One of the vestigial limbs left in Pathfinder from 3.5 was forcing dex-based combatants, even ranged combatants, to rely on strength for extra damage. I suppose this was intended as a balancing measure, since strength-based combatants required DEX for their AC, but it's not a popular decision among players (at least in my experience as a GM) and D&D5e, for example, did away with it (and eliminated DEX from the AC of fighter-types by altering how armor affects AC, particularly heavy armor)
Why then did Starfinder choose to keep this particular design decision? Sci-fi is home to many weapon types that make more sense adding Dex to damage rather than Str (laser swords, monofilament whips, etc.) I'm curious.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So...
Adding dex to damage doesn't make sense with laser swords in the first place, the blade will do the same damage, you can't even swing it harder to do more damage (which is where the idea of strength to damage comes from). You can strike more precisely, which is encapsulated in using dex to attack or in some other sort of precision damage bonus (like Sneak attack except sneak attack is gone in Pathfinder).
As to your question, it's not a rules question but a design question.
Also, near as I can tell there isn't even a option to use Dex to attack with melee weapons (no Weapon Finesse), so why would you allow dex to damage?
It took them a while to add an option like that into Pathfinder. Maybe they will again in Starfinder one day.
Operative weapons can add dex to attack with melee weapons, IIRC. I'm still going through the book.
Striking more precisely with a precision-based weapon should add to damage. Yes, this makes strength less valuable, but that is somewhat appropriate in a sci-fi setting, and there are other ways to offset this (5e, for example, gates heavy armor behind STR requirements, and generally makes it hard to pump AC over 20 regardless of your Dex, so Dex fighters don't have an unfair advantage).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, near as I can tell there isn't even a option to use Dex to attack with melee weapons (no Weapon Finesse), so why would you allow dex to damage?
Operative melee weapons allow dex to attack without a feat, but there is no dex to damage option. There is even a FAQ that confirms it.
*crosses the "Why no Dex to damage?" box off the New Game Launch Bingo Board*
Can I get one of those?
I'm getting the feeling this won't get an answer from the dev team :)
Honestly I can think of a couple reasons:
a) the devs don't like it.
b) Dex is already the primary stat for starfinder. Dex to damage on top would be really absurd.
Resolve points & key ability scores already feel like a way to force people not to dump stats, and not much is propping up Con (which primarily seems to be something to get from race and/or stat increases).
And the stat increases in general allow for min/maxing in a way that PF doesn't. You can prop up a lot of holes at level 5 and just start with 18 dex and 12/12 or 14 in whatever you want. Then go to 14/14/12 or 16/12/12 at 5.
|
They have gotten rid of virtually every X to Y power in the game. No Wisdom to AC, No Int to social skills, No Dex to Damage.
That said, with the new stat increase system, you are looking at 18 in every stat by level 20, before mods. Level to damage is quickly going to swamp minor differences in Attributes. And Deadly Accuracy works for everyone on everything.
You no longer *need* dex to damage.
part of the reason, I think, is that exeryone gets flat damage from specialisation, and the class that focus on more dex-focused combat gets more attacks to leverage their flat damage.
|
Operative weapons can add dex to attack with melee weapons, IIRC. I'm still going through the book.
Striking more precisely with a precision-based weapon should add to damage. Yes, this makes strength less valuable, but that is somewhat appropriate in a sci-fi setting, and there are other ways to offset this (5e, for example, gates heavy armor behind STR requirements, and generally makes it hard to pump AC over 20 regardless of your Dex, so Dex fighters don't have an unfair advantage).
Operative weapons don't, but probably did at one point in design. There is a bit of related text that survived, but th FAQ says it shouldn't be there
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of the vestigial limbs left in Pathfinder from 3.5 was forcing dex-based combatants, even ranged combatants, to rely on strength for extra damage. I suppose this was intended as a balancing measure, since strength-based combatants required DEX for their AC, but it's not a popular decision among players (at least in my experience as a GM) and D&D5e, for example, did away with it (and eliminated DEX from the AC of fighter-types by altering how armor affects AC, particularly heavy armor)
Why then did Starfinder choose to keep this particular design decision? Sci-fi is home to many weapon types that make more sense adding Dex to damage rather than Str (laser swords, monofilament whips, etc.) I'm curious.
I watched my game go down in flames every-time I allowed dex to damage. It allows a character to stack one stat and just be a terror while the rest of the group can't come close to the dps output of a dex to dam character.. PF devs admitted they did not crunch the numbers for PF beforehand. But they did crunch the numbers for SF and made the right choice in my opinion.
Damage in general is less reliant on stats in Starfinder than it was in Pathfinder because specialization and weapon damage scale everything up. So you probably don't need dex to damage to make high-dex characters more dangerous.
Also, max dex bonuses on armor are a lot more forgiving than they were in PF, so I think high dex is more valuable in this system, even without adding it to damage.
Thanks for the clarification; I didn't know about the changes to Weapon Specialization when I posted the question. Looking forward to seeing how all of this works out in actual play.
Yes, I actually *really* like the new rules Paizo implemented into Starfinder in regards to flat damage increases based upon level. It makes life much easier in figuring out who is better at what. I like that they removed the Weapon Finesse tax feat from the game...