| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work? D&D 5e figured this out like 5 years ago, guys.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work?
In real life, you need some amount of muscle to thrust a rapier into a body.
And yeah, a knife can cut through skin easily if it's sharp enough, but penetrating armor requires momentum, not just motor-coordination.
D&D 5e figured this out like 5 years ago, guys.
1. This system's ability score distribution makes Finesse Striker wholly unnecessary. 5E is very punishing if you don't laser focus on your key attributes, but this game is better for realistic STR 12/14 DEX 18 builds.
2. I'm chill with it being an option, given DEX fanboiz will always be there. Just make sure it doesn't make STR obsolete in every other department save for damage.
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work? D&D 5e figured this out like 5 years ago, guys.
because this is a playtest.
and what I have read, it's a clusterfrakk ATM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree that Finesse Striker should be available to other classes. Especially as a halfling fighter who's going the dex route.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I argue that you should be able to have effective dex builds with decent damage without completely invalidating strength for many builds. It seems like there's a primal need for people to add dex mod to damage, logic be damned.
I'll try to be brief about my design outlook:
1. If lots of people can get Dex mod to damage in place of Strength, it makes Strength very weak in comparison, because of Dex's other benefits.
2. It makes logical sense that a Strong and Quick melee character should deal more damage than a Weak and Quick melee character, all else being equal. Prevalent or baseline Dex to damage options that replace Str destroy that basic logic and make Strong Quick characters a waste.
3. By manipulating things like bonus damage, attack accuracy, crit rate, and secondary effects through class feats and features, it is possible to make a pure dex character deal similar damage to a pure strength character, without moving the damage stat. This is balanced because of the benefits of focusing on Dex.
4. By focusing on damage and selecting features that give quick weapons bonuses, it is possible to reach the highest levels of damage, even surpassing strength only builds, by increasing both Strength and Dex. This is fine due to the investment in features and two stats.
Edit: Alternatively, they could play around with balance so that you could spend some resources to apply both dex and str to damage.
5. If you want to increase Dex only and still meet the damage of Str/Dex characters, I think you might be a bit unreasonable.
I agree that Finesse Striker should be available to other classes. Especially as a halfling fighter who's going the dex route.
This is my first playtest character and I am finding damage output much better for a halfling in PF2 than PF1.
Having any path to Dex to damage that wouldn't require so many feats that it would subsume the build would become a "must have route."
The halfling fighter with a dex based build already gets a ranged weapon with a D10 damage die that can get a +2 to damage from point-blank shot.or you could use double slice with Filcher's forks and be a massive critical threat machine, especially when getting your opponent flat-footed. Plus 18 Dex fighter is already a lot better off defensively then a STR based fighter who has to buy expensive heavy armor and barely be able move for 17 levels.
PF2 has made more interesting ways to do damage than just adding your primary attribute to damage. DEX and STR should be an optimal combat-centric build, not a redundant trap option. I am just sorry rogues have no option for it.
The only characters who use strength in 5e are two handers, grapplers/shovers, and the unoptimized. .
Please don't forget Quarterstaff + Dueling + Polearm Master cheesers like me. STRanger for life.
This edition gives so many ability boosts that on higher levels you don't have to worry about str or dex. You have both up anyway.
On top of that the damage bonus falls off hard later on anyway because once you have a sword +4 and you roll 5 dice for damage, it doesn't really matter if you get +2 on top of that from your str or +5 from your dex.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
As someone who loves making DEX fighters, I'm all for having a Dex to damage option, but:
-I'd be more comfortable if it cost a feat rather than being a freebie. There should be some cost to dumping STR.
-I'd want it to be available to at least the Fighter and Ranger as well.
-I'm okay with it not being available at 1st level if they think that's too powerful. There are other D20 games where it's not an option until 8th.
-The Rogue's whole deal is that they're supposed to have a lower base damage than other martials but be able to pull ahead when they can arrange things to let them sneak attack, so letting them have this and sneak attack feels like it's giving them an unfair edge over the other martials right out of the gate. This on top of their huge skill advantage. :-(
The point is that in this edition you don't need to dump anything to be good at something else. Even dex builds don't need to dump str. You get easily at lvl 10 to 16 str and 20 dex without dumping anything. And having +5 damage instead of +3 is not a big advantage when you roll 4 or 5 damage dice with a weapon +3/+4.
I mean, a 5e ranger using a quarterstaff to do a PAM build would fall under "unoptimized."The only characters who use strength in 5e are two handers, grapplers/shovers, and the unoptimized.Please don't forget Quarterstaff + Dueling + Polearm Master cheesers like me. STRanger for life.
Not if you manage to shove in shillelagh cantrip in the mix
Not if you manage to shove in shillelagh cantrip in the mixI mean, a 5e ranger using a quarterstaff to do a PAM build would fall under "unoptimized."The only characters who use strength in 5e are two handers, grapplers/shovers, and the unoptimized.Please don't forget Quarterstaff + Dueling + Polearm Master cheesers like me. STRanger for life.
Actually, just hunter mark scales insanely well with the multiple attacks. Also, Fighter dips are broken in 5E
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point is that in this edition you don't need to dump anything to be good at something else. Even dex builds don't need to dump str. You get easily at lvl 10 to 16 str and 20 dex without dumping anything. And having +5 damage instead of +3 is not a big advantage when you roll 4 or 5 damage dice with a weapon +3/+4.
Yep, the only big problem right now is class budget forcing classes into melee Heavy Armor.
AoO in Fighters and Retributive Strike for Paladins punishes archers.
Heavy Armor preferences punishes DEX users.
Those features should be more optional.
The point is that in this edition you don't need to dump anything to be good at something else. Even dex builds don't need to dump str. You get easily at lvl 10 to 16 str and 20 dex without dumping anything. And having +5 damage instead of +3 is not a big advantage when you roll 4 or 5 damage dice with a weapon +3/+4.Yep, the only big problem right now is class budget forcing classes into melee Heavy Armor.
AoO in Fighters and Retributive Strike for Paladins punishes archers.
Heavy Armor preferences punishes DEX users.
Those features should be more optional.
I haven't looked at all at the options for a paladin, but the High Dex fighter is in good shape, either going Melee or Ranged. The Armor proficiency thing is not a big deal.
The proficiency thing doesn't kick in until 11th and 17th level. By 11th level, the High Dex fighter has a +5 Dex mod and so is going to maybe be one AC point behind the Heavy Armor fighter, but the heavy armor fighter is still moving at -10. By level 17, it might shift 1 more point and the speed penalty is reduced, but a melee Dex fighter focused on defense is going to be dualing dance and parry to get a +2 to defense without having to spend an action to raise a shield.
The ranged fighter's might slip a little, but they could always decide to pick up heavy armor at that point and just eat a -5 to speed if the bonus feels worth it. They don't lose the Dex bonus to attacks or reflex in the right armor. And the ranged fighter gets AoOs back at level 8.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I haven't looked at all at the options for a paladin, but the High Dex fighter is in good shape, either going Melee or Ranged. The Armor proficiency thing is not a big deal.
The proficiency thing doesn't kick in until 11th and 17th level. By 11th level, the High Dex fighter has a +5 Dex mod and so is going to maybe be one AC point behind the Heavy Armor fighter, but the heavy armor fighter is still moving at -10. By level 17, it might shift 1 more point and the speed penalty is reduced, but a melee Dex fighter focused on defense is going to be dualing dance and parry to get a +2 to defense without having to spend an action to raise a shield.
The ranged fighter's might slip a little, but they could always decide to pick up heavy armor at that point and just eat a -5 to speed if the bonus feels worth it. They don't lose the Dex bonus to attacks or reflex in the right armor. And the ranged fighter gets AoOs back at level 8.
This is the type of malarkey that made PF1 a bad game and makes 5E so painful in the first place.
Just make those features modular.
No class should have dead features. Looking at you, Trackless Step.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This edition gives so many ability boosts that on higher levels you don't have to worry about str or dex. You have both up anyway.
On top of that the damage bonus falls off hard later on anyway because once you have a sword +4 and you roll 5 dice for damage, it doesn't really matter if you get +2 on top of that from your str or +5 from your dex.
Very much this- a dex fighter can manage a pretty reasonable Str Score with minimal investment, just use your 1st and 5th level stat ups on like Dex, Con, Wis, and Str and you're at 14.
Aesthetically I would prefer Dex-fighters end up in that 14ish strength range and do good damage, while your 7-10 str melee dex folks who do good damage need to rely on things like sneak attack or poison.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is the type of malarkey that made PF1 a bad game and makes 5E so painful in the first place.Just make those features modular.
No class should have dead features. Looking at you, Trackless Step.
I think that this "dead feature" concern is an inevitable part of having a class based system. Some of these features are only necessary because those options are sub-optimal without extra training (i.e. Heavy Armor Proficiency). The class has those features to make those options viable, not intrinsically optimal. At the point where every class needs a light armor, medium armor, heavy armor track, as well as a "every weapon style" track, we might as well just have one martial class or no classes at all.
Personally, I am a fan of games like that, but it is not what PF2 is building towards. Within a year or two of game release, they probably will have archetypes that hide those features your character doesn't use from your class, but the exchange rate can't be one to one. There probably will be a fighter archetype that gives up the heavy armor proficiency, but the trade off is probably Expert light armor proficiency earlier and some kind of situational defensive feat or class feature.
I know we were promised a more modular system with PF2, and it is in a lot of ways, but it doesn't look like non-skill proficiencies higher than Expert come without a lot of sacrifice--looking at how a fighter can get Legendary Armor Proficiency with Gray maiden is pretty much 4 feats and still gated to level 18. Expert at 8 is a few levels early, as is master at 14, but feat cost is steep. Is this worth it in play? Would it be worth it for legendary light armor proficiency? Probably, but that makes me think it will cost an extra feat or have higher entry levels.
You'd think they'd at least have a Finesse Striker feat under the Rogue Archetype. Or have Finesse Striker instead of the Sneak Attack die as part of Rogue Dedication.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would prefer rogues get better sneak attack and nobody gets dex-to-damage.
I would prefer rogues get better sneak attack and nobody gets dex-to-damage.
I'd be fine with this, just to get rid of the asymmetry, and probably not eliminate, but at least minimize the calls for dex to damage for other classes (and the boost to str rogues would be nice, making them still less optimal, but at least have some benefit over dex rogues) but I think there needs to be some form of boost to dex characters in general, as right now, with the changes to magic weapons, dex builds seem weaker than they should be. I have not much idea on what the correct change would be, as I don't think a flat damage boost, such as dex to damage, or a boost to die sizes would be the right direction to go, but something, as right now, even dex characters who invest secondarily or tertiarily in strength seem underwhelming.
Because the overall theme of the playtest seems to be "you must be class X to do Y".
I think you really MUST be X to do Y, because these are ROLE playing games. I hate games where everyone can do everything just as fine as everyone else, it takes away all the purpose and pride of representing THAT specialist which people look for in a group to fill a in important specific need.
It's also fine to be someone who can do a bit of everything, but you have to suck at it compared to everyone else in their own fields, otherwise it's just an unrealistic power fantasy in my opinion.That being said, I have mixed feelings about DEX to damage for finesse weap. I'd rather let the rogue AND the monk (which at the moment doesn't) have their "finesse striker" feature as a specific optional build path.
You'd think they'd at least have a Finesse Striker feat under the Rogue Archetype. Or have Finesse Striker instead of the Sneak Attack die as part of Rogue Dedication.
exactly, make it optional, so that you have to forgo something else. For instance you can either train to become a "swashbuckler" type and add DEX to damage so that you fight openly, or be the stealthy assassin type who normally doesn't do much damage, but has a higher sneak attack bonus so that when they get you, they really get you.
Same for the monk, add DEX to damage but lock it under a specific martial arts path, combat style, school, whatever. The monk misses all of these things right now anyway.
...as precision damage was entirely removed from the game.
Really? then what's the point of the Fiery Body spell that gives you resistance to precision damage?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would prefer rogues get better sneak attack and nobody gets dex-to-damage.Rogues Sneak Attack progression was not nerfed because of dex to damage. It was nerfed because Sneak Attack dice multiply on critical hits now.
Sneak Attack is no longer classed as precision damage as precision damage was entirely removed from the game.
No, I mean my preferred solution to "rogues should be doing more damage" is "rogues get enhancements on strikes" not "rogues get to substitute dex for str."
From the stream today it sounds like dex-to-damage is no longer a mandatory part of being a rogue, so that's good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sneak Attack is no longer classed as precision damage as precision damage was entirely removed from the game.
Really?
Sneak Attack
You deal additional damage to flat-footed creatures (see page 322). If you Strike
a flat-footed creature with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse
unarmed attack, or a ranged attack, you deal 1d6 extra precision damage.
SLY STRIKER
When you succeed or critically
succeed at a Strike’s attack roll against a creature that isn’t flatfooted,
you deal extra precision damage equal to half your sneak
attack damage.
Backstabber: When you hit a flat-footed creature, this weapon
deals 1 precision damage. The damage increases to 2 if the
weapon is master quality or to 3 if it’s legendary.
ELEMENTAL FORM SPELL 5
Resistance 5 to critical hits and precision damage.
GASEOUS FORM SPELL 4
It gains
resistance 8 to physical damage and is immune to precision
damage.
UNUSUAL ANATOMY POWER 5
You gain resistance 10 to precision damage and resistance
10 to extra damage from critical hits.Cat
Your companion is a big cat, such as a leopard or tiger.
Special Your cat deals 1d6 additional precision damage against a
flat-footed target.
Precision damage increases an attack’s damage rather
than being a separate pool of damage. For example, a
dagger Strike that deals 1d6 precision damage from sneak
attack increases the piercing damage by 1d6. A creature
that was immune to precision damage would ignore the
1d6 but take the rest of the damage from the Strike.
GLOOM BLADE ITEM 9
Whenever you use your gloom blade to attack
a creature you’re unseen by, you deal 1d6 extra precision damage.
I hope Dex to Damage stays a rogue thing and is therefore rare. It shouldn't be a normal thing.
If they for some reasons gve it to all characters via a feat, I hope it will be done like PF2Es version of Intimidating Prowess. Not DEX to damage but +1 or 2 to damage if your dex is high enough. So STR still matters.
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work? D&D 5e figured this out like 5 years ago, guys.
Because dex-to-damage is a fairly terrible idea that warps the stat priority to an even more ridiculous degree. (Strength already competes with Int and Charisma as the least useful stat unless your class absolutely requires it, except with dex to damage, it will never be absolutely required).
Personally, I'd prefer it if they dropped it from the rogue as well.
It isn't really necessary in PF2- your stat will never matter as much as your weapon bonus, and it's easy to have strength at a point where its contributing but not essential to max out.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For feat support, I'd rather see a way to add finesse to some higher damage die weapons than a universal dex-to-damage. Like something akin to how Shelynites could finesse glaives with the bladed brush feat in PF1, or something akin to spear dancing spiral so a monk can finesse a bo staff or similar. Both of these examples are 2-handed weapons so wouldn' be eligible for finesse striker anyway, but for someone who is willing to invest in dex and str a bigger damage die is going to add more damage in the long run than substituting dex-for-str.
finesse strike should be absolutely rogue only, ever. it would wreak havoc if they opened it up to other classes. I;d rather it not exist, but if it's going to, it should be rogue only, forever.
finesse strike should be absolutely rogue only, ever. it would wreak havoc if they opened it up to other classes. I;d rather it not exist, but if it's going to, it should be rogue only, forever.
Yes, well, the problem is, with future books stuffed with feats and classes, it will not stay that way. It isn't even that much protection with the way archetype multiclassing works. Rogue is a better choice for base class for a lot of builds, and picking up <class> later if it means you get to be mono-stated is a no-brainer.
This is especially true with the minor differences between one-handed weapons and the absolutely punishing penalties for medium and heavy armor (especially speed), when they all resolve to 7 AC-wise. Add in the several lackluster classes with dippable feats, and obviously you should go base rogue plus <whatever>. Except casters (mostly)
They either need to find a way to avoid making Dex the universal god stat (and there hasn't been any attempt in that direction), or not include dex to damage at all.
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work?In real life, you need some amount of muscle to thrust a rapier into a body.
To quote a HEMA instructor: He has never had a student who lacked the strength to use use a sword effectively.
Using a sword against an armoured target is much more about precision and getting the sword into the gaps than it is about strength - no matter how strong you are, you're not going to stab through someone's plate (because the sword will probably break first).
The compromise most games that aren't D&D make is to have a "Dexterity-like" stat to determine whether you hit, and a "Strength-like" stat to determine how much damage you deal if you connect. D&D is something of an oddity in having Strength be the default all-round melee stat.
I guess what I'm suggesting is that "Real Life" is actually a very poor resource to call on when talking D&D/Pathfinder mechanics. We accept them not because they model real life combat well, but because they're familiar.
And when it comes to familiarity: Unchained Rogue, Fencing Grace, Slashing Grace and Dervish Dance have been a part of Pathfinder 1 for a while now. And, despite the fact they could never topple Strength-based power-attacking melee monsters from the Throne of the Damage King, they were extremely popular (at least in my experience). So we shouldn't be surprised people are asking why Dex to damage is so restricted in PF2.
I'd argue that if Paizo were concerned about balance issues that having "the one stat" may cause, based on Pathfinder 1 experiences... they've actually already solved the issue in Pathfinder 2 by drastically restricting how high you can raise a single stat, and by scaling weapon damage by adding damage dice.
I wish they would add a Fighting stat like the old Marvel FASERIP game. I always felt that game had the best stats.
Fighting - for melee AC and melee to-hit
Agility - for ranged AC and ranged to-hit, reflex saves, acrobatics
Strength - for melee damage, athletics
Endurance - fort saves, speed
Reason - smarts
Intuition - perception
Psyche - will saves, magic and psionics
The FASE stats collectively determined HP.
Anywho, thats not gonna happen. So put me down for keeping dex to damage as a special rogue thing or just flat out removing it from the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I hope Dex to Damage stays a rogue thing and is therefore rare. It shouldn't be a normal thing.
Others may have mentioned this but... I wouldn't say it being a rogue thing would make it rare. In fact, our experience has been the opposite. Rogue + Multiclass archetype is the go-to concept for a lot of characters, from "The Bard 2.0" (rogue/wizard) to the Inquisitor (rogue/cleric) to the Swashbuckler (rogue/fighter).
Why?
The PF2 rogue is simply badass. In fact, as much as I love it, it might be too badass, mostly due to having too many exclusives (skill rate, skill feat rate, Dex to damage) loaded into the one class.
Edit: I should add that I do not believe that making Dex to Damage an automatic thing is a good idea - it borks up monster design too much to have small and nimble things also dealing grotesque amounts of damage. But I do believe that Finesse Striker as a general feat that rogues get for free would not actually cause as much harm to game balance as people believe, largely due to the way things scale. Indeed, the greatest effect it will have is from 1st to 4th level, while PCs are still playing with a single weapon dice of damage.
I am also of the opinion that a number of class feats should be moved into the general feat list, to decouple certain combat styles from specific classes, and make legacy builds more viable. E.g. Double Shot and Triple Shot are, in essence, direct ports of the Rapid Shot and Manyshot feats from Pathfinder 1, except they're fighter only - even the ranger, who could get them as bonus feats in PF1, doesn't get access to them except via the Fighter multiclass archetype. I am presently not convinced that making it harder to attain character style statements makes for a more fun game =/
Why is this a Rogue class feature instead of just how Finesse weapons work?In real life, you need some amount of muscle to thrust a rapier into a body.To quote a HEMA instructor: He has never had a student who lacked the strength to use use a sword effectively.
Using a sword against an armoured target is much more about precision and getting the sword into the gaps than it is about strength - no matter how strong you are, you're not going to stab through someone's plate (because the sword will probably break first). (...)
As a HEMA practitioner and enthusiast, I agree with the quote.
STR is not very useful in a real fencing scenario, but it is useful in rpgs such as these where a simulation of "fantasy" combat more often describes hero like characters with superpowers hitting demons with skins as hard as armor.Which makes me think, again, it might be more interesting to add more uses to STR, instead of eliminating DEX to damage. For example, skilled fighters could have a "break defense" trait which enables them to take away DEX to AC from their targets, etc.
I like DEX-to-damage options because I like making Dex-based warriors, because I think it's way cooler to play a swordsman who's quick and mobile and skilled than a big, limbering brute.
That said, I feel like getting Dex-to-damage for free is too much. PF2 seems to be trying to do away with dump stats, so there should be some cost for dumping Strength.
And the rogue's whole shtick is supposed to be that they don't normally hit hard but they can destroy stuff when they arrange things to get their sneak attack. Giving them the same damage bonus as a fighter without having to spend any stat points on it just seems way too good.
Not only do I love DEX to damage being a core rogue thing, but I think absorbing the swashbuckler into it and giving them more of the duelist stuff would really make this class shine.
I could see them writing a feat called swashbuckler.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That said, I feel like getting Dex-to-damage for free is too much. PF2 seems to be trying to do away with dump stats, so there should be some cost for dumping Strength.
Not to nitpick, but to point out a couple of things I believe people tend to overlook.
1) Dumping Strength has a cost: It reduces how much a character can carry before hitting encumbered (which disables a few rogue abilities, such as Nimble Dodge), and also nerfs one's Athletics skill, which is not only climbing and swimming, but also combat maneuvers. Strength also contributes to ranged damage via composite shortbows, which Finesse Striker does not.
2) Rogues can already dump Intelligence: Given what Int affects in PF2, there is precious little reason for rogues to invest in it other than for thematic reasons. It is actually less useful than Strength, even with Dex to damage. What price do rogues pay to be able to dump Int?
Does Finesse Striker work with unarmed strikes ?
i.e. does it let one use its Dexterity modifier to damage when attacking with a fist ?
What about other unarmed strikes, like the tiger claws from the monk's Tiger Stance feat ?
Since Sneak Attack calls out "an agile or finesse melee weapon [or] an agile or finesse unarmed attack" that implies to me that unarmed attacks are distinct from melee weapons and finesse striker only applies to "an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon" so it would not apply to unarmed strikes or tiger claw attacks as these are not weapons.
Unarmed Rogue/Monks are probably better off going going scoundrel's feint to eventually set up "flurry of sneak attacks."
Does Finesse Striker work with unarmed strikes ?
i.e. does it let one use its Dexterity modifier to damage when attacking with a fist ?
What about other unarmed strikes, like the tiger claws from the monk's Tiger Stance feat ?
Finesse Striker (assuming that it has not been changed by errata) begins with "When you attack with an agile or finesse one-handed melee weapon".
In the equipment section, the fist is shown on the table as being usable with one hand and having both the agile and finesse traits, so Finesse Striker should work with an unarmed strike as long as the "weapon" still has at least one of those traits and is still a one-handed weapon.
Yes, Scoundrel's Feint would definitely make a good combo !
For Finesse Striker... I do agree that the Sneak Attack implies that unarmed attacks are somewhat distinct from melee weapons.
However, at page 183: "Unarmed: An unarmed attack uses your body rather than a manufactured weapon. AN UNARMED ATTACK ISN'T A WEAPON, though it’s categorized with weapons for weapon tables and weapon groups, and it might have weapon traits. Because it’s a part of your body, an unarmed attack can’t be Disarmed. It also doesn’t take up a hand, though A FIST or other grasping appendage FOLLOWS THE SAME RULES AS A FREE-HAND WEAPON." (emphasis mine)
If we look at free-hand weapon, at page 182: "Free-Hand: This weapon doesn’t take up your hand, usually because it is built into your armor. A free-hand weapon can’t be Disarmed. You can use the hand covered by your free-hand weapon to wield other items, perform manipulate actions, and so forth. You can’t attack with a free-hand weapon if you’re wielding anything in that hand or using the hand for something else. When you’re not wielding anything and not using the hand, you can use ABILITIES that require you to have a hand free as well as those that require you to BE WIELDING A WEAPON IN THAT HAND. Each of your hands can have only one free-hand weapon on it." (emphasis mine)
So, from page 183, an unarmed strike isn't a weapon. But from page 182, if your hand is free, you count as wielding a weapon in that hand for abilities (i.e. for finesse striker)
Am I interpreting that correctly ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be my personal ruling that since monks have no access to dex-to-damage rogues should not be able to combine it with monk feats gained through multiclassing, since it's undesirable that a rogue be more effective using the tiger stance than a monk is.