Am I the only one who doesn't see the point of making rogues useless for the first two levels? If this iconic feat really needs a prereq, why not just change it to 'must be proficient with a weapon in order to use your Dex modifier to attacks"? I already have my own house rules so I'm not dependent on Jason making this change in Pathfinder RPG, but I figured I'd bring it up. My apologies if it's been mentioned before but I can't recall anyone bringing it up.
TS
So super-finesse-rogues can't take it at first level, haha. It's a good feat, it lets you change the stat associated with your AB. That's pretty powerful, and the +1BAB req is there to be a jerk for your first two levels if you're taking advantage of it as a rogue.
This used to prevent you from taking it until third level - your next feat - but now you can circumvent that by taking "Finesse Rogue" as your 2nd level rogue talent. Less interesting than the other powers, but it still gets you your DEX to AB a level early if you want to "make that sacrifice".
I like the choice/conflict that presents.
True. I don't see the point in having it a BAB +1 as a prerequisite as well. Weapon profiency might be a way to go for a prerequisite if the feat needs one at all. Dex 13+ could be another possible prerequisite.
A weapon proficiency shouldn't be required for Weapon Finesse, for the strict reason that it applies to unarmed attacks and natural weapons. Making it require proficiency in "a small weapon-or-rapier-or-whip-or-spiked chain-or-other fancy splatbook item that can be finessed-or-improved unarmed strike as a feat-or-has a natural weapon" is too much of a mouthfull, and frankly, if someone wants to take weapon finesse without proficiency in anything it offers a benefit to - I say let them?
Same goes for a lower-than-13 DEX.
|
So super-finesse-rogues can't take it at first level, haha. It's a good feat, it lets you change the stat associated with your AB. That's pretty powerful, and the +1BAB req is there to be a jerk for your first two levels if you're taking advantage of it as a rogue.
Well, I don't consider it to be that powerful. Most characters usually have at least two good stats, so I could build a rogue with decent Dex AND Str scores and make it a good fighter. Also, the feat only applies to weapons that don't deal that much damage. I think the weapon finesse feat is more about style, because having a stealthy rogue character carrying a longsword or great-axe is just lame and too munchkin imho.
This used to prevent you from taking it until third level - your next feat - but now you can circumvent that by taking "Finesse Rogue" as your 2nd level rogue talent. Less interesting than the other powers, but it still gets you your DEX to AB a level early if you want to "make that sacrifice".
I like the choice/conflict that presents.
Yes, I agree, this is a nice option! I haven't seen the PF rogue in action yet, so I didn't realize this change. So, it seems that it's unnecessary to change the feat then.
A weapon proficiency shouldn't be required for Weapon Finesse, for the strict reason that it applies to unarmed attacks.
Good point! I didn't consider this when writing my reply. Thanks!
The +1 BAB always pissed me off, too. I also house-ruled it out of my meatspace campaign.
|
|
Odd-numbered attribute prereqs put flames on the side of my face, I hate them that much. Apparently I'm not alone, since the designers then give those sorts of Feats away as class features without the stupid prereqs anyway (example; Two-Weapon Fighting and the Ranger).
If the design is annoying enough that even the designers look for ways around it, perhaps it's annoying enough to be taken out behind the woodshed...
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Odd-numbered attribute prereqs put flames on the side of my face, I hate them that much. Apparently I'm not alone, since the designers then give those sorts of Feats away as class features without the stupid prereqs anyway (example; Two-Weapon Fighting and the Ranger).
If the design is annoying enough that even the designers look for ways around it, perhaps it's annoying enough to be taken out behind the woodshed...
See, I'll disagree, I like the odd numbers, it gives them a purpose, and keeps just even numbers from being beenficial. "Do I take a 12 in int for the skill point, or do I bump it up to 13 for weapon finesse? 14 in dex for the +2, or do I spend the two extra points to build a TWF at 1st level..."
|
Well, I don't consider it to be that powerful. Most characters usually have at least two good stats, so I could build a rogue with decent Dex AND Str scores and make it a good fighter.
And with Finesse, you can make Str an average stat, and crank up your Int for extra skills, and make it a good fighter.
Finesse rocks. Less stat-dependency, less to spend on stat-boosting items, and your extra skill points can keep your Escape Artist bonus maxed, so your pitiful Str never handicaps you in a grapple.
Even more so if you play a Small PC, who trades Str for Dex. The reduction from a medium shortsword to a small shortsword only reduces the damage by an average of 1 point, so why not ensure the attack hits, and delivers an extra WhoppingD6 of sneak attack damage?
|
See, I'll disagree, I like the odd numbers, it gives them a purpose, and keeps just even numbers from being beenficial. "Do I take a 12 in int for the skill point, or do I bump it up to 13 for weapon finesse? 14 in dex for the +2, or do I spend the two extra points to build a TWF at 1st level..."
I strongly agree with this. Leave the odd-valued pre-reqs as is and leave weapon finesse as is. The rogue (from all reports) is not a crippled character in dire need of a boost power-wise.
I would leave Weapon Finesse just the way it is. Rogues are hardly gimped the way they are and having to wait a couple of levels to get the feat doesn't harm them.
I house rule that WF has no prereq because while waiting until 3rd level for it isn't a huge pain in the butt, it is also a pointless pain in the butt. Sure some rogues have decent Str and some are rped to be too cowardly for melee anyway, but WF is one of those options that the typical rogue really needs to be a well-rounded and functional part of the group. I don't see WF as a powerful feat at all. After all, fighters and barbarians get the equivalent for free plus they get to add their primary stat to damage. If WF isn't overpowered at 20th level when a rogue has a 30 Dex, it certainly isn't overpowered at 1st level when he has an 18 Dex. Unless you consider overpowered to mean "able to hit foes reliably."
There have been several occasions when I as a player have passed over the rogue in whole because of WF's prereq; I'm not one of those players who likes to play the greedy cowardly rogue type. When I play a rogue I like to mix it up in melee and earn my share of loot, and this just isn't viable until I can get WF. So when beginning a 1st level campaign and wanting to play a rogue I effectively have four options: a) suck it up and be a combat clutz for two levels, b) dump a decent score in Str even though it doesn't fit my character or the class archetype, c) start as a barb or fighter just so I can fight effectively as a rogue or d) play something else until 3rd level and then switch characters. Maybe other people see those as "interesting choices", but I think they're about as interesting as the choices that the mafia gives to a money borrower late on his repayment.
TS
The +1 BAB prerequisite exists to balance it against the Weapon Focus feat. Instead of +1 with a single weapon, you can get a +4 (with an 18 Dex) with all light weapons (plus a couple others). In 3.0, this feat could only be applied to a single weapon, same as Weapon Focus, an indication of how powerful it was thought to be.
For comparison, let's take a fighter with 14 Str and 18 Dex. Mechanically, Weapon Finesse (+5 melee attack bonus) is better than Weapon Focus (+4 melee attack bonus) for this character. Choosing Weapon Focus in a weapon that can be used with Weapon Finesse is an even better option (+6 melee attack bonus). Effectively, the 14 Str/18 Dex fighter will have the same melee attack bonus, a higher AC, and do only slightly less damage than a 18 Str/14 Dex fighter for the cost of one feat.
There's no need to generalize like that, a fighter could well be built to have the finesse feats. The duelist class, for example, is an enormous pain to take as a rogue - because of the BAB requirement. You can't take it until your 9th level if you're a pure-class rogue.
The duelist abilities are "geared" more toward the "typical" rogue build, sure, you benefit from a high DEX and INT. But there's no reason this class couldn't be used with a fighter.
3.5 Rogue building for Duelist,
Level 1. Rogue, BAB 0, Feat: Dodge
Level 2. Rogue, BAB 1
Level 3. Rogue, BAB 2, Feat: Weapon Finesse
Level 4. Rogue, BAB 3
Level 5. Rogue, BAB 3
Level 6. Rogue, BAB 4, Feat: Mobility
Level 7. Rogue, BAB 5
Level 8. Rogue, BAB 6
Level 9. **DUELIST**
Note that, in order to pull this off in 3.5, all the characters feats had to be put into the Duelist pre reqs, leaving no space for "further customization." This is alleviated in Pathfinder by Rogue Talents and more feats, as such
Pathfinder Rogue building for Duelist
Level 1. Rogue, BAB 0, Feat: (any)
Level 2. Rogue, BAB 1, Rogue Talent: Finesse Rogue
Level 3. Rogue, BAB 2, Feat: (any)
Level 4. Rogue, BAB 3, Rogue Talent: Combat Trick: Dodge
Level 5. Rogue, BAB 3, Feat: (any)
Level 6. Rogue, BAB 4, Rogue Talent: Combat Trick: Mobility
Level 7. Rogue, BAB 5, Feat: (any)
Level 8. Rogue, BAB 6, Rogue Talent: (any)
Level 9. **DUELIST**
In 3.5, then only "hardship" in getting duelist levels as a fighter was the tumble requirement. No full BAB class has it as a class skill, which means you'd have to take one level in Bard or Rogue to qualify for the class. Even with the multiclassing, though, you can still take the class one level ahead of a pure-class rogue.
3.5 Fighter/Rogue building for Duelist
Level 1. Fighter, BAB 1, Feat: Weapon Finesse, Fighter Feat: Dodge
Level 2. Rogue, BAB 1
Level 3. Rogue, BAB 2, Feat: Mobility
Level 4. Fighter, BAB 3, Fighter Feat: (any)
Level 5. Fighter, BAB 4
Level 6. Fighter, BAB 5, Feat: (any), Fighter Feat: (any)
Level 7. Fighter, BAB 6
Level 8. **DUELIST**
In Pathfinder, the Fighter doesn't even need to multiclass into rogue, as there's no restriction on maximum ranks. Prestige class skill requirements follow a formula of (X-3)x2 if they aren't a class skill, which makes the tumble requirement only 4 - easily attainable by the 7th level, to maximize how soon you can take the class.
Pathfinder Fighter building for Duelist
Level 1. Fighter, BAB 1, Feat: Weapon Finesse, Fighter Feat: Dodge
Level 2. Fighter, BAB 2, Fighter Feat: Mobility
Level 3. Fighter, BAB 3, Feat: (any)
Level 4. Fighter, BAB 4, Fighter Feat: (any)
Level 5. Fighter, BAB 5, Feat: (any)
Level 6. Fighter, BAB 6, Fighter Feat: (any)
Level 7. **DUELIST**
Though if you want Tumble (Acrobatics) as a class skill, you could always make a Barbarian/Duelist and still take the class sooner than a rogue. This route also gets you a faster move speed without armour, Improved Uncanny Dodge without multiclassing, and the ability to rage (the hit to AC won't mean nearly as much at the higher levels of Duelist).
This is kind of dodgy, though, and I doubt most people would consider Barbarian/Duelist as a good idea.
Once you have your Duelist levels, it's full BAB progression, and as a Pathfinder fighter who can meet the skill requirements by level 4, you'll keep your four attacks by level 20 as though you went pure fighter.
... In summary: it's not necessarily true that every fighter wears fullplate. That was kind of a longwinded post, though, and went all over the place away from the actual topic at hand.
I think the +1 BAB requirement is a little annoying. My argument is that Weapon Finesse is a character-defining feat to any "speed" character, so any "speed" character should be able to start out with it. Exactly like a "power" character can start out with Power Attack, another clear character-defining feat.
My thoughts exactly. Weapon Finesse is such an integral feat for so many characters that I've heard a few DMs say that they give it to every PC for free.
TS
|
My thought, the reason why Weapon Focus and Weapon Finese both want a BAB of +1 is because someone with a +0 BAB is someone that's NOT skilled at attacking anything yet, they're just capable of not throwing their weapon when they swing it. :)
+0 = You don't know how to fight.
+1 = You know how to fight.
Proficient = Know how to handle the weapon correctly.
|
|
My thought, the reason why Weapon Focus and Weapon Finese both want a BAB of +1 is because someone with a +0 BAB is someone that's NOT skilled at attacking anything yet, they're just capable of not throwing their weapon when they swing it. :)
+0 = You don't know how to fight.
+1 = You know how to fight.
Proficient = Know how to handle the weapon correctly.
So monks don't know how to fight?
If anyone deserves Weapon Finesse at 1st level, its monks.
So monks don't know how to fight?
If anyone deserves Weapon Finesse at 1st level, its monks.
If anyone deserves Weapon Finesse it's 1-HD animals (stupid MM errata).
The prerequisite has never been a problem for me. Then again, I see no reason for it either. 1st-level rogues should be able to take the feat if they wish without penalty.
From the post I'm assuming that Paizo hasn't changed it for the Pathfinder RPG? Is this the case?
The prerequisite has never been a problem for me. Then again, I see no reason for it either. 1st-level rogues should be able to take the feat if they wish without penalty.
From the post I'm assuming that Paizo hasn't changed it for the Pathfinder RPG? Is this the case?
That is correct.
It would be, in my opinion, appropriate to drop the +1 base attack bonus prerequisite from Weapon Finesse. Are we to believe that a character initially must train and advance to 3rd level fighting in one style of combat, then at third level gains the weapon finesse feat and dramatically changes the way he uses his weapons? While you could argue that he slowly was practicing the different style, you could equally argue that a given character might choose to use that style from the start.
It would be, in my opinion, appropriate to drop the +1 base attack bonus prerequisite from Weapon Finesse. Are we to believe that a character initially must train and advance to 3rd level fighting in one style of combat, then at third level gains the weapon finesse feat and dramatically changes the way he uses his weapons? While you could argue that he slowly was practicing the different style, you could equally argue that a given character might choose to use that style from the start.Are we to believe that a 1st level non-martial class is able to fight in a difficult, specialized style when they have barely more combat proficiency than a peasant farmer? Would you allow a peasant farmer to have Weapon Finesse? I certainly wouldn't.
I would. Maybe instead of swinging a scythe, the peasant grew up playing "navies and pirates" with his friends with sticks. So when this farmer joined the town militia, he chose to practice with a hand axe rather than a scythe because it better suited how he liked to swing things. I don't think +1 BAB is the big landmark of combat prowess that many people think of it as. +1 BAB compared to +0 BAB is a total 5% better chance to land a blow; oooh, ahhh! That's roughly the difference between a farmer boy swinging sticks with his friends and the same farmer one year later graduating from town militia camp. If we have to assign a particular BAB as a landmark, it should be +6 because at least then you get a second swing.
TS
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Player: I see that feat you're talking about, but it requires +1 Base Attack Bonus, and rogues don't get that until level 2. I could wait until level 2, but... I don't get another feat until level 3! You mean I have to stumble around using Strength to attack with through the first month or so of the game?DM: (What do you say?)
"Well, the Rogue class is, first and foremost, a class for skill-monkeys. If your character were completely dedicated to being a Rogue, he'd be terrific at a lot of things, but combat wouldn't be as high a priority.
"So, I'd recommend taking your second level as Fighter, and picking Weapon Finesse as your Fighter feat. He'll always be a little better at combat than his pure-Rogue brethren, but a little behind them in all those other skills.
"Or, for 'sneaky guy who's good at combat', we might look at the class that specializes in that: Ranger."
Player: I see that feat you're talking about, but it requires +1 Base Attack Bonus, and rogues don't get that until level 2. I could wait until level 2, but... I don't get another feat until level 3! You mean I have to stumble around using Strength to attack with through the first month or so of the game?DM: (What do you say?)
"Well, the Rogue class is, first and foremost, a class for skill-monkeys. If your character were completely dedicated to being a Rogue, he'd be terrific at a lot of things, but combat wouldn't be as high a priority.
"So, I'd recommend taking your second level as Fighter, and picking Weapon Finesse as your Fighter feat. He'll always be a little better at combat than his pure-Rogue brethren, but a little behind them in all those other skills.
"Or, for 'sneaky guy who's good at combat', we might look at the class that specializes in that: Ranger."
I'd have to agree. As much as people like to harp on sneak attack damage, rogues are not meant for front-line combat in the same way rangers and fighters are. I keep the +1 BAB for Weapon Finesse in my games, if only to drive home the point that rogues are *not* fighters and vice versa.
I'd have to agree. As much as people like to harp on sneak attack damage, rogues are not meant for front-line combat in the same way rangers and fighters are. I keep the +1 BAB for Weapon Finesse in my games, if only to drive home the point that rogues are *not* fighters and vice versa.
But all that proves is that level 1 rogues are not fighters, but level 2 rogues are.
Just to clarify, in my mind if Weapon Finesse had a prerequisite of +4 BAB, that would be a more reasonable restriction than having a prerequisite of +1 BAB. As it is, it's like having a ten minute waiting period before buying a gun; if the waiting period is that short, why bother?
:)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Level 1 rogues are not fighters, but level 2 rogues are.
It's like having a ten-minute waiting period before buying a gun; if the waiting period is that short, why bother?
If every Rogue were out collecting experience points and rising in level, I'd agree with you.
Let's look at the feats or actions that require a BAB of at least 1. Things like Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Quick Draw, Weapon Focus, drawing a weapon as part of a movement action, an so on.
These are no great shakes, but they're things that you'd expect someone with some martial training could train in, but which you wouldn't expect of an aristocrat or a novice wizard. Baby rogues: great with the picking locks, not so great with the weapons. Rogues with 13 combats under their belts: getting a clue.
These are no great shakes, but they're things that you'd expect someone with some martial training could train in, but which you wouldn't expect of an aristocrat or a novice wizard. Baby rogues: great with the picking locks, not so great with the weapons. Rogues with 13 combats under their belts: getting a clue.
But in my experience, high Dex/low Str rogues spend that first level or two firing missile weapons. So somehow that practice with a shortbow (say) translates to skill with a rapier later on.
I'd have to agree. As much as people like to harp on sneak attack damage, rogues are not meant for front-line combat in the same way rangers and fighters are. I keep the +1 BAB for Weapon Finesse in my games, if only to drive home the point that rogues are *not* fighters and vice versa.But all that proves is that level 1 rogues are not fighters, but level 2 rogues are.
Just to clarify, in my mind if Weapon Finesse had a prerequisite of +4 BAB, that would be a more reasonable restriction than having a prerequisite of +1 BAB. As it is, it's like having a ten minute waiting period before buying a gun; if the waiting period is that short, why bother?
:)
An interesting point. However, when you take the rogue and put him next to a fighter of the same level(note: not behind him so he can try to pull off a sneak attack right away), it begins to fall apart. The sheer number of feats available to the fighter means that he is going to be literally all over the rogue combatwise, even if he loses initiative. As levels progress, the rogue will definitely have picked up more than his fair share of tricks, but the fighter will STILL beat him hands down, and not just because of his greater hit die. He's still hitting more often and therefore doing more damage on the whole than his rogue buddy.