Request: Support for Weapon Finesse in Ultimate Combat!

This is a spin-off discussion thread from my contribution to this thread gathering ideas for Ultimate Combat, in which I ask:

Please help make Dex-based melee characters viable!

I know Rogues exist, but they are horribly squishy. I know Rangers and Fighters can take Finesse, but they have an extremely hard time staying relevant in terms of damage output. I've heard about Dervish Dance, but it's extremely restrictive in terms of flavor as well as crunch.

What is needed is a mechanic to increase the damage output of Finesse combattants, with the following properties:
- Affordable cost. Something with harsh prerequisites like Spring Attack is going to cripple most builds, especially if they also want to pursue other feat trees matching the flavor (such as Spring Attack!).
- Limited power. A Dex-based fighter should have a lower raw damage output than a Str-based one. It makes sense conceptually, and it is needed because a high Dex comes with lots of other advantages.
- Sufficient power. A Dex-based fighter must be able to perform the role of a traditional Fighter in the party. His damage output must be relevant. No acrobatic trick or high touch AC is ever going to balance out the lack of a credible offensive threat.
- Fluff versatility. Dex-based melee combat is a beaufitul concept that fits well into various regions of the character landscape: Swashbucklers, Elven Rangers, Monks, Bards. All finessable weapons should be supported.

The easiest way to ensure balance would be a slow, escalating bonus to damage hard-coded into an archetype's level progression, as Sneak Attack is for the Rogue. The problem with that is that you lock the effect into a given base class (and its archetype), leaving little wiggle-room for fluff. That said, if the mechanic is reasonaly robust and elegant, one might want to make several matching archetypes for the different base classes, all using the same mechanic. (A conservative way to do this would be to use the pre-existing Sneak Attack mechanic. Maybe give 1d6/3 levels of Sneak Attack to certain Fighter and Ranger archetypes? Though a static damage bonus (as it is seen in Arcane Strike) would fit the Fighter's design philosophy better.)

Another mechanically easy way to do it would be to make it one or several feat. Feats are choosable by anyone and thus mesh with every existing melee base class. The problem there is the power balance. Some 3/4-BAB classes already have melee boosters build into the class (Rogues, Bards, Monks). One would have to take care not to make the new source of damage too powerful for those classes. My suggestions for that:
- Make the bonus dependent on BAB, like Power Attack. Fighters, Rangers, and Paladins are built with high-Str characters in mind. A Dex-based implementation of these classes is going to need a lot of support from the new feat.
- If Monks and dual-wielding Rogues and Bards threaten to unbalance things by getting too much leverage out of the feat, maybe have the bonus apply only to a single weapon (and maybe half to off-hand weapons?).

How about this?

Surgical Strike (Combat Feat)
You may not have the brawn to decapitate your foes, but if your blade is quick and steady, a well-placed stab is more than enough.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse
Benefit: While wielding a weapon using Weapon Finesse, you gain a bonus to the weapon damage roll. This bonus is equal to half your Dexterity modifier. If you are using a single one-handed weapon and are wielding neither a shield nor any off-hand weapons, the bonus is equal to your Dexterity modifier instead. Creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to the bonus damage from Surgical Strikes.

This rewards using Weapon Finesse without making Strength irrelevant.

Opinions?

Problem I see with this feat is that it will reward characters with good DEX and good STR, similar to what happens with Bows.

However, characters who invest in DEX by making STR a dump stat (the better to avoid MAD) will still have a low damage output, as opposed for example as Dervish Dance where STR becomes irrelevant.

Example : STR 18, DEX 16 : gets +6+1=+7 bonus to damage with a 2-handed weapon, (+4+1)+(+2+1) = +8 total with TWF and +4+3 = +7 if in the Duelist configuration

STR 7, DEX 20 : gets -2+2= +0 to damage with a 2-handed weapon, (-2+2)+(-2+2) = +0 total with TWF and -2+5=+3 in the Duelist configuration.

In such a case, I will likely rather make a ranged combattant with a crossbow.

Finally, the STR 20, DEX 7 tank will be delivering +7 bonus damage with a 2-handed weapon,(+5)+(+2) = +7 total with TWF and +5 in the Duelist configuration

Maybe replacing (rather than adding) the STR bonus with the bonus you proposed would be the way to go.

Then, STR7, DEX 20 would get +2 bonus damage with a 2-handed weapon, (+2)+(+2)=+4 total with TWF and +5 in the Duelist configuration

Still not on par with the STR20, DEX7 tank, though

Sure as soon as they come up with a feat that allows a character to use strength for AC, initiative, Reflex, a number of skills, and ranged attack rolls.

Surgical Strike (Combat Feat)
You may not have the brawn to decapitate your foes, but if your blade is quick and steady, a well-placed stab is more than enough.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse
Benefit: While wielding a weapon using Weapon Finesse, you gain a bonus to the weapon damage roll. This bonus is equal to half your Dexterity modifier. If you are using a single one-handed weapon and are wielding neither a shield nor any off-hand weapons, the bonus is equal to your Dexterity modifier instead. Creatures immune to critical hits are also immune to the bonus damage from Surgical Strikes.

OK, let me save you 20 pages of argument here: Dexterity is sufficiently overloaded as it is as an ability score - it boosts lots of skills, it provides an AC bonus, a save bonus, and a to-hit bonus.

In a previous thread along this line, we decided that Intelligence to damage for the Improved Weapon Finesse or whatever you wanted to call it feat would be far preferable.

Don't get me wrong, I am all for boosting the effectiveness of dex-based fighting characters (I am currently running two in on-line games): one thrust of a rapier in the hands of a skilled user can be as deadly as a blow from a two-handed sword any time of the day or night.

Problem I see with this feat is that it will reward characters with good DEX and good STR, similar to what happens with Bows.

And why not? Currently a Fighter has rather little incentive to go above a Dex of 12.

However, characters who invest in DEX by making STR a dump stat (the better to avoid MAD) will still have a low damage output, as opposed for example as Dervish Dance where STR becomes irrelevant.

I don't think it's wise to bypass Str entirely, as it invites ability powergaming (well, it invites it even more than people already do it). A Dex of 7 hurts a Str-based Fighter, then let a Str of 7 hurt a Dex-based Fighter.

(It's also realistic that swordfighting, even with light blades, requires a certain amount of muscle stamina, but I know verisimilitude is not very widely accepted as valid grounds for rules...)

Example : STR 18, DEX 16 : gets +6+1=+7 bonus to damage with a 2-handed weapon

That's a damage bonus of +1 at a to-hit penalty of -1. Bad deal, I'd say. That same Fighter could also swing a Greatsword rather than whatever finessable weapon he used to pull off this trick, which most likely will serve him better.

Only the duelist gains +3 damage for -1 to hit here. He would be better served with Str 16, Dex 18, though. Or Str 13, Dex 20, for that matter, which is what I think a duelist should be aiming for in this scheme of things. It will give you a typical 1d6+6, as opposed to the 2d6+7 of the Str-based greatsword fighter, or the 1d8+5 and +2 AC of the Str-based Sword-and-Board fighter. Competitive, but weaker in the end.

Sure as soon as they come up with a feat that allows a character to use strength for AC, initiative, Reflex, a number of skills, and ranged attack rolls.

As you can see above, my proposal does not allow the dumping of Str, and Str-based characters still outperform the Dex builds.

As you can see above, my proposal does not allow the dumping of Str, and Str-based characters still outperform the Dex builds.

Okay, how about a feat for half strength bonus to AC, reflex, and intiative.

Dex is already an amazing stat. There doesn't need to be anymore support for it. Charisma (and to a lesser degree strength) need far more love.

Dex is already an amazing stat. There doesn't need to be anymore support for it. Charisma (and to a lesser degree strength) need far more love.

+1, Really this all the way. Dex is already so good it's not even funny.

OK, let me save you 20 pages of argument here: Dexterity is sufficiently overloaded as it is as an ability score - it boosts lots of skills, it provides an AC bonus, a save bonus, and a to-hit bonus.

Forget the "to-hit", Strength does that too. Forget the AC bonus -- Strength does that by allowing you to wear Armor like so much silk. So we have "lots of skills" and the least important save (and initiative, you forgot that) against "few skills", personal carrying capacity, more damage, and two free feats. Doesn't sound like such a bad deal to me.

In a previous thread along this line, we decided that Intelligence to damage for the Improved Weapon Finesse or whatever you wanted to call it feat would be far preferable.

I wouldn't mind that either, though you'd be greatly favoring Magi and Wizard-based Eldritch Knights over Rangers, Paladins, Vivisectionists, and in particular Monks. The Monk really cannot afford more MAD.

Would you consider it fair if Wis or Cha were also allowed as a possible source of the damage? It quickly gets very complicated there.

I think my proposal goes a long way towards balancing things out by only making Dex half effective at boosting damage and keeping Strength at full effectiveness. The only way to exploit full Dex to damage is to go free-hand -- a currently woefully undersupported and virtually unplayed combat style. Even with my modifications, that style's damage output is going to lag behind all styles of Str builds. Everybody wins.

Unless you create a feat that lets you add strength to AC/Reflex saves and initiative (not to mention several far more useful skills) I wouldnt even consider such a thing for my table. Like others have said, dex is already overloaded. I dont allow dervish dance at my table, nor would I allow this. If you want to be a damage dealer you need strength or alternate sources of damage (like sneak attack). If you want to be a fighter and do damage, you should have to split between dex and strength. No amount of feats would in my opinion justify allowing dex to damage.

Wow people are sensitive about this. Feat already exists (Dervish Dance is actually better in some ways). It's silly to gripe about a wizard getting it's int to hit (or to hit AND damage for that matter) as it hitting anything would be a foolish waste of time.

I don't see anything wrong with it, not really. Piranna Strike (I think that was the name?) is basically power attack for dex... so sure.

I would like to see something for Fighters that lets you use Int as a combat stat. The only fighter archetype that can't be made effective is the really smart warrior (I suppose you could do it with rogue, but why not fighter?)

I'm sure you'll see more support for dextrous fighters, smart fighters, and strong fighters. What I'm really hoping for is a BEVY of new weapons that are LESS VANILLA. The weapons are really, really bland right now and could seriously use some newcomers that are worth taking.

Edit - Balance really isn't the issue here. That's silly. 15 point build human Barbarian/Alchemist-Vivisectionist is rolling up on a potential 30 str at level two, at level three you could have those three wonderful primary attacks for feral mutagen at +17 with +15 damage before power attack.

I guess I don't see what a dex based fighter does that is even remotely that terrifying for many, many levels.

Okay, how about a feat for half strength bonus to AC, reflex, and intiative.

That would sound silly, I admit, even considering that the Str bonus to AC would have to be Armor-typed, and given that you would have to spend two feats to gain these bonuses, it would not be very far from balanced (comparable to Lightning Reflexes, Improved Initiative, and cheap armor). In fact, it might make some rather flavorful Barbarian builds possible, and he would most likely still not dump Dex.

I am not suggesting that, though. I am suggesting to add half of one ability modifier to a single function for a combattant that is so weak as to be unplayable with standard rules (the high-Dex, low-Str fighter). That's much less to ask. And again, the rule does not invite Str dumping.

You overestimate the value of the multitudinous functions of Dex to a melee character. As it stands, countless valid melee builds will max Str and dump Dex, but only a single build can survive with max Dex and dumped Str (the Rogue), and even that one is much better off with a neutral Str score. It seems that for all its uses, Dex is still far more expendable in melee than Str is.

I've wanted to see a feat that gives you half of your dexterity modifier to damage on top of strength when using finesse weapons. After running a bunch of calculations I didn't find it overpowered at all.

Actually Fighters have a severe incentive to go for a 20 Dex (+4 to Dex limit, Full Plate armor), or a 24 (Mithral Full Plate) or a 28 (Mithral Breastplate). At least, if they don't want any of their class abilities to become superfluous. Getting to a 24 by level 20 with just Dex booster + Inherents means a starting score of 13 is required.

For a 20 with just the booster, starting score of 14.

===Aelryinth

I would like to see something for Fighters that lets you use Int as a combat stat. The only fighter archetype that can't be made effective is the really smart warrior (I suppose you could do it with rogue, but why not fighter?)

See my post above.

Also, in a current game we came up with:
Swift Justice Archetype (Paladin):
Lose proficiency with medium and heavy armour, gain Acrobatics, Bluff, Intimidate, Perception and Stealth as class skills. Lose Mercy class feature and gain:
Truth's Razor: at 3rd level the paladin gains a +1 bonus to damage with finesse weapons, and a +1 dodge bonus to AC while wielding a finesse weapon. This bonus increases by a further +1 at ever three levels, to the limit of the paladin's intelligence modifier (but always a minimum of +1).

Gallard Stormeye wrote:

Okay, how about a feat for half strength bonus to AC, reflex, and intiative.

That would sound silly, I admit, even considering that the Str bonus to AC would have to be Armor-typed, and given that you would have to spend two feats to gain these bonuses, it would not be very far from balanced (comparable to Lightning Reflexes, Improved Initiative, and cheap armor). In fact, it might make some rather flavorful Barbarian builds possible, and he would most likely still not dump Dex.

I am not suggesting that, though. I am suggesting to add half of one ability modifier to a single function for a combattant that is so weak as to be unplayable with standard rules (the high-Dex, low-Str fighter). That's much less to ask. And again, the rule does not invite Str dumping.

You overestimate the value of the multitudinous functions of Dex to a melee character. As it stands, countless valid melee builds will max Str and dump Dex, but only a single build can survive with max Dex and dumped Str (the Rogue), and even that one is much better off with a neutral Str score. It seems that for all its uses, Dex is still far more expendable in melee than Str is.

I guess the thing that holds me up there is that physical strength would never help your armor anyway, but dexterity can and would help you kill things.

The importance of the stat's is all relevant to the class you're playing, there doesn't need to be any internal re-balancing of them, and why would'nt you let a melee character play the character they WANT (the dex-y duelist) when ANY mage can hurl a fireball or a lightning bolt?

nathan blackmer wrote:

I would like to see something for Fighters that lets you use Int as a combat stat. The only fighter archetype that can't be made effective is the really smart warrior (I suppose you could do it with rogue, but why not fighter?)

See my post above.

Also, in a current game we came up with:
Swift Justice Archetype (Paladin):
Lose proficiency with medium and heavy armour, gain Acrobatics, Bluff, Intimidate, Perception and Stealth as class skills. Lose Mercy class feature and gain:
Truth's Razor: at 3rd level the paladin gains a +1 bonus to damage with finesse weapons, and a +1 dodge bonus to AC while wielding a finesse weapon. This bonus increases by a further +1 at ever three levels, to the limit of the paladin's intelligence modifier (but always a minimum of +1).

I checked out what you said upstream, I just don't think that Dex is over-loaded. I think a two feat tax for non-fighters to use dex to damage is fair and balanced... it's not like a barbarian would ever use it, a Rogue would but even then the damage gain would be negligible.... which leaves us with the Fighter, who ends up being just about as good as he would have been anyway.

Technically you can get extra AC with Str through shield of swings, as an aside.

I made a feat for this purpose in my house rules. Granted I changed some things about the attribute scores but this is one feat that can easily be ported. Basically it grants sneak attack on attacks with finesse weapons.

It scales slower than the rogue's and is based on Int. for every point of Int mod, you can get 1d6 sneak attack, and it is capped at 1d6 per three levels.

I based it on SA because I think it is a cool alternative way of dealing damage, it fits well with the idea of a dex-fighter and I didn't see a reason why only rogues should have it. Rogues are just better at it that's all.

Ah, I wasn't aware that Pathfinder Fighters can use that much Dex thanks to their Armor Training. I guess I've never played a PF Fighter so far.

Anyway, if you're worried about fullplated greatsword Fighters picking up the feat, which is not the intention at all, you can just add the restriction of Light or no armor. If you're still worried, remove the possibility to use the feat with two-handed weapons. The free-hand style is really what I'm aiming at, and that can really use all the help it can get.

The current Dervish Dance is quite similar, but replacing Str rather than adding to it makes it rather abusable, IMHO.

I checked out what you said upstream, I just don't think that Dex is over-loaded. I think a two feat tax for non-fighters to use dex to damage is fair and balanced... it's not like a barbarian would ever use it, a Rogue would but even then the damage gain would be negligible.... which leaves us with the Fighter, who ends up being just about as good as he would have been anyway.

Well, measure them up:

Strength: adds to melee attack, damage, 2 skills
Dexterity: adds to melee attack (with feat), missile attack, AC, one save, 7 skills.
Constitution: adds to one save, hit points.
Intelligence: adds to skill ranks, 3 skills & 2 skill groups (Craft and Knowledge)
Wisdom: adds to one save, 4 skills & 1 skill group (Profession), AC for monks.
Charisma: adds to 6 skills & 12 skill group (Perform).

Looks to me like Dex is already doing a lot more than any other ability score.

In the other thread I argued just as you did ... and I was still wrong. Look at Int to damage - it encourages the smart fighter, the expertise master, for example, and it means a fighter has more options in terms of combat style.

Your typical fighter can benefit a lot from dex-to-damage: for example, a high strength TWF build using two short swords which is already a damage demon gets even better with it. He benefits less from Int to damage, as his focus is strength and dexterity, he cannot add to intelligence as well. The Combat Expertise oriented fighter can get a lot out of it, though, and he is the one that actually needs it. Int-to-damage encourages the smart fighter, something nothing else but the duelist does, and fills the required gap for the finesse fighter.

You overestimate the value of the multitudinous functions of Dex to a melee character. As it stands, countless valid melee builds will max Str and dump Dex, but only a single build can survive with max Dex and dumped Str (the Rogue), and even that one is much better off with a neutral Str score. It seems that for all its uses, Dex is still far more expendable in melee than Str is.

I have a finesse based inquisitor and vivisectionist alchemist that do quite well. The vivisectionist is high end of the pack with melee damage, exceptional defensively, and can still do Ok ranged. The inquisitor is mid-high range on melee damage (depending on Bane), quite decent on ranged damage, and really solid defensively with high AC and high saves.

Neither build dumps strength, but strength isn't the key to their damage capacity, they lean heavily on bonus damage from other things.

The Dervish Dancer is a good compromise for getting dexterity to damage, you lose out on the possibility of getting an off hand weapon or a shield in your off hand. The bummer is it's limited to scimitar only. I'm not sure if Ultimate Combat will fix that.

For what it's worth there is another good dexterity fighter feat out there called Piranha Strike. It's essentially Power Attack for finesse characters.

I don't know if either of these are going to appear in Ultimate Combat or not.

Strength: adds to melee attack, damage, 2 skills
Dexterity: adds to melee attack (with feat), missile attack, AC, one save, 7 skills.
Constitution: adds to one save, hit points.
Intelligence: adds to skill ranks, 3 skills & 2 skill groups (Craft and Knowledge)
Wisdom: adds to one save, 4 skills & 1 skill group (Profession), AC for monks.
Charisma: adds to 6 skills & 12 skill group (Perform).

According to that logic, everybody should be dumping Con because it serves the least functions. Nobody does. Clearly some of these things are not like the others.

Look at Int to damage - it encourages the smart fighter, the expertise master, for example, and it means a fighter has more options in terms of combat style.

I certainly like the idea of a smart fighter, especially given that I once played a moderately dumb Fighter that was treated by everyone as dumber than he was supposed to be. Too bad Combat Expertise has such an abysimal return; I figure Int would be more popular otherwise.

Incidentally, tripping and disarming feats key of Int, so a smart fighter could certainly be fun and effective if he had a bit more support.

Your typical fighter can benefit a lot from dex-to-damage: for example, a high strength TWF build using two short swords which is already a damage demon gets even better with it.

Looks like a Dervish Dance-like feat is the way to go then...

For what it's worth there is another good dexterity fighter feat out there called Piranha Strike. It's essentially Power Attack for finesse characters.

That looks nice. If Dervish Dance were to be opened up to other finessable weapon types, and maybe made available before 3rd level, it would form an acceptable solution for building a duelist-type Dex fighter.

My main initiative here is to receive support for Dex-based fighers in Ultimate Combat; I don't care much what the mechanism is as long as it does its job well and is reasonably accessible. I don't think Swashbucklers should have to suffer through a few levels of utter suckitude before they get to have their enabling feats.

Before the APG, me and my group homebrewed a Spadassin base class to allow a fellow player to fight efficiently with dexterity.
Ironically, this class didn't use dexterity for anything more than what it is already intended to do, instead, it got Weapon Finesse at 1st level, a cumulative dodge bonus, and it used charisma as a bonus to damage and AC depending on level. This charisma bonus worked only against ennemies with at least 1 intelligence point, and also didn't work on ennemies immune to critical hits and sneak attacks. At very high levels, it was able to crit on 13-20 if using a keen weapon like Kukri or rapier. But even with this critical rate, it did overall low damage when compared to a pre-APG two-weapon fighter who was not optimized, got a bit more AC than a two-handed fighter, and a lower to-hit on average due to having full BAB, but less feats and bonus than a fighter. So, it was as much efficient as a fighter, but focused on critical hits and stratospheric touch AC instead of pure constancy, damage and sheer AC. It was your perfect mobile parangon, able to use critical feats for nice control, do impressive moves using the surroundings, and be on-par with a full-plate fighter who didn't invest in a shield and AC feats.
The player loved the class, played it perfectly and never felt behind the others even though we all had well-built characters.

And let me say it again, characters who never had to fight a creepy couple of classical-dancing spadassin ghosts using teamwork feats in an old haunted cathedral never knew FEAR. Ghosts keep the character's charisma, add +4 to it, and get this bonus to AC -AND- HP in top of the spadassin's abilities, items and any additionnal ghost powers.
Oh, and it's totally f%#@ing awesome too. I swear to Zeus our underpants weren't clean after this fight which concluded in an epic way an horror story arc.

If we ever see something in UC that emphazises "dexterity-fighting", I hope it will follow the same scheme and instead use a mental stat, dexterity is awesome enough to not add damage in top of it's uses.

That looks nice. If Dervish Dance were to be opened up to other finessable weapon types, and maybe made available before 3rd level, it would form an acceptable solution for building a duelist-type Dex fighter.

My main initiative here is to receive support for Dex-based fighers in Ultimate Combat; I don't care much what the mechanism is as long as it does its job well and is reasonably accessible. I don't...

A lot of character concepts don't really fully come together until 3rd level or higher, it's the nature of the system that you improve over time. My alchemist doesn't get feral mutagen or precise bomb until second level. Power attack requires +1 BAB so for many it's a third level feat. Two weapon fighting characters often need weapon finesse so they don't get their second weapon until third level.

The list of "not-so-great-until" options is quite large.

Before the APG, me and my group homebrewed a Spadassin base class to allow a fellow player to fight efficiently with dexterity.

Sounds like great fun! I can very well see a feat or archetype to similar effect in Ultimate Combat. Actually, it would probably have to be a fighter archetype to avoid being too powerful in the hands of a Paladin, Bard, or Oracle... too bad that would still screw over the Monks. If any class could do with a bit less MAD, it would have to be them.

Also, I'm glad that spadassin is an actual word (I had to look it up); at first I thought it was a contraction of spaz and assassin. ;)

I'm all in support of Int-to-damage as a feat or low-level archetype ability. Other than adding skills, Int doesn't do much for classes that don't cast from it, and most finesse fighters, dueslists, and swashbucklers of literature fight as much with wit as they do grace.

The big issue with finesse fighting right now is that there's no way to be a good melee fighter without an absurd strength. At least an Int-to-damage feat would provide an alternative that would allow 12 and 10 Str characters with decent dex and int to stay level with their hulking barbarian-physique brethren.

I played a game where one character had Dex-to-damage, thanks to Shadow Blade from ToB. It was just slightly much. Dex wasn't quite a god stat until it could also add to damage.

Also, Int-to-damage would explain how all those elves in the books and movies can go toe to toe with orcs and humans and live, and of all the mental stats, I think it has the easiest flavor - Int-fighting means precision and calculated strikes based on an educated understanding of anatomy.

Sounds like great fun! I can very well see a feat or archetype to similar effect in Ultimate Combat. Actually, it would probably have to be a fighter archetype to avoid being too powerful in the hands of a Paladin, Bard, or Oracle...

The spadassin character looked a lot like your current avatar. :)

Since there already is a spadassin variant for rogues, I don't think we'll see a full BAB dexterity/charisma fighter in UC... but I would love to see an official version of our Spadassin base-class as a variant : charisma on damage, fast dodge bonus to AC to always have a medium-to-heavy armor equivalent, specialist of acrobatics, movement in difficult terrain and critical hits.

This is actually a really good idea for a feat. The fact that a fighter can take it and will be able to use their strength and half of their dex for a weapon is nice. This would be well worth the feat investment for any decent Rogue..

As far as the available options to get Finesse fighters to do a bit more damage without relying on strength as much as a Greatsword fighter.. several options are available.

Option 1) Requires Weapon Finesse and a dex of 15+, only functions on light one handed weapons. Primary Hand will use Half Strength, Half Dex for damage, off hand will use half dex.

Option 2) Requires Weapon Finesse and a dex of 15+, only functions on light one handed weapons. Allows you to use your Dexterity Modifier for your damage as opposed to your Strength.

Option 3) Requires Weapon Finesse and a dex of 15+, only functions on light one handed weapons. Allows you to use your Dexterity Modifier for your damage as opposed to your Strength. Wielding a weapon one handed is full Dex modifier, two handed is Half Dex Modifier for both.

I'm personally partial to Option #1, as it helps out high dex builds really well, and encourages you to not neglect strength.

Average "Duelist" build from what I've seen is usually 12-14 Strength and 16-20 Dexterity depending on the build.

This could function for Int as well, but I prefer it being Dex as it assists Rangers, Monks, Fighters, Rogues, and other heavily Dexterous builds and does not reward Magus/Wizard/Alchemist and other Intelligence builds.

Also, Int-to-damage would explain how all those elves in the books and movies can go toe to toe with orcs and humans and live, and of all the mental stats, I think it has the easiest flavor - Int-fighting means precision and calculated strikes based on an educated understanding of anatomy.

It does work well, but I also see it work well for sheer determination or inner equilibrium (Wis) or panache and daring (Cha)... I'm still hoping for a viable Dex-based Monk.

This could function for Int as well, but I prefer it being Dex as it assists Rangers, Monks, Fighters, Rogues, and other heavily Dexterous builds and does not reward Magus/Wizard/Alchemist and other Intelligence builds.

That is indeed my primary motivation to base the bonus on (half of) Dex. It puts the bonus where it is needed. Dex 15 as a requirement means you have to be serious about a Dex-based fighting style. A requirement of Light armor only should effectively keep it out of the hands of high-Str heavy hitters who just want to beef their damage up further.

Face_P0lluti0n wrote:

Also, Int-to-damage would explain how all those elves in the books and movies can go toe to toe with orcs and humans and live, and of all the mental stats, I think it has the easiest flavor - Int-fighting means precision and calculated strikes based on an educated understanding of anatomy.

It does work well, but I also see it work well for sheer determination or inner equilibrium (Wis) or panache and daring (Cha)... I'm still hoping for a viable Dex-based Monk.

Int works better for me than this.

Catharsis wrote:

Face_P0lluti0n wrote:

Also, Int-to-damage would explain how all those elves in the books and movies can go toe to toe with orcs and humans and live, and of all the mental stats, I think it has the easiest flavor - Int-fighting means precision and calculated strikes based on an educated understanding of anatomy.

It does work well, but I also see it work well for sheer determination or inner equilibrium (Wis) or panache and daring (Cha)... I'm still hoping for a viable Dex-based Monk.

Int works better for me than this.

I don't see any difference. It's been proven that you can be as book smart about anatomy as you want and never get good at fighting. You get good at fighting by being taught techniques and training those over and over until they are second nature.

Intelligence is important in developing a training plan but an average intelligence person with the right training program is going to be just as good as a genius with the same program.

I haven't done the metagame Dpr formulas, so I really don't have an opinion on that aspect.

one thing I WOULD like to see, is when making new weapons they keep Weapon finese in mind!! The fact that 'Sword cane' doesn't have a line of text saying either 'This weapon works with Finesse' or 'This weapon shares a proficiency with Rapier' is truly inexcusable.

New feats and new weapons REALLY have to fit in with the feats and builds from the core, or things fall apart.

in a game coming up we've all agreed that sword cane will share a proficiency with Rapier, and my bard can use one with finesse...

Whenever he GETs finesse... His build changed a bit from concept to finish... but really, sword cane = martial?? Bards and rogues are the only ones who would WANT a weapon like that??

Such poor planning....

I haven't done the metagame Dpr formulas, so I really don't have an opinion on that aspect.

one thing I WOULD like to see, is when making new weapons they keep Weapon finese in mind!! The fact that 'Sword cane' doesn't have a line of text saying either 'This weapon works with Finesse' or 'This weapon shares a proficiency with Rapier' is truly inexcusable.

Umm... they do keep that in mind, they define the weapon as "Light" when it's finesse-able. Alternately they have entries like the Sawtooth Saber "If you have exotic weapon proficiency (Sawtooth Saber) treat this as a light melee weapon"... in other words... It's finesse-able.

If a weapon *isn't* a light melee weapon then the developers don't intend for it to be used with Weapon Finesse. That is one of the biggest reasons some weapons are listed as light melee and others are one handed.

phantom1592 wrote:

I haven't done the metagame Dpr formulas, so I really don't have an opinion on that aspect.

one thing I WOULD like to see, is when making new weapons they keep Weapon finese in mind!! The fact that 'Sword cane' doesn't have a line of text saying either 'This weapon works with Finesse' or 'This weapon shares a proficiency with Rapier' is truly inexcusable.

Umm... they do keep that in mind, they define the weapon as "Light" when it's finesse-able. Alternately they have entries like the Sawtooth Saber "If you have exotic weapon proficiency (Sawtooth Saber) treat this as a light melee weapon"... in other words... It's finesse-able.

If a weapon *isn't* a light melee weapon then the developers don't intend for it to be used with Weapon Finesse. That is one of the biggest reasons some weapons are listed as light melee and others are one handed.

i believe he was stating that he felt(and on this one i agree with him) that the sword cane could/should? have been finesse-able or a light weapon. nine times out of ten whenever i see one, it's used in a style of...fencing.

Well, while we're waiting for Ultimate Combat to come out here's a home brew feat I came up with. It's pretty balanced considering it's identical to the Dervish Dancer feat from the Inner Sea Guide save for requiring 2 ranks in Acrobatics rather than Perform (dance) and you use a rapier rather than a scimitar.

Expert Fencer
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dex 15, 2 ranks in Acrobatics
When wielding a rapier in one hand and nothing in the other hand you may use your Dexterity modifier to damage instead of your Strength.

i believe he was stating that he felt(and on this one i agree with him) that the sword cane could/should? have been finesse-able or a light weapon. nine times out of ten whenever i see one, it's used in a style of...fencing.

Then shouldn't he have said "I think the sword cane should be a finesse-able weapon"? I'm a big fan of people saying what they mean.

In any case, I agree. The description "slender, light blade" even supports the idea that it should be a light weapon.

My suspicion is they wanted to keep it a martial weapon. Having it equivalent to a rapier, easily concealable, and giving it the ability to be drawn as a swift action was a bit much to wrap into a martial weapon. That's just pure speculation on my part though.

nathan blackmer wrote:

I checked out what you said upstream, I just don't think that Dex is over-loaded. I think a two feat tax for non-fighters to use dex to damage is fair and balanced... it's not like a barbarian would ever use it, a Rogue would but even then the damage gain would be negligible.... which leaves us with the Fighter, who ends up being just about as good as he would have been anyway.

Well, measure them up:

Strength: adds to melee attack, damage, 2 skills, carrying capacity and movement speed while carrying gear, CMB, CMD,
Dexterity: missile attack, AC, one save, 7 skills, CMD.
Constitution: adds to one save, hit points.
Intelligence: adds to skill ranks, 3 skills & 2 skill groups (Craft and Knowledge)
Wisdom: adds to one save, 4 skills & 1 skill group (Profession), AC for monks.
Charisma: adds to 6 skills & 12 skill group (Perform).

Looks to me like Dex is already doing a lot more than any other ability score.

In the other thread I argued just as you did ... and I was still wrong. Look at Int to damage - it encourages the smart fighter, the expertise master, for example, and it means a fighter has more options in terms of combat style.

Your typical fighter can benefit a lot from dex-to-damage: for example, a high strength TWF build using two short swords which is already a damage demon gets even better with it. He benefits less from Int to damage, as his focus is strength and dexterity, he cannot add to intelligence as well. The Combat Expertise oriented fighter can get a lot out of it, though, and he is the one that actually needs it. Int-to-damage encourages the smart fighter, something nothing else but the duelist does, and fills the required gap for the finesse fighter.

I've never, in my time playing Pathfinder, stood up and said "DAYUMN dex is BROKEN."

That said you left out encumbrance for Str, which affects the kind of armor you can wear, which affects your AC. It seems like the data is being skewed to fit a perspective... all stats also open up specific feats as well, and the str reliant feat lines are SOLID. Cleave, Power Attack, Furious Focus, etc are all very good and cannot be replicated with a dex build. Even if you opened up dex to damage you wouldn't see the the kind of numbers a str based melee character could put out at the levels you commonly see play at (1-12).

Oh I corrected a bit of what you said (bold - mine). You can't count feats with what the stat does... or class specific things (because if you did any spellcasting stat is wayyyyyy better, and the analysis would be huge and take forever to write).

Important side note - I don't think dex should STACK with str for damage - it should be one or the other.

Yeah duelist kind of works. It really needs to be an archetype so that you don't have to wade through X levels of useless until you can use it.

Benicio Del Espada wrote:

Catharsis wrote:

Face_P0lluti0n wrote:

Also, Int-to-damage would explain how all those elves in the books and movies can go toe to toe with orcs and humans and live, and of all the mental stats, I think it has the easiest flavor - Int-fighting means precision and calculated strikes based on an educated understanding of anatomy.

It does work well, but I also see it work well for sheer determination or inner equilibrium (Wis) or panache and daring (Cha)... I'm still hoping for a viable Dex-based Monk.

Int works better for me than this.

I don't see any difference. It's been proven that you can be as book smart about anatomy as you want and never get good at fighting. You get good at fighting by being taught techniques and training those over and over until they are second nature.

Intelligence is important in developing a training plan but an average intelligence person with the right training program is going to be just as good as a genius with the same program.

That's a poor analogy. You can be ridiculously strong and have a glass jaw, too.

Intelligence is the hallmark of a good fencer. It's called physical chess because of the thought that goes into the combat, and without a quick and cunning mind a person won't ever be a decent fencer. Speed only gets you so far, and that's why most of the great historic fencers came into their own in their late 20's / early 30's... they were older, more seasoned, [b]and had learned that a thinking man wins the fight.[\b]

Sure there's a base line of physical aptitude, but there are even modern fencers (although in becoming a game it has lost most of what made it a combat art) that are in poor physical shape who are competing at a very high level within the sport.

According to that logic, everybody should be dumping Con because it serves the least functions. Nobody does. Clearly some of these things are not like the others.

I said what they do, not how many things they do. Hit points are massively important, for example, so Con doesn't need to do more to be important. Dex does a lot, though, and I'd be reluctant to add more.

I certainly like the idea of a smart fighter, especially given that I once played a moderately dumb Fighter that was treated by everyone as dumber than he was supposed to be. Too bad Combat Expertise has such an abysimal return; I figure Int would be more popular otherwise.

Incidentally, tripping and disarming feats key of Int, so a smart fighter could certainly be fun and effective if he had a bit more support.

I absolutely agree. Think of your typical role-model for your dex-based fighter: he's not just quick, he's also clever.

I'm all in support of Int-to-damage as a feat or low-level archetype ability. Other than adding skills, Int doesn't do much for classes that don't cast from it, and most finesse fighters, dueslists, and swashbucklers of literature fight as much with wit as they do grace.

The big issue with finesse fighting right now is that there's no way to be a good melee fighter without an absurd strength. At least an Int-to-damage feat would provide an alternative that would allow 12 and 10 Str characters with decent dex and int to stay level with their hulking barbarian-physique brethren.

Just so - I think you should be able to be a good fighter without massive strength, although it should take some work.

I've never, in my time playing Pathfinder, stood up and said "DAYUMN dex is BROKEN."

Nor me, but it is very, very useful.

Oh I corrected a bit of what you said (bold - mine). You can't count feats with what the stat does... or class specific things (because if you did any spellcasting stat is wayyyyyy better, and the analysis would be huge and take forever to write).

Thanks for that, I just reeled stuff off the top of my head. You are also right in that the strength-based feats are just off the scale, and the dex-based ones generally just bring you up to the level of the strength-based fighter without the feats.

And yes, you are right that spell-casting depends on stats, but it also depends on class. We're looking at what are in effect class-independent features here. Everyone can get the benefits of them with the right feats, not everyone benefits from spells.

Important side note - I don't think dex should STACK with str for damage - it should be one or the other.

Thing is, you cannot get past the verisimilitude that stronger = hit harder and there is no reason you cannot hit hard and hit precisely, so there's no reason they shouldn't stack other than metagame balance. This is why Int-to-damage works better: your dex-based fighter is going to need high dexterity to start with, and all fighters want decent strength and constitution. To get decent intelligence to rack up damage, you have to lose one of these - typically, you aren't going to be any better off than the high strength fighter because of the MADness.

We want to match the high strength grunt, but we don't want to outstrip him.

Yeah duelist kind of works. It really needs to be an archetype so that you don't have to wade through X levels of useless until you can use it.

I agree, I think it was a missed opportunity in the APG, frankly - that's why I did the Swift Justice paladin archetype, which kind of works OK.

Rathendar wrote:

i believe he was stating that he felt(and on this one i agree with him) that the sword cane could/should? have been finesse-able or a light weapon. nine times out of ten whenever i see one, it's used in a style of...fencing.

Then shouldn't he have said "I think the sword cane should be a finesse-able weapon"? I'm a big fan of people saying what they mean.

In any case, I agree. The description "slender, light blade" even supports the idea that it should be a light weapon.

My suspicion is they wanted to keep it a martial weapon. Having it equivalent to a rapier, easily concealable, and giving it the ability to be drawn as a swift action was a bit much to wrap into a martial weapon. That's just pure speculation on my part though.

Exactly, "I believe the sword cane should have been finessable or a light weapon"

The main thing is that in the Core, there are exceptions and fun lists of things for various characters.. that (naturally) didn't leave room for future weapons.

Sword canes are 'light slender blades' and they are used the SAME as Rapiers are.

Bards are allowed all light weapons, longsword, rapier, saps, whips...

Rogues are allowed all light weapons, rapier, short bow, etc...

Sword canes are 'martial' weapons...

WHO were they designed to be used by? Are there many fighters and clerics and paladins using sword canes? 'hiding' the weapon is nice... but rapier has a crit of 18-20 where sword cane has just 20...

As a martial weapon, the ONLY reason to chose it is for 'flavor'... and to do so you will be using a LESSER weapon, AND need to burn a feat on it...

Making it either a light weapon or like Sawtooth saber adding 'this weapon functions (or shares a proficency) with Rapier' would have put it in the hands of the people who need it AND would have made it finessable like the weapon is designed.

It's easy enough to home rule... but when introducing new weapons, I would like a quick errata to the class lists or a line in the weapon description to help mesh a bit better with the core.

I'm a fan of the duelist PrC. PF improved it a lot, but it does need a little more oomph, somehow. It adds your int bonus to AC, but that's all. Perhaps adding it to damage would do the trick?

Thing is, you cannot get past the verisimilitude that stronger = hit harder and there is no reason you cannot hit hard and hit precisely, so there's no reason they shouldn't stack other than metagame balance. This is why Int-to-damage works better: your dex-based fighter is going to need high dexterity to start with, and all fighters want decent strength and constitution. To get decent intelligence to rack up damage, you have to lose one of these - typically, you aren't going to be any better off than the high strength fighter because of the MADness.

We want to match the high strength grunt, but we don't want to outstrip him.

ehhhh... depends on the weapon.

Piercing weapons only require what? 4 pounds of pressure to peirce skin? Any strength over that is reduntant. It's all location then...

Though to be honest, I think the extra languages and skill points you get from a high intelligence makes it just (if not more) important than high dex.

Also since Dex is considered the 'aiming' stat, it should play more important role in hitting that 'sweet spot'. Intelligence tells you WHERE to hit... (i.e. the heart. The throat. We all KNOW that...) Dex let's you actually STRIKE there.

I LOVE the idea of finesse and other stuff that lets you use OTHER stats for striking purposes... Anything that means your characters DOESN'T have to be pumped full of strength ALL the TIME... Is a win for me!

(I've always been more fond of the nimble swashbucklers then the burly beat-sticks...)

I haven't done the metagame Dpr formulas, so I really don't have an opinion on that aspect.

one thing I WOULD like to see, is when making new weapons they keep Weapon finese in mind!! The fact that 'Sword cane' doesn't have a line of text saying either 'This weapon works with Finesse' or 'This weapon shares a proficiency with Rapier' is truly inexcusable.

You do understand that any weapon classfied as "Light" is Finessable by default?

phantom1592 wrote:

I haven't done the metagame Dpr formulas, so I really don't have an opinion on that aspect.

one thing I WOULD like to see, is when making new weapons they keep Weapon finese in mind!! The fact that 'Sword cane' doesn't have a line of text saying either 'This weapon works with Finesse' or 'This weapon shares a proficiency with Rapier' is truly inexcusable.

You do understand that any weapon classfied as "Light" is Finessable by default?

Correct.

Weapon finesse works with With a light weapon, elven curve blade, rapier, whip, or spiked chain.

Like Rapier, Sword Cane is a one handed martial weapon. Though it's a weaker version of it.

ehhhh... depends on the weapon.

Piercing weapons only require what? 4 pounds of pressure to peirce skin? Any strength over that is reduntant. It's all location then...

... skin of what? A frog? A dragon? Plate armoured skin? I can see strength being very important. Sure, you have to run a human through by six inches to reach a vital organ, but how deep do you need to drive it to nail a dragon?

I say, make it Int-to-damage, stack it with strength.

Like Rapier, Sword Cane is a one handed martial weapon. Though it's a weaker version of it.

Which is as it should be. It sacrifices power and mass for conceivability.

phantom1592 wrote:

ehhhh... depends on the weapon.

Piercing weapons only require what? 4 pounds of pressure to peirce skin? Any strength over that is reduntant. It's all location then...

... skin of what? A frog? A dragon? Plate armoured skin? I can see strength being very important. Sure, you have to run a human through by six inches to reach a vital organ, but how deep do you need to drive it to nail a dragon?

I say, make it Int-to-damage, stack it with strength.

Ooohh... good point.

Not sure I like taking stacking two stats for damage... but I see your arguement.

I'm a fan of the duelist PrC. PF improved it a lot, but it does need a little more oomph, somehow. It adds your int bonus to AC, but that's all. Perhaps adding it to damage would do the trick?

Actualy I have done that in 3.5. It was a Swashbuckler from 3.5 with Duelist.

The character worked well up against str based melee fighters. Though twenty levels of play they did slightly more damage (I think average it was 1 to 3 points though I crited more) but my character had a AC that made a difference. So it evened out.

Personaly I don't get the reluctance to allow a feat that allows Dex to damage...or maybe int for finnessable weapons. It make the characters viable...

That's a poor analogy. You can be ridiculously strong and have a glass jaw, too.

It's not an analogy

Intelligence is the hallmark of a good fencer. It's called physical chess because of the thought that goes into the combat, and without a quick and cunning mind a person won't ever be a decent fencer. Speed only gets you so far, and that's why most of the great historic fencers came into their own in their late 20's / early 30's... they were older, more seasoned, [b]and had learned that a thinking man wins the fight.[\b]

Sure there's a base line of physical aptitude, but there are even modern fencers (although in becoming a game it has lost most of what made it a combat art) that are in poor physical shape who are competing at a very high level within the sport.

I don't think there is any real support for this point of view. Fencing has always been a sport for the wealthy. The concept that it's a "thinking man's" sport is a myth based on the fact that the people who dominated the sport were wealthy men who could afford to dabble in a sport that had so little practical use. When it comes to actual really hurting people you need trained reflexes and stamina.

Take a look at the current US fencing team, none of them are over 30, most look under 25. The only older guy in the picture is the trainer. They all look pretty fit to me.

Ooohh... good point.

Not sure I like taking stacking two stats for damage... but I see your arguement.

I don't think it breaks the game. Take a 25 point-buy for a strength-based fighter:

Str 16+2 = 18
Dex 14
Con 16

You can hit with a two-handed sword for 2d6+6 base damage. I you are willing to lose out on Dex completely, you could go:
Str 18+2 = 20, Dex 11, Con 15
and hit for 2d6+7

Now take a 25 point-buy for a dex-based fighter:

Str 14
Dex 16+2 = 18
Con 14
Int 14

Best you can do is hit with an eleven curve-blade for 1d10+5, and you have lost out on hit points. You could exploit this with an elf:
Str 14, Dex 16+2=18, Con 14-2=12, Int 14+2=16
and you still hit for only 1d10+6.

If you lose out on the Dexterity to boost the intelligence, you lose out on to-hit chances. Remember, you are using Weapon Finesse, so your Dexterity has to be used as your to-hit modifier - hence putting all your points into Strength and Intelligence isn't an option if you want to hit anything at all.