attack. Otherwise he just had a pile of attack which could be used PA but only up to his lower BAB and/or maybe disarm.

[nonsi]

I used two books, both of which are freely available, to create my example. Not exactly googling to kingdom come.

And whatever you think of ToB, you can't just wave your hand and hope that it goes away.

I just don't care about ToB. I ignore it entirely.

Also ToB is very popular and is used a lot because fighting types need a bit more flexibility than just damage. It should be taken into consideration when you offer a fix even if you don't like it. Fixes are suppose to accommodate what is wrong in the system, having a fix that requires banning other official material just so it works fairly isn't a good fix.

Call me a megalomaniac if you will, but I strongly believe this is a better solution to all 3.5e's melee issues than ToB (on most if not all aspects).
If you wish for a detailed explanation why, you're more than welcome to that discussion.

As I said before here he gets return in damage for the extra boost in attack. Otherwise he just had a pile of attack which could be used PA but only up to his lower BAB and/or maybe disarm.

Now that this came up, I wouldn't automatically rule out the idea of capping the extra damage with BAB.
This could prevent quite a bit of munchkinism.

[nonsi]

I'm pretty sure unarmed strike doesn't work that way. You can't declare every part of your body you strike with as a separate weapon. You have a single unarmed strike.

Thanks for the interpretation. I hadn't realized he meant stacking enhancements on different body parts (which both is impossible and that fact that enhancements of the same type never stack).

[SowZ]

You wouldn't need to make DEX to hit rolls. This already has the effect of making Dex more important by making AC more important.