RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Combat maneuvers indicate that any applicable attack bonus to an attack applies to the CMB check. Would weapon finesse therefore apply when either using a finesseable weapon to disarm, sunder, etc. or when grappling? I know unarmed strikes are finessable, but is grappling? What about other 'full body' maneuvers such as bull rush or overrun?
If weapon finesse is usable in these situations, that makes the Agile Maneuvers feat seem pretty weak in comparison.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I personally combine Weapon Finesse/Agile Maneuvers anyway in my games. But then, I believe feats should do more.
You are incredibly deft with a sword.
+0 BAB: You may use your Dexterity Modifier instead of your Strength modifier for calculating your melee attack bonus.
+1 BAB: You may use your Dexterity Modifier instead of your Strength modifier for calculating your grapple bonus.
+6 BAB: You may use your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier when attempting to trip an opponent.
+11 BAB: You may use your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier for calculating your melee damage.
+16 BAB: Opportunist – Once per turn, when an opponent is struck, you may take an attack of opportunity on that opponent.
|
I grabbed this from another thread ...
In BETA it said
"When you perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB to the result plus any bonuses you might have due to specific feats or abilities."
In the final it says
"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus."
At least to me its clear that the DEX bonus from Weapon Finesse is a "normal attack bonus" (sense it replaces STR) and thus not added.
I grabbed this from another thread ...
In BETA it said
"When you perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB to the result plus any bonuses you might have due to specific feats or abilities."
In the final it says
"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus."
At least to me its clear that the DEX bonus from Weapon Finesse is a "normal attack bonus" (sense it replaces STR) and thus not added.
Yep. That's how I read it, which is why my Cleric of Sune took Agile Maneuvers tonight for his whip.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I grabbed this from another thread ...
In BETA it said
"When you perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB to the result plus any bonuses you might have due to specific feats or abilities."
In the final it says
"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus."
At least to me its clear that the DEX bonus from Weapon Finesse is a "normal attack bonus" (sense it replaces STR) and thus not added.
But the next sentence in final it says:
"Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver."
Since weapon finesse is a feat that grants a bonus to an attack roll, wouldn't it apply?
I grabbed this from another thread ...
In BETA it said
"When you perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB to the result plus any bonuses you might have due to specific feats or abilities."
In the final it says
"When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus."
At least to me its clear that the DEX bonus from Weapon Finesse is a "normal attack bonus" (sense it replaces STR) and thus not added.
But the next sentence in final it says:
"Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver."
Since weapon finesse is a feat that grants a bonus to an attack roll, wouldn't it apply?
I thought the same thing, but lets take a look.
Weapon Finesse (Combat)
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.
Benefit: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
Combat Maneuvers
Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects.
Sense weapon finesse does not give you a bonus, but rather a replacement, I am sure Jason would say that it would not work, and obviously using weapon finesse for combat maneuvers is not RAI, so I would just give up and put it up to unclear writing.
But the next sentence in final it says:
"Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver."
Since weapon finesse is a feat that grants a bonus to an attack roll, wouldn't it apply?
That would completely invalidate the Agile Maneuvers feet though.
|
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
That would completely invalidate the Agile Maneuvers feet though.But the next sentence in final it says:
"Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver."
Since weapon finesse is a feat that grants a bonus to an attack roll, wouldn't it apply?
And hence, my question. However, I think Hexen has it correct above.
@Hex: That doesn't make any sense.
You usually apply STR bonus to attack rolls. WF allows you to apply DEX bonus to attack rolls.
Maneuvers use all your Attack bonuses. With WF, DEX Bonus *IS* an Attack Bonus.
It doesn't matter if it's "additional" or a 'replacement'.
RAW, WF *does* apply to Maneuvers, though I suspect that's not the intent.
There *IS* actually a differentiation between AM/WF re: Maneuvers, though:
WF only applies to Finesse Weapons, while AM applies to ALL Maneuver Attacks.
Of course, high DEX types who would use AM would be using Finesse Weapons and WF in the first place...
The wording really needs to be fixed if the intent is as what we assume it is.
Honestly, the entire presentation of Maneuvers is a wreck:
It would be twice as simple/half the word-count to ditch the separate mechanical definition of Maneuvers (which besides Size Mod is 100% identical to normal Attacks), and simply say "When making a Maneuver Attack, add the (size derived) Maneuver Modifier to your normal Attack Bonus". Likewise, CMD could be directly derived from Touch AC, + BAB + STR + (size derived) Maneuver Modifier. If Weapon Finesse/ Agile Maneuvers are desired to remain distinct, THEY CAN BE INDIVIDUALLY SPECIFIED TO APPLY TO MANEUVERS OR NOT. There is no other difference in the under-lying mechanics to justify re-deriving them scratch.
I've seen a kazillion questions on "does this bonus apply to Maneuver Attacks", "does this apply to CMD", which are all direct consequences of the bizarre choice to 'independently derive' the CMB/CMD formula which is in fact 99% the same as Attack/AC except for Size Bonus, which can be individually specified (like how Touch AC ignores specific AC Bonuses).
I really want to hear Jason's rationale for this, though I can't really imagine any good one.
Ironically, I realized I may have been one of the first play-testers to use the "CMD" lingo here on the boards :-)
Note that the creatures in the Bestiary with Weapon Finesse don't have it included in their CMB numbers. E.g. a giant centipede with +0 BAB, 9 Str, 15 Dex and Weapon Finesse has a CMB of -1, not +2.
Food for thought.
Agile Maneuvers is weak and redundant, IMHO, and should be eliminated.
Weak, maybe. But not exactly redundant -- Agile Maneuvers would work even with a non-finessable weapon.
I fail to see how deftness and finesse with a light weapon suddenly goes away when you want to Disarm rather than Attack.
I believe Disarm is "in place of a melee attack", so I think the RAW supports your sentiment here. The only maneuvers that don't use weapon bonuses are Bull-Rush, Over-Run and Grapple (though you can get Weapon Focus: Grapple, and if you have a Grab Natural Attack that should use appropriate bonuses as well). And actually, the wording for Bull-Rush: looks like if doing a Charge, you CAN use weapons (and their bonuses) to make a Bull-Rush. I'm not sure of that one, so I'll put in the Errata thread.
Note that the creatures in the Bestiary with Weapon Finesse don't have it included in their CMB numbers. E.g. a giant centipede with +0 BAB, 9 Str, 15 Dex and Weapon Finesse has a CMB of -1, not +2.
Food for thought.
This is exactly why I think the 'presentation' of CMB is a shame. There is a huge number of common cases whereby CMB will have to be further modified, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus/Training, Enhanced Weapons, Improved Maneuver X Feats, not to mention Iterative/Secondary attacks, so in probably 2/3rds of the cases where PCs would use CMB, they can't use CMB directly, it is just another 'intermediate' stat like BAB. If Paizo's own Bestiary stat-blocks can't coherently and consisely convey what the appropriate attack bonus should be for various Maneuvers, are players and DMs going to intuitively be juggling these numbers around for their own characters? From the amount of confusion and questions on the topic, I'd say "no".
Since the bonuses for most of those cases are ALREADY calculated into people's different attack routines, why not ditch 'CMB' as an intermediate stat and just express it's DIFFERENCE as a modifier to normal attacks (e.g. double the current Maneuver Size Mod - in most cases being ZERO for PCs)? The way CMB is presented just doesn't seem in line with how the game is actually played... I mean, Ranged Attacks are not dealt with as a completely separate entity from Melee Attacks, they are described solely whereby their differences diverge from the norm. The whole idea of CMB/CMD is to make maneuvers conform to the attack/AC system, so why create a parallel secondary "BAB" stat when the only difference is Size Mod and potentially cancelling out a Weapon Finesse that doesn't apply to all Maneuvers, so you indicate -X (difference of DEX mod to STR mod) to Sunder, Disarm, Bullrush, Over-Run maneuvers unless you have Dextrous Maneuvers, or just don't 'factor in' DEX bonus to attacks in the first place but instead list a 'conditional' bonus = difference of DEX/STR which applies to melee attacks, trip, sunder, disarm (basically everything but BR, OR, and Grapple).
|
Weak, maybe. But not exactly redundant -- Agile Maneuvers would work even with a non-finessable weapon.
Agile Maneuvers is weak and redundant, IMHO, and should be eliminated.
Sound reasonable. I don't have a copy of my book handy. What maneuvers would you use a finesse weapon for - disarm and sunder? Are there any finessable trip weapons?
@Hex: That doesn't make any sense.
You usually apply STR bonus to attack rolls. WF allows you to apply DEX bonus to attack rolls.
Maneuvers use all your Attack bonuses. With WF, DEX Bonus *IS* an Attack Bonus.
It doesn't matter if it's "additional" or a 'replacement'.RAW, WF *does* apply to Maneuvers, though I suspect that's not the intent.
There *IS* actually a differentiation between AM/WF re: Maneuvers, though:
WF only applies to Finesse Weapons, while AM applies to ALL Maneuver Attacks.
Of course, high DEX types who would use AM would be using Finesse Weapons and WF in the first place...The wording really needs to be fixed if the intent is as what we assume it is.
Honestly, the entire presentation of Maneuvers is a wreck:It would be twice as simple/half the word-count to ditch the separate mechanical definition of Maneuvers (which besides Size Mod is 100% identical to normal Attacks), and simply say "When making a Maneuver Attack, add the (size derived) Maneuver Modifier to your normal Attack Bonus". Likewise, CMD could be directly derived from Touch AC, + BAB + STR + (size derived) Maneuver Modifier. If Weapon Finesse/ Agile Maneuvers are desired to remain distinct, THEY CAN BE INDIVIDUALLY SPECIFIED TO APPLY TO MANEUVERS OR NOT. There is no other difference in the under-lying mechanics to justify re-deriving them scratch.
I've seen a kazillion questions on "does this bonus apply to Maneuver Attacks", "does this apply to CMD", which are all direct consequences of the bizarre choice to 'independently derive' the CMB/CMD formula which is in fact 99% the same as Attack/AC except for Size Bonus, which can be individually specified (like how Touch AC ignores specific AC Bonuses).
I really want to hear Jason's rationale for this, though I can't really imagine any good one.
Ironically, I realized I may have been one of the first play-testers to use the "CMD" lingo here on the boards :-)
The bonuses to hit applies to combat maneuvers. Weapon finesse does not grant a bonus, its a replacement. Grant it I think dex should apply to all combat maneuvers with this feat, but it is neither RAW or RAI because there is a feat just for that, applying to combat maneuvers.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I finally found the post I was looking for: 9-25-09
Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, and similar feats would only apply when you're attempting a combat maneuver with that weapon. For the most part, this would be limited to things like disarm or sunder or MAYBE trip. You wouldn't get this bonus to things like overrun, bull rush, or grapple that don't use a weapon attack as part of their requirements.
Agile Maneuvers applies to EVERY maneuver every time.
If you're a rapier fighter who uses Weapon Finesse and won't be ever doing many bull rushes, Weapon Finesse or Weapon Focus is the feat for you and Agile Maneuvers is not.
If you're a bard or rogue or monk who wants to be all about the kung-fu or swashbuckly elements of ALL of the combat maneuvers, regardless of what move you want to make or what weapon you use, Agile Maneuvers is the feat you want and Weapon Finesse/Focus is not.
Now that I've searched for it and found it, I realized that the Pathfinder SRD FAQ already had it with appropriate source.
Thanks for the reality check, MillerHero.
Yes, that has been common knowledge for quite a while (see the September date).
Hexen, just look at the Finesse Feat: it doesn't say the 'substitution' only applies to melee attacks (for damage), it says . CMB checks are explicitly defined as attack rolls: . Thus James' explanation, which is 100% in-line with the RAW.
Like I wrote, I'm going to post the bit about Bull-Rushes on Charges to the Errata thread, because it DOES use the 'in place of an attack' that allows Weapon Finesse in other cases.
What maneuvers would you use a finesse weapon for - disarm and sunder? Are there any finessable trip weapons?
Finessable Trip Weapons: kama, whip, sickle, spiked chain, ...?
So you think it WF ought to apply to Bull Rushes as well?
You can make a bull rush as a standard action or as part of a charge, in place of the melee attack.
"In place of [a] melee attack" is exactly the phrase used in other maneuvers which do benefit from WF. So per RAW, it does look like WF applies to Bullrush IF you do it as part of a charge - if you need to maneuver out of a straight line or whatever, it doesn't benefit. I posted it to Errata thread, it seems fairly likely to not necessarily be a planned feature.
Honestly, the way this information is presented about whether or not each Maneuver can use weapon bonuses or not is a mess. It is impossible to quickly pick up other than reading the entire descriptive texts themselves. There should be a mini-table summarizes which are weapon-attack substitutable, which are standard actions, which are special.
@Hex: That doesn't make any sense.
You usually apply STR bonus to attack rolls. WF allows you to apply DEX bonus to attack rolls.
Maneuvers use all your Attack bonuses. With WF, DEX Bonus *IS* an Attack Bonus.
It doesn't matter if it's "additional" or a 'replacement'.RAW, WF *does* apply to Maneuvers, though I suspect that's not the intent.
The question is, does the character now add his ST modifier in calculating the CMB, AND add his DX modifier through WF?
Level 1 Human Fighter with ST 16/DX 16 and WF uses a shortsword in a disarm attempt; he calculates his CMB (BAB + ST modifier + Size Modifier = 4). Does he than also add his DX Modifier from WF for a total attack bonus of +7, or does the DX Modifier replace the ST modifier in the CMB calculation?
Developer
|
The question is, does the character now add his ST modifier in calculating the CMB, AND add his DX modifier through WF?
Level 1 Human Fighter with ST 16/DX 16 and WF uses a shortsword in a disarm attempt; he calculates his CMB (BAB + ST modifier + Size Modifier = 4). Does he than also add his DX Modifier from WF for a total attack bonus of +7, or does the DX Modifier replace the ST modifier in the CMB calculation?
Interesting reading, but not quite accurate. WF lets you use one modifier instead of the other on attack rolls with qualifying weapons. It says instead. As said before, CMB checks are attack rolls. You choose one or the other. You don't get both with just finesse.
Interesting reading, but not quite accurate. WF lets you use one modifier instead of the other on attack rolls with qualifying weapons. It says instead. As said before, CMB checks are attack rolls. You choose one or the other. You don't get both with just finesse.
I didn't mean to suggest one or the other, as I think this is the correct reading. It was the discussion above about WF being a "bonus", and whether the line about adding bonuses that apply to your attack after calculating the CMB would give the double dip. It seemed clear (to me, at least) that substituting the CMB for the normal attack bonus would limit the WF effects to the CMB calculation. But now I know. <G>
Thanks!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously people, actually check the FAQ before you're necroing 2 year old threads.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The entry contains the line
"Disarm, sunder and trip are normally the only kinds of combat maneuvers in which you're actually using a weapon to perform the maneuver, and therefore the weapon's bonuses apply to the roll." Emphasis mine.
So, what are the circumstances outside of normally? Does this include an unarmed monk with Weapon Finesse when he/she is grappling? If so, then one would assume that associated to hit bonuses such as Amulet of Mighty Fists, Weapon Focus etc also count toward the roll.
"Normally" means "unless otherwise specified".
The "trip" weapon quality (as on the flail or sickle) will let you use your weapon to perform a drag or reposition maneuver; that's the only exception I'm aware of.
So unless you have some ability that specifically lets you grapple with a weapon, your grapple checks will not be delivered by a weapon. So AoMF, Weapon Finesse, and Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike) will NOT apply to your grapple checks. Note, however, that you can choose "grapple" with Weapon Focus. Also, the Agile Maneuvers feat exists for when you want to use DEX for non-weapon-using maneuvers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Read this Blog entry, it might clarify this a bit more:
Clicky
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Right. It's not 100%clear to me, but Barbarian Knockback would seem to be using your weapon... It seems to be similar to the Polearm Master ability the blog describes as an exception (although few polearms are finesse weapons so THAT wpn specific bonus wouldn't be in play there) ... I think the whip master feats eventually let you grapple with a whip which is probably also another case... The FAQ was never 100% clarified to my satisfaction... Which is important since it's not really just explaining the raw rules as much as creating new ones. By raw of the text, barb Knockback (with a finesse wpn) and Greater whip mastery Grapple can't use weapon finesse although they seem to be using the weapon just as much as the Polearm ability.
There is also unclear ness about RAW/RAI re Ranged maneuvers... Whether bolas or archer fighters trick shots....
But if there isn't anything in the rules specifically describing how your weapon attack is delivering a non-finesse type maneuver, then you can't use DEX via finesse you will need agile maneuvers... Which you should need for a man catcher grapple since its not a finesse weapon.
|
Dirty Tricks are not a weapon based maneuver, barring a class ability that makes them one. Therefore, weapon finesse would not apply. You would need agile maneuvers to make dirty tricks dex based.
A burglars buckler would grant it's bonus to the maneuver, but as it's a shield, you would lose all monk class features that turn off when using armor while using it.
|
|
yes - my monk doesn't get WIS to AC (he's a maneuver master monk and flurry of maneuvers doesn't have any requirements to be unarmored)
Dirty trick is SPECIFICALLY noted by Sean Reynolds in his blog post on this topic as a case where a GM might well allow (a sap to hit in a sensitive spot
Which means expect table variation. Unless you have a specific class ability like the Ustalavic Duelist's Science of the Blade, most dirty tricks will not have weapon feats affect it.
Dirty Tricks are not a weapon based maneuver, barring a class ability that makes them one. Therefore, weapon finesse would not apply. You would need agile maneuvers to make dirty tricks dex based.
A burglars buckler would grant it's bonus to the maneuver, but as it's a shield, you would lose all monk class features that turn off when using armor while using it.
Except that it says that Dirty Tricks can involve weaponry on a case by case basis.