|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So yeah, I want DEX-to-damage to be gone to have more build choices. A Rogue will always boost DEX for accuracy, and they'll have the option to boost STR for damage, but given they get a broad choice of attribute boosts, boosting INT/WIS/CHA/CON should also have their advantages.
I don't think removing Dex-to-damage increases build options. I think having it not be mandatory does. I'm all for other, equally good, options rather than that one, but Dex-to-damage can be a lot of fun.
Otherwise, I'd like STR to be a more fun option for classes as a . I don't need STR to be good if you want to swing a hammer. That's always a thing. But what about people who aren't primarily a bruiser? Can't they get some value out of STR?
Here I'm in complete agreement. Strength being better and more relevant is something I absolutely want. I'll repeat my complete agreement that the Strength reducing ACP thing is a great idea, and suggest that additional options in that vein are a better solution in regards to Str/Dex parity than removing things from Dex.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
AC actually turns into ACP and speed reduction after wealth allows for heavy armorSpd might have more impact in PF2 but in PF1 it did not matter that many times in melee combat
Finesse melee weapons have lower damage as a design feature and this has a bigger impact in PF2
Not all DEX-based melee combatants should be Rogues with unearthly Stealth
As I mentioned earlier, I have no problem with DEX to damage being gated behind a feat but I do not want it gated behind a specific class or a specific weapon à la Dervish Dance : it kills both diversity in builds AND verisimilitude
And if it was not clear before I apologize, but I am talking about DEX-based melee characters and NOT ranged attackers
IIRC, DEX to damage is a melee thing, not a ranged combat one
I think speed and mobility are something the developers are trying to promote with a lot of the action economy and removal of general Attacks of Opportunity. I think they are counting on us to make sure that feels right in the play test.
Certainly getting rid of combats where two enemies stand next to each other and attack as many times as possible is a good design goal.
Movement speed is tactical: can my character reach that archer or wizard in the back, or can my character move into flanking position, or can my character charge the approaching enemy? It does not deal any damage, but it opens up possibilities for more damage to the enemy. It won't be as powerful as raw damage.
Good tactics are one of the most amusing parts of my games, so I will be glad to see more.
I am curious about why you feel like Dex to Damage increases diversity of builds. If it was true that attribute was the only way or even the obvious best way to increase damage, then I would agree that having only one attribute attached to damage would be a problem. But Pathfinder has a long tradition of having other ways to make up damage, and personally I think having some of those take center stage for Dex builds is a better design than just letting Dex alone cover everything.
My second Pathfinder character was a gnome ranger monk (What to do with a Gnome Ranger Monk? March 2011). He was a versatile character with great utility. I liked his ability to switch between a bow and an unarmed strike, but his damage per hit was awful for a frontline combatant. His ways to deal make up damage were the Ranger Guide archetype's Ranger's Focus (Favored Enemy on a chosen target, but only twice a day) and the Monk Four Winds archetype's Elemental Fist (1d6 elemental damage once a day, activated before the attack roll). Those ran out pretty quickly.
Actually, my gnome's damage had been adequate as a skirmisher, but when the party fighter died and was replaced with a spellcaster, he took her place on the front line. Different roles have different standards, and the front line calls for high damage.
Let's look at the ways classes deal more damage.
Alchemist - Avoids melee attacks unless Strength mutagen build. Bombs target touch AC, get Int-to-damage, and can splash adjacent enemies.
Barbarian - Rage gives +2 or more to Strength. Builds for Strength.
Bard - Inspire Courage gives +1 to damage. That's a weak boost, but other party members like the support.
Cleric - Cast Divine Favor or another self buff.
Druid - Shapeshift into a bear and use multiple natural attacks.
Fighter - Weapon Training. Weapon Specialization. Builds for Strength.
Magus - Spellstrike. Builds for Strength or builds for Dexterity via Dervish Dance.
Monk - Multiple attacks via Flurry of Misses, I mean Flurry of Blows. Builds for Strength.
Paladin - Smite Evil. Builds for Strength.
Ranger - Favored Enemy if chosen with uncanny foresight. Often relies on archery.
Rogue - Sneak attack. Likes Two-Weapon Fighting for more sneak attacks. Builds for Dexterity.
Sorcerer - does not do weapon damage.
Wizard - does not do weapon damage.
We have barbarian, fighter, monk, and paladin relying on Strength for most of their hits and damage, rogue relying on Dexterity for hits with sneak attack for damage, and magus with two builds split between the two styles. Bards, clerics, druids, and sometimes alchemists buff with magic, bomb alchemists prefer Int-to-damage, and rangers prefer archery. Sorcerer and wizard aren't even part of this discussion.
I am pro options for damage, I am not pro tying them to attribute switching.I am curious on how you think having more options besides str to damage doesn't increase the diversity of builds.
The alchemist's Int-to-damage with bombs and the Gunslinger's Dex-to-damage with firearms are all tied to a specific weapon required by a class feature. That gives a narrative that that character is gifted with the weapon, rather than that the attribute is good for damage. The PF2 rogue's Finesse Striker gives Dex-to-damage to all agile or finesse one-handed melee weapons. That shifts the narrative away from the character's expertise with the weapon and more toward how Dexterity can deal massive damage. Finesse Striker is not precision damage, it is not a critical hit, it is not clever aim--what is it?
Finesse Striker feels like a consolation prize for rogues who did not manage to find a flatfooted opponent to sneak attack. It does not enhance the flavor of Dexterity. However, at Dex 18 and 1st or 2nd level, the consolation prize is bigger than the sneak attack prize. At all levels, it is more reliable. I fear it will become the rogue's primary ability and sneak attack will be a legacy secondary ability, used when convenient.
The rogue does deserve a consolation prize for the lack of flatfooted opponents, but it should be more flavorful. For example:
[[F]] Dagger Feint
Trigger You miss without critical failure a melee attack with an agile or finesse one-handed weapon.
You may make a feint attempt against the target of the failed attack as a free action. You may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Charisma modifier for the Deception check.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So yeah, I want DEX-to-damage to be gone to have more build choices. A Rogue will always boost DEX for accuracy, and they'll have the option to boost STR for damage, but given they get a broad choice of attribute boosts, boosting INT/WIS/CHA/CON should also have their advantages.I don't think removing Dex-to-damage increases build options. I think having it not be mandatory does. I'm all for other, equally good, options rather than that one, but Dex-to-damage can be a lot of fun.
Dex to damage needs to be a true cost if it doesn't want to affect build variety, and a major one, if any class has access to dex to damage,it can't be at the cost of just a class/race/general feat, it needs to come at the cost of something very powerful/class defining that can't be regained. If dex to damage is available for as something as cheap as "part of the class", it pigeonholes the class, and as a feat, it becomes a feat tax for rogue and any class with access and dex as the key ability score .
The problem is then that the people who choose dex to damage might cry that they're being "punished" for wanting dex to damage, and this "solution" only works for rogue as is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is a symptom of of people perceiving attribute increases as the best or only way to increase damage. I agree that finding ways to game agile and finesse weapons is likely to be a problem in PF2 if they start making things like elven curveblades that qualify for this class feature (finesse strike is already a default class feature for the rogue at this point). The multi-classing shenanigans don't go away by having finesse strike be the path of getting Dex to damage, and there is already one known class that gets half wrecked with easy access to dex to damage.Oh really, what class?
The monk has a str based build and a DEX based build with wisdom being an optional stat for either of them. If a monk can get DEX to damage the STR monk is pretty much a trap option out of the gate.
The developers have looked pretty closely at the rogue. It was not a good class in PF1. The primary fix was to build weapon finesse and Dex to Damage into the class, because any other options for it became feat taxes that prevented rogues from having better options. If every single rogue is going to have a Dex of 18 and no 1st level rogues are going to have a STR of 18, then the only rogue builds in the game for whom finesse striker is not a default "best/only" option are rogues built purely for ranged attacks (not likely to be an optimal build with the difficulty of getting sneak attacks with ranged attacks after the first round of combat), and rogues who decide to go with a 16 in STR, which will still look like a trap option because the 16 STR rogue built to be a bruiser is behind the STR 10 rogue who opts for the "optional" finesse striker feat. That is why they built it into the rogue class and are planning on keeping it a class specific ability.
Given the reality that Dex to damage is going to be class specific, which option feels like the better fit? The original finesse striker class ability (Dex to damage with finesse and agile one-handed weapons)? or having that ability be a flat damage bonus?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dex to damage needs to be a true cost if it doesn't want to affect build variety, and a major one, if any class has access to dex to damage,it can't be at the cost of just a class/race/general feat, it needs to come at the cost of something very powerful/class defining that can't be regained.
I'm not sure I entirely agree. Strength already has several very real advantages over Dexterity, making it a valid playstyle in its own right, especially if getting Dex-to-damage has a meaningful cost of some sort, and by meaningful I mean 'requires investment' not 'very powerful and class defining'.
Dex-to-damage is just not actually that mechanically powercul in the grand scheme of things.
If dex to damage is available for as something as cheap as "part of the class", it pigeonholes the class, and as a feat, it becomes a feat tax for rogue and any class with access and dex as the key ability score .
I agree that it can pigeonhole a class if it's a core part of it you cannot trade out, but don't think merely having it in the Class at all has that result.
The problem is then that the people who choose dex to damage might cry that they're being "punished" for wanting dex to damage, and this "solution" only works for rogue as is.
I think how well a lot of solutions work depends heavily on how multiclassing works, which is a big unknown and one reason I think this whole discussion is fairly premature.
great analysis
The Alchemist getting a feat to add INT to damage is actually a great and interesting case study. They don't get it at first level, and it is not switching the damage attribute, it is adding an attribute damage to a damage type where normally there is none. It will be a good idea to look at how well that works out.
Another possible solution I could see is perhaps letting the rogue have a 3-7th level feat that lets them add their dex to damage (on top of strength) with sneak attacks or critical hits. This would be the direct damage feat, that would hopefully coincide with other options that would start inflicting serious status effects with the same kind of attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel giving dex to damage to anything other than just the rogue makes characters too similar. What's the difference between a STR build and a DEX build if you just try to make them do balanced damage? heavier armor vs lighter armor? The dex based fighter that runs around you and tires you out while making you miss vs the str based fighter who could knock you down with only a few blows is an appealing dichotomy to me. If they could make both of these types completely balanced in combat that would be absolutely ideal.
Dex to damage just feels like a weak way to appeal to people who like playing dex fighters but want to do crazy damage at the same time.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel giving dex to damage to anything other than just the rogue makes characters too similar. What's the difference between a STR build and a DEX build if you just try to make them do balanced damage? heavier armor vs lighter armor? The dex based fighter that runs around you and tires you out while making you miss vs the str based fighter who could knock you down with only a few blows is an appealing dichotomy to me. If they could make both of these types completely balanced in combat that would be absolutely ideal.
Dex to damage just feels like a weak way to appeal to people who like playing dex fighters but want to do crazy damage at the same time.
The issue with this analysis is that Dex-to-damage as it stands does legitimately terrible damage as compared to Strength. Even assuming the Str build goes one-handed, they wind up with something like 120% of the Dex build's by the end point and a two-handed Str build does more like 160%.
The Dex build can also TWF or use a shield but not both, while the Str-build can combine the two.
Dropping Dex characters' damage further risks making it an entirely unworkable strategy for anyone but Rogues (who would rely on Sneak Attack) and a suboptimal strategy even for a Rogue (who will feel almost obligated to go Str for damage in many cases).
But again, all this really depends on exactly how a bunch of specific stuff works that we don't know yet, and won't until we have the book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The issue with this analysis is that Dex-to-damage as it stands does legitimately terrible damage as compared to Strength. Even assuming the Str build goes one-handed, they wind up with something like 120% of the Dex build's by the end point and a two-handed Str build does more like 160%.
The Dex build can also TWF or use a shield but not both, while the Str-build can combine the two.
Dropping Dex characters' damage further risks making it an entirely unworkable strategy for anyone but Rogues (who would rely on Sneak Attack) and a suboptimal strategy even for a Rogue (who will feel almost obligated to go Str for damage in many cases).
But again, all this really depends on exactly how a bunch of specific stuff works that we don't know yet, and won't until we have the book.
Two things worth noting in this new edition:
accuracy and amour class is going to be much more important and add much more damage than in first edition because of the critical success system. I imagine a dex based character should have the advantage here.
With AoO not being a built in option for every creature along with the new action economy allowing you to move more than 5feet and still do respectable damage. Overall mobility will be a much more lucrative option. Again favouring lightly armoured dex based characters.
There's a lot to look forwards to as a dex based melee character in 2e. Just because dex to damage won't be exploitable doesn't mean that dex based melee characters will go in the trash can.
|
|
Two things worth noting in this new edition:
accuracy and amour class is going to be much more important and add much more damage than in first edition because of the critical success system. I imagine a dex based character should have the advantage here.
This appears to be factually incorrect. Dexterity does as well on accuracy as Strength, but no better.
With AoO not being a built in option for every creature along with the new action economy allowing you to move more than 5feet and still do respectable damage. Overall mobility will be a much more lucrative option. Again favouring lightly armoured dex based characters.
This is true to some degree. I'm not sure an extra 5 feet of movement make up for that big a damage swing on their own.
There's a lot to look forwards to as a dex based melee character in 2e. Just because dex to damage won't be exploitable doesn't mean that dex based melee characters will go in the trash can.
Oh, you misunderstand. As things stand at the moment, I think Dex characters are fine, lower damage and all. They do, as you say, have greater mobility, are sneakier, and have several other potential advantages.
It's if you get rid of Dex-to-damage (without replacing it with some other Dex-exclusive damage enhancer) that things get really bad for Dex-based characters.
|
|
The previewed pregens' stat distribution is enlightening I think.
2 of them have DEX18 and low STR : the ranged attacker (Alchemist) and the DEX-based attacker (Rogue)
2 of them have STR18 and low to average DEX : the frontliners (Paladin and Fighter)
1 quasi-frontliner has higher STR than DEX too (the Cleric)
So, any melee combattant will get STR as high as possible unless they have DEX to damage ( in which case DEX is maximized)
Which means the DEX-based non-Rogue frontliner is royally out of luck to put it most politely
How is that for pigeonholing ?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The previewed pregens' stat distribution is enlightening I think.
2 of them have DEX18 and low STR : the ranged attacker (Alchemist) and the DEX-based attacker (Rogue)
2 of them have STR18 and low to average DEX : the frontliners (Paladin and Fighter)
1 quasi-frontliner has higher STR than DEX too (the Cleric)
So, any melee combattant will get STR as high as possible unless they have DEX to damage ( in which case DEX is maximized)
Which means the DEX-based non-Rogue frontliner is royally out of luck to put it most politely
How is that for pigeonholing ?
Pregen's are the most generic versions of their characters. It makes sense that they follow a very basic build structure. If every version of these classes needs the same attribute build, then the game has a serious problem.
Maybe a conditional Dex to damage so that it doesn't replace Str all together, something like:
Deadly Finesse: When you score a critical hit with a finesse weapon you add twice your dexterity modifier to damage.
That might be too swingy I am just looking for a way to address all concerns.
I feel giving dex to damage to anything other than just the rogue makes characters too similar. What's the difference between a STR build and a DEX build if you just try to make them do balanced damage? heavier armor vs lighter armor? The dex based fighter that runs around you and tires you out while making you miss vs the str based fighter who could knock you down with only a few blows is an appealing dichotomy to me. If they could make both of these types completely balanced in combat that would be absolutely ideal.
Dex to damage just feels like a weak way to appeal to people who like playing dex fighters but want to do crazy damage at the same time.
Does the dex fighter have to be the fighter class? Could the character be a monk or ranger instead? How about a swashbuckler when that class is introduced to PF2?
I am fairly old-fashioned about attributes, because I started playing Dungeons & Dragons back in the days of rolling the six attributes in order and then selecting the character class. Being able to change the order of the rolled attributes became a common house rule, because people wanted to pick a class they wanted to play rather than a class that fit the rolls. But still, I like to be able to look at a set of stats, such as a combination of good Strength and good Wisdom, and pick a class that fits them, Cleric.
I can roughly match the 12 PF2 core classes to single stats and pairs of physical and mental stats, ignoring Constitution.
STR barbarian, fighter
DEX rogue
INT wizard
WIS cleric, druid
CHA sorcerer
STR+DEX ranger
STR+INT -
STR+WIS str monk
STR+CHA paladin
DEX+INT alchemist
DEX+WIS dex monk
DEX+CHA bard
The Raven Black already checked how the stats on the pregen characters match up
The previewed pregens' stat distribution is enlightening I think.
2 of them have DEX18 and low STR : the ranged attacker (Alchemist) and the DEX-based attacker (Rogue)
2 of them have STR18 and low to average DEX : the frontliners (Paladin and Fighter)
1 quasi-frontliner has higher STR than DEX too (the Cleric)
So, any melee combattant will get STR as high as possible unless they have DEX to damage ( in which case DEX is maximized)
Which means the DEX-based non-Rogue frontliner is royally out of luck to put it most politely
How is that for pigeonholing ?
Alchemist Fumbus's best two are INT 18 and DEX 16.
Cleric Kyra's best three are WIS 18, STR 14, CHA 14.Fighter Valeros's best three are STR 18, DEX 14, CON 14.
Paladin Seelah's best two are STR 18 and CHA 14.
Rogue Merisiel's best two are DEX 18 and CON 14.
Wizard Ezren's best three are INT 18, DEX 14, CON 14.
Barbarian, fighter, strength monk, paladin, and ranger have Strength as a primary attribute, so they can rely on Strength for damage. The alchemist relies on alchemy. The bard and cleric rely on buffs. The druid has not been previewed yet, but druids have animal companions and shapeshifting. Sorcerers and wizards are famous for staying out of melee, but they could choose good buff spells or touch spells.
That leaves the rogue and the dexterity monk as the classes rely on dexterity without strength nor spells. Thus, the only PF2 core class intended to be a dex-based non-rogue frontliner is the dexterity monk.
The monk class preview did not say what the dexterity monk could do for damage. Flurry of Blows gives an extra attack, and some fighting styles, such as Dragon Tail, give bigger damage dice. Maybe that will be enough.
The conditional dex to damage is slightly too high a swing, so simply adding dexterity mod to damage as precision damage, and thus unable to multiply on a crit, in addition to strength would make more sense. By removing the critical benefit of it it allows for some moderate damage increase without crowding out strength. This however is a stopgap to the issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe a damage die boost. You increase the damage of finesse weapons to a d8.
Maybe a conditional Dex to damage so that it doesn't replace Str all together, something like:
Deadly Finesse: When you score a critical hit with a finesse weapon you add twice your dexterity modifier to damage.
That might be too swingy I am just looking for a way to address all concerns.
I was a big fan of "when you use dex-to-hit and str-for-damage, you get [some additional benefit]" style of effects in PF1. I see no reason we can't do the same in PF2, just with a larger potential class of benefits since the game's math no longer is appropriate things like "+level" to damage.
I plan to build and compare 3 frontliners once we have the book :
STR-based Fighter to get a baseline
DEX-based Rogue
DEX-based FighterI expect the last one to fare very poorly :-(
Could be fun to build and compare a STR-based Rogue too
There is a good chance that things like "dex-based fighter" might not hit optimal viability until more archetypes and feat options open up, but I think asking ourselves what those builds need, and providing that feed back will be very useful. SO it is totally cool to engage in these projects.
Is the concept behind a dex based fighter a two-weapon fighter? a fighter that uses thrown weapons to maximize attacks per round without having to move?
It is important that our character concepts focus more on what a character does in play than just looking at mechanical options. IF Dex based fighter is just Valeros with a 16 Dex and 16 STR, there may be some value in seeing what that build looks like, but it is probably ok for that build to be less optimal than the exact same build with a 18 STR and 14 Dex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was a big fan of "when you use dex-to-hit and str-for-damage, you get [some additional benefit]" style of effects in PF1. I see no reason we can't do the same in PF2, just with a larger potential class of benefits since the game's math no longer is appropriate things like "+level" to damage.Maybe a conditional Dex to damage so that it doesn't replace Str all together, something like:
Deadly Finesse: When you score a critical hit with a finesse weapon you add twice your dexterity modifier to damage.
That might be too swingy I am just looking for a way to address all concerns.
Spheres of Might had add half your BAB to damage when using Dex to hit and Str to damage as an effect. Maybe just making the rogue base ability +1 damage per sneak attack dies would be enough for them. It would prevent dipping at least.
They weren't planning on giving Dex to damage to anyone else so I would assume that Dex fighters/monks/rangers have other options and wouldn't need the damage boost they think the rogue needs.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The DEX to damage for the Rogue comes IMO from the Rogue needing high DEX for Rogue things and being then unable to sustain the high STR needed to be a frontliner
I get that rogues need high Dex and are unlikely to start with a Str higher than 12 since it will probably be fourth most important stat territory. I think they probably need a damage boost to stay viable I just don't think that Dex to Damage is a good way to go about that damage boost.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No no I agree if it were up to me I would not have dex to damage at all. I'm just trying to work out what seems like a reasonable compromise. Dex to hit and no dex to damage would be my preference for rogues. I really don't think it would put them that far behind in damage. It might also encourage them to bu up a 12 or 14 str for the little extra damage.
I wanted to thank you for your willingness to find some compromise. I really appreciate it :-)
I was a big fan of "when you use dex-to-hit and str-for-damage, you get [some additional benefit]" style of effects in PF1. I see no reason we can't do the same in PF2, just with a larger potential class of benefits since the game's math no longer is appropriate things like "+level" to damage.Maybe a conditional Dex to damage so that it doesn't replace Str all together, something like:
Deadly Finesse: When you score a critical hit with a finesse weapon you add twice your dexterity modifier to damage.
That might be too swingy I am just looking for a way to address all concerns.
Spheres of Might had add half your BAB to damage when using Dex to hit and Str to damage as an effect. Maybe just making the rogue base ability +1 damage per sneak attack dies would be enough for them. It would prevent dipping at least.
They weren't planning on giving Dex to damage to anyone else so I would assume that Dex fighters/monks/rangers have other options and wouldn't need the damage boost they think the rogue needs.
It's an interesting concept, but the scaling on damage for sneak attack doesn't curve on the scale particularly well. Otherwise I would support in earlier suggestion very similar to that that for every sneak attack. You could do you do an extra damage. Dex to damage would make more sense at that point as a mechanical effect, instead of dealing extra damage on hit as dexterity modifier, applying it as a bleed effect would be more mechanically interesting and still allow strength to damage to play aroll.
Mind you this is coming from a person who enjoys dexterity to damage as an Unchained Rogue. I have very little issue with dexterity to damage, but I prefer to be of more mechanical effect rather than a flat modifier to damage. Or be locked behind a measure of gating| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The DEX to damage for the Rogue comes IMO from the Rogue needing high DEX for Rogue things and being then unable to sustain the high STR needed to be a frontlinerI get that rogues need high Dex and are unlikely to start with a Str higher than 12 since it will probably be fourth most important stat territory. I think they probably need a damage boost to stay viable I just don't think that Dex to Damage is a good way to go about that damage boost.
I feel like "the rogue who is strong and a bruiser" should be every bit as viable and supported by the rules as "the rogue who is intelligent and a tactician" or "the rogue who is charming, and a manipulator".
Building "dex-to-damage" into the class puts the former in a bad position, since you have a class feature which runs counter to your (wholly reasonable) concept.
It's an interesting concept, but the scaling on damage for sneak attack doesn't curve on the scale particularly well
Could you clarify that please. Are you saying it's too weak or too good or both at different times?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My problem with DEX-to-damage is that it encourages 8 STR, and nothing else encourages raising STR. That's the crux of the matter.
UnRogue needs DEX-to-damage because of point-buy issues. If a regular Rogue could have 18 STR and 18 DEX, they wouldn't need DEX-to-damage for output, right?
PF2E Rogue does NOT need DEX-to-damage for point-buy issues. Due to four +2 ability boosts to spread around, Rogues would be easily able to afford to boost STR to get extra damage.
PF2E Rogue would lag behind in damage, ostensibly, if they didn't have DEX-to-damage. Well, then give them another boost to damage elsewhere, somehow. They can always increase their Strength to get more base damage.
Ideas:
1. First level ability grants Rogues +2 damage with Agile/Finesse weapons. Simple enough. If a Rogue goes gung-ho on STR, then they'll have to deal with their bad AC and increased crits coming to their face due to not having good armor proficiencies. If they have high DEX and good STR, they'll be good hitters, but miss out on utility. If they take high DEX and good mental stats with middling STR, they'll be more utility focused than damage focused, but they'll still be able to Sneak Attack to compensate.
2. High level ability grants Rogues DEX+STR to damage. A capstone of sorts, at 7th level or higher so it's not easy to pick, but a good boost to damage that also says "leveling up STR is not a waste."
I apologize I was referring to the damage curve. As they gain sneak attack every other level beginning with the first the bonus to damage would only be plus one, which is a boost if they choose to have positive strengths and is a bonus they're in. However it starts out low and scales into the largest static bonus that Pathfinder to is going to give at plus 10 on top of a strength modifier and incentivizes them to maximize both strength and dexterity. As a result, it would have to be a Precision or static bonus not multipliable on a critical hit to not overwhelm the damage output of other classes.
The reason I suggested bleed is just to create a dynamic in which the character benefits from their High dexterity but does not need to dump strength for upfront damage impact. Creating statistical Dynamics is more beneficial. Another option would be orind effect for striking twice that benefits from your dexterity modifier to imply cutting twice and aggravating a wound.
I apologize I was referring to the damage curve. As they gain sneak attack every other level beginning with the first the bonus to damage would only be plus one, which is a boost if they choose to have positive strengths and is a bonus they're in. However it starts out low and scales into the largest static bonus that Pathfinder to is going to give at plus 10 on top of a strength modifier and incentivizes them to maximize both strength and dexterity. As a result, it would have to be a Precision or static bonus not multipliable on a critical hit to not overwhelm the damage output of other classes.
The reason I suggested bleed is just to create a dynamic in which the character benefits from their High dexterity but does not need to dump strength for upfront damage impact. Creating statistical Dynamics is more beneficial. Another option would be orind effect for striking twice that benefits from your dexterity modifier to imply cutting twice and aggravating a wound.
Running the numbers it doesn't actually overwhelm the damage output of a one handed Str fighter though it does exceed it. Since weapons get extra die for every +1 and finesse weapons are d6 not d8 every potency rank up means that the finesse user is another point behind. Combine that with the fact that a dex focused character will always be a point behind in Str it means that with one feature invested and two ability scores maxed the 22 Dex 20 Str rogue would deal 3 more damage than a Str user who has not invested a feature in damage.
6d6+5 Str +10 Bonus (36) vs 6d8+ 6 Str (33)
Not sure if that's the right solution. I'll keep thinking about it.
EDIT: Probably actually 1 point less since at high levels a Str wielder would get a +2 Str item while a Dex wielder would need to get a +2 dex item, accuracy is more important than static damage at most levels.
Except you forgot that sneak attack is much easier to achieve in pf2 so there is the extra d6s associated with that flat bonus to consider in this pattern. Also most finesse weapons have less issue with iteratives.
Moreover both these equations ignore Feats associated with damage output. Which honestly impact the speculation as well. But you remember the comparison has to do with a range of damage with the Rogue doing 21 minimum and 51 maximum. Where is the fighter in this equation does 12 minimum 54 maximum. So the Rogues flat damage is significantly higher and thus are more likely to stay on the higher end of the Curve.
When it comes to optimization and damaged floors that's going to look significantly more appealing.
Apologies if any of this comes off weird or makes no sense as I'm talk to texting on my phone.
Except you forgot that sneak attack is much easier to achieve in pf2 so there is the extra d6s associated with that flat bonus to consider in this pattern. Also most finesse weapons have less issue with iteratives.
Moreover both these equations ignore Feats associated with damage output. Which honestly impact the speculation as well. But you remember the comparison has to do with a range of damage with the Rogue doing 21 minimum and 51 maximum. Where is the fighter in this equation does 12 minimum 54 maximum. So the Rogues flat damage is significantly higher and thus are more likely to stay on the higher end of the Curve.
When it comes to optimization and damaged floors that's going to look significantly more appealing.
Apologies if any of this comes off weird or makes no sense as I'm talk to texting on my phone.
True I didn't count sneak attack but neither does adding Dex to damage the base ability that I am looking to dine an alternative too.
Overall though you are right. Dex to damage is a buff to rogues but still doesn't allow them to surpass a fighter's damage this proposal does which ultimately means it is not the right path. I was mostly just pointing out how much of an effect base damage has on the final outcome.
1. First level ability grants Rogues +2 damage with Agile/Finesse weapons. Simple enough. If a Rogue goes gung-ho on STR, then they'll have to deal with their bad AC and increased crits coming to their face due to not having good armor proficiencies. If they have high DEX and good STR, they'll be good hitters, but miss out on utility. If they take high DEX and good mental stats with middling STR, they'll be more utility focused than damage focused, but they'll still be able to Sneak Attack to compensate.
"
I think this is probably the best option. If you want to be a melee rogue than Str should be at least your fourth most important stat so expecting a 12 that gets boosted to 14 and then 16 later on seems reasonable. Under those assumptions your damage is one point lower with this ability compared to having Dex to damage. If you invest more you can get your damage one point higher than you could with dex to damage.
Either way you can choose to have both Str and Dex focused rogues be competitive without introducing Dex to Damage which is problematic.
No I completely understand, I was only pointing out that that's why I didn't support that specific alternative to Dex to damage. Particularly Dex to damage in a vacuum isn't overpowered it's simply the fact that it makes strength almost worthless. I personally find it fine but that's from the perspective of a person who plays and a high level free vmc Mythic campaign. And tend to run highly deadly high-powered campaigns, but that also comes from the fact that I have my own game system designed and dexterity is separated from agility in the 10 stat array. I focused specifically in my system on giving every stat roughly strengths power level. That sadly is not an option for this system.
Though if you do want an alternative to Dex to damage that isn't bleeding effects, or replacement of strength, stacking armor penetration for increased chance to critically hit, or my favorite which is a stacking buff to your damage for each successive hit up to your dexterity modifier in damage. Which also incentivizes utilizing potential iterative. Though by far my favorite would simply be providing a resource such as an expenditure of resonance to temporarily gain a bonus to damage equivalent to your dexterity modifier.
Make no mistake I fully agree with you in finding an alternative that would be useful and I love your feedback I love discussing these kinds of things with people. So forgive me if I come off even remotely snarky as that's not my intention I'm simply talks to texting at work.
My problem with DEX-to-damage is that it encourages 8 STR, and nothing else encourages raising STR. That's the crux of the matter.So come up with ways to encourage raising str, don't need to take away dex to damage. Similarly I have an issue with str to damage because it encourages 10 dex full plate builds.
Since every point of AC matters more if you are talking about optimized builds then I expect it will be Dex 12 or 14. Whatever hits the Max Dex of Mithral Full Plate.
PF2E Rogue does NOT need DEX-to-damage for point-buy issues. Due to four +2 ability boosts to spread around, Rogues would be easily able to afford to boost STR to get extra damage.I mean sure they could invest in both dex and str every level boost just to have damage on par with the fighters and less utility than them, or they could just ignore the class feature, go full str and more skills or con for more hp, or cha for more Resonance and bluffing.
Rogues shouldn't have standard damage on par with the fighter without heavy investment. That's the trade off for sneak attack dealing a bunch of extra damage.
Ahh bad quoting system. RE: +2 flat bonus
As I've said time and time again, flat boosts are bad. They either are not significant enough, so that you don't want use them, or they significant enough to shoehorn builds and cut down diversity in builds.
Using this idea as an example, what happens to this ability when you hit 5, 10, 15, 20? Does it stay the same?, if so you're forcing rogues to either have subpar damage and the same utility as other martials or less utility and the sane damage. If it increases, it overly rewards rogues who go high str, giving them more damage than other martials while having less utility or having the same damage amd more utility.
If this was dex to damage, then those levels would allow rogues to keep their damage and utility on par with other martials.
Again rogues should deal less damage than other martials but overall a static +2 is enough at all levels. It means that in order to match dex to damage you need to keep your Str modifier two points lower than your dex modifier which isn't particularly difficult to do especially since a rogue will probably start with 18 dex so Str improves twice as fast as Dex every time you boost it.
Honestly, as an aside, it's difficult to Dane whether Dex to damage would even be necessary. I make this comment simply because of the ease with which sneak attack can be employed. The caveat stands in what restrictions apply to sneak attack and the rate at which damage grows. If only a select few creatures are immune, and it grows at the Pathfinder one pacing the necessity of Dexter damage is minimal. As each day of sneak attack is worth roughly three points of damage so it first level they're automatically gaming 3 points of damage on any sneak hit.
This skills viciously if it's too easy to get and becomes a nuisance and unreliable if it's not. Considering sneak attack multipliers on a critical hit now from what I've garnered, correct me if I'm wrong on this as it is been some time since I read that. It is actually a huge boost to damage.
Yes sneak attack multiplies on a critical hit so it's a huge damage boost. I guess we don't actually know if it scales at the same rate though it may well be slower.
My problem with DEX-to-damage is that it encourages 8 STR, and nothing else encourages raising STR. That's the crux of the matter.So come up with ways to encourage raising str, don't need to take away dex to damage. Similarly I have an issue with str to damage because it encourages 10 dex full plate builds.Since every point of AC matters more if you are talking about optimized builds then I expect it will be Dex 12 or 14. Whatever hits the Max Dex of Mithral Full Plate.
As seen with the pregen Valeros. It would be pretty unfortunate if the fighter pregen has a higher Dex than they would reasonably be able to benefit from. Even Seelah has a Dex of 12 implying that 1 point of Dex will be applicable even with the heaviest armor possible. Perhaps there are builds that are possible that have close to best AC with a Dex of 10, but there is a good chance that they will be at least one AC point behind if not 2, and not likely achievable at level 1. That seems fair in comparison to 2 points of damage.
It almost invariably has to Simply due to the implications of multi-class ruling. It's been directly stated that maximize multiclassing afterwards will grant you up to eight levels of spells if you were to multi-class into a Caster from a non caster. Regardless of the mechanics that create that scenario that means the reverse is also true and a huge selection of sneak attack could be gone it in reverse.
Otherwise the implication is reaching 8 d 6 sneak attack to acquit the balance. When averaged out, assuming the players using daggers 4D for damage to minimize damage. That's 6d4 + 10d6 base vs 12d6 + 6str for a two-handed fighter barring other Feats that give damage. So from 16 up to 84 vs 18 up to 78. Which means they do as much damage with a dagger as a fighter does with a two-handed sword. And that's why understanding other mitigating factors is essential.
I didn't catch that so, that's definitely factors in in that case. Though I imagine it probably scales more like a Slayer as that seems to be where they've drawn quite a bit of inspiration. So more like 76 and multi classes would get 5 D6. Though regardless the question is a question of other abilities and how much they intend for classes to work in a vacuum AKA without class Feats spent. This to me is a little more important than just throughput and strength dumping versus Dex to damage concerns. But that's neither here nor there I'm just rambling.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The conditional dex to damage is slightly too high a swing, so simply adding dexterity mod to damage as precision damage, and thus unable to multiply on a crit, in addition to strength would make more sense. By removing the critical benefit of it it allows for some moderate damage increase without crowding out strength. This however is a stopgap to the issue.
The issue with this is that all damage (including Sneak Attack) doubles on a crit.
I apologize I was referring to the damage curve. As they gain sneak attack every other level beginning with the first the bonus to damage would only be plus one,
Actually, evidence suggests Sneak Attack comes less frequently than this. A 3rd level Rogue in a demo game had only 1d6 Sneak Attack.
Errors like both these are why I think we should wait until the playtest is out to discuss this.
I feel like "the rogue who is strong and a bruiser" should be every bit as viable and supported by the rules as "the rogue who is intelligent and a tactician" or "the rogue who is charming, and a manipulator".
Building "dex-to-damage" into the class puts the former in a bad position, since you have a class feature which runs counter to your (wholly reasonable) concept.
I agree. I'd rather it was a choice of several valid options rather than automatic.
My problem with DEX-to-damage is that it encourages 8 STR, and nothing else encourages raising STR. That's the crux of the matter.
I'm not actually sure this is a problem as long as Dex-to-damage costs something of value to compensate.
UnRogue needs DEX-to-damage because of point-buy issues. If a regular Rogue could have 18 STR and 18 DEX, they wouldn't need DEX-to-damage for output, right?
True.
PF2E Rogue does NOT need DEX-to-damage for point-buy issues. Due to four +2 ability boosts to spread around, Rogues would be easily able to afford to boost STR to get extra damage.
This is not correct. If Rogues have to get Str for damage then they are locked in to Str, Dex, Con, and Wis due to the need for Saves (Fort and Will Saves remaining very bad things to not be good at). That means that, mechanically, they are less likely than a Fighter or Barbarian (who need to raise Str, Con, and Wis, but can skimp on the Dex much more easily) to have good Int or Cha, which is deeply counter-thematic in many ways.
PF2E Rogue would lag behind in damage, ostensibly, if they didn't have DEX-to-damage. Well, then give them another boost to damage elsewhere, somehow. They can always increase their Strength to get more base damage.
Having to increase an additional stat for combat is a huge disadvantage that makes the Class a lot less fun.
Ideas:
1. First level ability grants Rogues +2 damage with Agile/Finesse weapons. Simple enough. If a Rogue goes gung-ho on STR, then they'll have to deal with their bad AC and increased crits coming to their face due to not having good armor proficiencies. If they have high DEX and good STR, they'll be good hitters, but miss out on utility. If they take high DEX and good mental stats with middling STR, they'll be more utility focused than damage focused, but they'll still be able to Sneak Attack to compensate.
This still incentivizes all Rogues to be as thuggish (ie: low Int and Cha) as possible, which is a bad incentive. There's certainly a place for Rogues like that, but it being the singularly optimal choice is distinctly not fun for all the people who want to play clever or charming Rogues.
As I've noted before, I'd much rather you had a choice between Dex-to-damage and some Str-based advantage, like Medium Armor Proficiency plus Str-to-Intimidate.
2. High level ability grants Rogues DEX+STR to damage. A capstone of sorts, at 7th level or higher so it's not easy to pick, but a good boost to damage that also says "leveling up STR is not a waste."
This is possible, I suppose. I'd rather there be serious choices, though.
This topic reminds me of the kobold paladin character I made in 5e that had a strength of 4. Due to dex to damage, he was able to keep in in damage despite this, and that was what made me realize how you need to be careful with dex to damage and to give strength a means to keep up with it.
That being said, I don't think it needs to be done away with completely, or at least not remove dex out of the melee attacking equation, as it could potentially pigeonhole martials into being burly brutes and potentially kill off some nimble and quick non-rogue martials. I would like to see how, instead of directly giving dex to damage, boost the weapon dice of smaller finesse weapons like daggers would work depending on dex, or giving a 1.5x dex to hit for finesse weapons kinda like how 2-handers get a 1.5x str to damage. I think acp and the armor movespeed penalty should be reduced/removed by higher strength stats
I also wonder how casters can be a bit less one-statty in 2e. Sure rays and touch attacks use Dex and Strength respectively, but not only are they uncommon in pathfinder in favor of save based nukes, but since they are considered touch, they have a much easier chance at hitting anyways. From my experience, I think clerics and shape shifting druids are the only primary casters that rely on more than just their spell-casting stat, but how would wizards and sorcerers become less SAD?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And that 12 - 14 dex is easily allowed to come by later with ability boosts. In addition this investment is a lot less of a cost for the fighter, than it would be for the rogue doing vice versa.
...
And that's still a way more significant investment than a strength build would need to put in for their defenses. If melee weapons had a maximum str bonus to their to hit or damage, then it'd be the equivalent investment required. Instead a flat +2 means less damage or less utility than a fighter.
I don't see your argument. Why is investing in Str more of a burden for a Dex Rogue than investing in Dex is for a Fighter?
This still incentivizes all Rogues to be as thuggish (ie: low Int and Cha) as possible, which is a bad incentive. There's certainly a place for Rogues like that, but it being the singularly optimal choice is distinctly not fun for all the people who want to play clever or charming Rogues.
That's a very power gamer focused analysis. Giving a static +2 damage gives reason for Rogues to invest in Str sure but there is no reason that it would make all rogues thuggish. It makes it a real choice.
At least it would have a much weaker effect than having dex to damage which encourages all rogues to be weaklings.