I'm thinking of making that swashbuckler Int to damage ability into a feat that any class can take. It would allow for Dex/Int rogues to do high damage at least. Things get a little harder with Monks though, because a high int monk doesn't quite fit...they're supposed to be high wisdom and they already add wisdom to AC. Of course, at this point a dex monk is just flavor, you get almost the same benefit just from doing a str/wis monk. A dex/wis monk would have less damage, but much higher AC right now...maybe there could be an option to change the class so that wisdom adds to damage instead of AC.
Int to damage as a feat would be good for rogues, carmendine monks (non core 3.5 feat to basically swap INT for WIS in determining monk abilities) and eldritch knight/gish types absolutely. CW swashbucklers didn't get much return from that class feature in my experience, and if INT was the focus of the character they were really weak until level 3.
Wis to damage as a feat is a bad idea because of clerics and druids, who would become melee monsters. Still not as bad as 3.x pre-errata druids (one stat to rule them all), but I doubt many would see that as balanced. The other option is to have a monk class feature, but then there is the dipping problem. I really like the reinforced class structure of PF and would hate to give people incentives to take a level of monk for mechanical reasons (as druids would sometimes do for really cheesy reasons, for example).
Dex to damage would probably benefit the monk more than anyone, especially helping their AC problems (they don't need to worry about the armor encumbrance or dex caps) and letting them use their mobility to greatest effect (except jump, I suppose). They would still have problems if it was restricted to one weapon, though, unless they chose a monk weapon rather than unarmed strikes, or they took it twice.
weapon finesse and power attack not fitting?
this is probably just me not being familiar with PF power attack. In 3.5 you couldn't use power attack with light weapons, which are the usual finessable choice. It sounds like several people think not allowing power attack is too much of a nerf.
not allowing TWF is probably more appropriate from a balance perspective, but it just seems wrong flavor wise. still, I suppose you could make the argument that the concentration required for that precision could only happen on a single weapon. (hand waving)
@ DeathQuaker - Interesting idea, would take some thought about how to do it. I think there are lots of STR/CON damage feats/abilities to model on. Personally, I like the idea of doing INT damage, you could call the feat "critical lobotomy" or something :-)
ahhh, ray of stupidity. how many times did that end fights prematurely?
Int to damage as a feat would be good for rogues, carmendine monks (non core 3.5 feat to basically swap INT for WIS in determining monk abilities) and eldritch knight/gish types absolutely. CW swashbucklers didn't get much return from that class feature in my experience, and if INT was the focus of the character they were really weak until level 3.
Wis to damage as a feat is a bad idea because of clerics and druids, who would become melee monsters. Still not as bad as 3.x pre-errata druids (one stat to rule them all), but I doubt many would see that as balanced. The other option is to have a monk class feature, but then there is the dipping problem. I really like the reinforced class structure of PF and would hate to give people incentives to take a level of monk for mechanical reasons (as druids would sometimes do for really cheesy reasons, for example).
Dex to damage would probably benefit the monk more than anyone, especially helping their AC problems (they don't need to worry about the armor encumbrance or dex caps) and letting them use their mobility to greatest effect (except jump, I suppose). They would still have problems if it was restricted to one weapon, though, unless they chose a monk weapon rather than unarmed strikes, or they took it twice.
Ouch, I didn't think of the druid/cleric issue with the wisdom to damage. Yea, I'll definately have to limit that in some way if I implement it. If I made it into a monk class feature I'd have to find a way to stop any dipping. There's enough crazy monk class feature dipping going on as it is...like with my npc sorceror with 1 monk level and Asetic Mage so that he can add his CHA to his AC XD
Either way, it definately looks like the standard monk is the problem child here, as usual. Though in my games I already buff them by increasing their BAB and hit points to fighter level, I'd have to do some testing to see if I really want to do any more. Though, I guess the bab boost really only changes non flurry attacks, lol.
Whilst I agree to DEX adding to damage in principal I can see it causing a whole load of problems. I see it as being a munchkin's dream. While I can see its value for someone wanting a swashbuckler type PC I just see it as being too good.
DEX is a critical stat for many classes and a darn good secondary for a lot more. DEX boosts AC, Reflex Saves, a stack of skills and Initiative. If you added "and do damage" to it as well it is just too much.
Rogues become uber-damage dealing, Monks would become sooooo nasty, Wizards/Sorcerers would be doing that little bit more damage lobbing daggers/using slings (and before anyone says anything every HP counts). Even Clerics (the traditional clumsy party member in most of the games I've played in) would boost DEX.
And what happens to the humble fighter? Why play a high strength fighter when a high dexterity one deals as much damage, has the same chance of hitting, has better reflex saves, initiative, AC...
Nice idea but open to too much abuse.
That was merely an example that higher dex means better placement of the shot
Which it already does. Higher Dex will help you place shots better with a bow; it will help you hit more often and crit more often.
|
We used a Dex-to-weapon (instead of Str) damage feat back in the day, requiring Weapon Finesse as a prereq, but ruled that it was precision damage, and therefore ineffective against critters that could be sneak attacked / critically hit. In Pathfinder, that's less of a concern, but I'm still not convinced that it matters. The Dex Fighter will still be using *two feats* to do something that a Str Fighter can do out of the box (add his best attribute modifier to attack and damage rolls).
The Str Fighter will be able to blow those feats on stuff like Power Attack and Cleave, sexy options that a low-Str, high-Dex Fighter just flat out doesn't get.
The Dex Fighter will still be using *two feats* to do something that a Str Fighter can do out of the box (add his best attribute modifier to attack and damage rolls).
When the Str fighter gets to also add his Str to his AC, touch AC, reflex saving throws, and initiative "right out of the box", you mean.
The Str Fighter will be able to blow those feats on stuff like Power Attack and Cleave, sexy options that a low-Str, high-Dex Fighter just flat out doesn't get.
Just fyi, there's significantly more feats in Pathfinder core that require high Dex than high Str. Power attack tree is the only one that requires Str (and only 13, something that even a Dex-focused fighter could probably manage), where four feat trees as well as a number of individual feats require Dex scores ranging up to 19.
Since Dexterity is already used for so many things, it seems overpowered to me to give it damage as well.
|
|
The Dex Fighter will still be using *two feats* to do something that a Str Fighter can do out of the box (add his best attribute modifier to attack and damage rolls).When the Str fighter gets to also add his Str to his AC, touch AC, reflex saving throws, and initiative "right out of the box", you mean.
Nope. I meant what I wrote, and even included the text above that I've bolded for your convenience. I did *not* say that a Str Fighter could do *everything* that a Dex Fighter with those feats could do, only that those feats allowed the Dex Fighter to do *something* that the Str Fighter could do.
Either way, it definately looks like the standard monk is the problem child here, as usual...
Actually, a 'fix' for Monks I just thought of was re: Standard Attacks.
Why not allow Monks to make Standard Attacks as if using a Primary Natural Weapon, using 1.5 STR?Probably not enough to make most people think the Monk is 100% fixed, but it seems a VERY reasonable thing to do.
Of course, it reinforces that a STR-focus build is the best way to make a Monk, as Treantmonk points out in his guide.
We used a Dex-to-weapon (instead of Str) damage feat back in the day, requiring Weapon Finesse as a prereq, but ruled that it was precision damage, and therefore ineffective against critters that could be sneak attacked / critically hit. In Pathfinder, that's less of a concern, but I'm still not convinced that it matters.
How did that feat choice work in your game (was it 3.5?)? Did everyone go the dex route? Did you run into problems with characters being overpowered?
I find that there are a lot of fearful reactions to this proposal, and having specific examples is helpful.
So far, I think we have seen that:
1) it doesn't obviously out-damage STR builds with appropriate restrictions (e.g. no TWF, no power attack or only one-handed weapons)
2) fighters won't dump STR any more than they usually dump DEX because of armor
3) armor also caps the AC bonus of increased DEX for most characters
the question is whether the non-damage benefits of higher dex are worth 2 feats and the loss of damage that the restrictions might apply. They get somewhat scaling bonuses to initiative, mobility, stealth and reflex saves and a capped AC bonus. On the other hand, CMB would be down for the Dex build, and would require another feat to equalize (agile maneuvers). Certainly a bigger boost than, say, 2 of: improved intiative, dodge, mobility, lightning reflexes. Not that many fighters would take lightning reflexes or mobility, but improved initiative is a static bonus, whereas pumping dex somewhat scales. I think it is true that they benefit more than 2 feats, but it is also true that those benefits are sub-optimal for fighters, who could use the feats to diversify their combat through things like vital strike, step up, the very nice critical feats etc. which aren’t reflected in full round DPR, but would contribute to their efficacy in combat nonetheless.
These kinds of questions could be debated endlessly, so having play tests would be the best solution IMO. Still, I don't think that the feat is wildly overpowered, or that it will lead to rampant munchkinism.
I think it is actually more of a munchkin trap - seems like a great deal, but the expected power boost won't materialize.
I can't imagine that it would be worthwhile for full casters (unless some arcane melee type), for example. ditto for barbarians as has been pointed out by others.
Actually, a 'fix' for Monks I just thought of was re: Standard Attacks.
Why not allow Monks to make Standard Attacks as if using a Primary Natural Weapon, using 1.5 STR?Probably not enough to make most people think the Monk is 100% fixed, but it seems a VERY reasonable thing to do.
Of course, it reinforces that a STR-focus build is the best way to make a Monk, as Treantmonk points out in his guide.
there was actually a feat like this from forgotten realms - hammerfist (i think). It was for dwarf monks and they used 2 hands to do it, or somesuch. never tried the feat, but it couldn't hurt. are you thinking for a feat or just house-rule?
just to be clear though, it isn't that I think that monks can't do damage if built for it (hats off to Treantmonk for his wonderful guides, and having the guts to take on monks), I guess I just prefer the flavor of a finesse monk, and of them having better defense and I am looking for a way to make that happen.
Why not just use what is already available from the Tome of Battle. It would cost 3 feats in total. If you wanted to change the weapons available that would be simple.
3 Feats is not a bad cost for this ability. Plus you get the benefits of the 2 Preq feats and what they can give you...
don't have ToB, so hard to comment. but it sounds like that feat chain actually was more effective than the feats discussed so far?
3 feats is a tall order for a low level character though - are there other prereqs that set a minimum level? I am really looking for something that lets a character start at level 1 and substitute Str as the damage stat (I tend to like starting campaigns at the beginning and sucking for 2 or 5 levels is really painful).
The Dex Fighter will still be using *two feats* to do something that a Str Fighter can do out of the box (add his best attribute modifier to attack and damage rolls).When the Str fighter gets to also add his Str to his AC, touch AC, reflex saving throws, and initiative "right out of the box", you mean.Nope. I meant what I wrote, and even included the text above that I've bolded for your convenience. I did *not* say that a Str Fighter could do *everything* that a Dex Fighter with those feats could do, only that those feats allowed the Dex Fighter to do *something* that the Str Fighter could do.
Then it's misleading. Your Dex fighter with his two feats will be doing much more with his primary ability score than a Str based fighter will be doing right out of the box. More things than he will ever do, in fact, given that there are no feats to allow you to add Str to any saves, AC, init, etc.
2) fighters won't dump STR any more than they usually dump DEX because of armor
3) armor also caps the AC bonus of increased DEX for most characters
Did you forget that fighters now have armor training which allows them to get a significantly higher max dex bonus as they level?
These things said; while I think the feat is rather better than average, I agree that it's probably not gamebreaking applied to an average fighter build. If that's what you will be using it for and you can trust your players not to abuse it (as seems to be the case), then by all means.
The main worry for me would be a rogue taking it, since for them they aren't replacing any significant Str bonus with it. Even at say a first level human rogue, assuming a 16 base and a +2 racial to his Dex, that's +4 damage for the price of a single feat. Easily better than any other feat. Scale it up to 20th level and say your rogue has a +10 or +11 Dex bonus by then... +10 damage for a single feat is light years past any other feat, and single feats shouldn't be that much better than any other.
A possible way to fix this might be ruling that the extra damage doesn't stack with sneak attack or other precision based extra dice of damage.
Did you forget that fighters now have armor training which allows them to get a significantly higher max dex bonus as they level?
No, not really. it is a higher cap, but there is a cap that means dex is giving diminishing returns to AC.
The main worry for me would be a rogue taking it, since for them they aren't replacing any significant Str bonus with it. Even at say a first level human rogue, assuming a 16 base and a +2 racial to his Dex, that's +4 damage for the price of a single feat. Easily better than any other feat. Scale it up to 20th level and say your rogue has a +10 or +11 Dex bonus by then... +10 damage for a single feat is light years past any other feat, and...
I think banning it with TWF would result in rogues doing less damage with a full round sneak attack, but more consistent damage otherwise, which strikes me as a reasonable exchange.
again, I would like to try it out and hear about experiences of others who have already. We have heard that a similar feat exists in PF, and have existed in the past in 3.5, and they didn't result in a massive switch to DEX style characters or make rogues unstoppable, for example.
I think banning it with TWF would result in rogues doing less damage with a full round sneak attack
Even if it's only working with the primary weapon, it'd still be outright better than any other feat for our neighborhood 20th level rogue.
I think banning it with TWF would result in rogues doing less damage with a full round sneak attackEven if it's only working with the primary weapon, it'd still be outright better than any other feat for our neighborhood 20th level rogue.
I think just about any rogue would want it, sure. unless they wanted to do as much damage as possible, in which case they would pump STR and take TWF, power attack, etc. It is within the rules, but it doesn't really work for me as a concept.
I think the most likely outcome for a rogue to use the feat to boost damage if they were melee based and just use it for single attacks (attacks of opportunity, spring attacks, etc.), but go with TWF for the times when they can get that full round with sneak attack in. sure, it would be a boost for rogues (but again, peak damage would still come from STR builds). personally, I don't have a problem with that.
I think banning it with TWF would result in rogues doing less damage with a full round sneak attackEven if it's only working with the primary weapon, it'd still be outright better than any other feat for our neighborhood 20th level rogue.I think just about any rogue would want it, sure. [snip] personally, I don't have a problem with that.
If that's the case, then, by all means, include it in your campaign. My opinion (besides the side note that it's unbalanced for rogues) is only that it's very easily breakable; if, as I said, you can trust your players not to break it, then you have no problem.
It is within the rules, but it doesn't really work for me as a concept.
While you could try something like that, it would work horribly as a build, so you and the rules are in perfect agreement here.
|
|
We used a Dex-to-weapon (instead of Str) damage feat back in the day, requiring Weapon Finesse as a prereq, but ruled that it was precision damage, and therefore ineffective against critters that could be sneak attacked / critically hit. In Pathfinder, that's less of a concern, but I'm still not convinced that it matters.How did that feat choice work in your game (was it 3.5?)? Did everyone go the dex route? Did you run into problems with characters being overpowered?
No one touched it. It sat there like stinky cheese, unloved. Nobody was willing to blow two feats to play a Dex Fighter, when they could play a Str Fighter and buy an armor / shield item of +X to AC at half the price that a Dex Fighter would have to spend on a weapon of +X to Atk/Dam.
My players are all about efficiency, sometimes.
Hm. So one person saying a player of his used it and it was horribly overpowered, and one saying his players never used it because they thought it would be worthless.
I wonder where the discrepancy comes from.
|
|
There was a thread bouncing around here somewhere were someone calculated the damage output of various fighter 'builds,' such as two-handed, two-weapon, sword and board, etc.
Anyone know where that is? It would see that the need for this sort of feat option would depend pretty strongly on whether or not the two-weapon fighter (which is inherently a Dex-based fighter, due to the prereqs for the various TWF feats) is 'keeping up' with the other options for damage output.
If the TWF is doing fine, then this feat isn't really needed. If TWF is lagging, perhaps it's the sort of thing that's needed to bring their numbers up.
Just a thought.
There was a thread bouncing around here somewhere were someone calculated the damage output of various fighter 'builds,' such as two-handed, two-weapon, sword and board, etc.
Anyone know where that is? It would see that the need for this sort of feat option would depend pretty strongly on whether or not the two-weapon fighter (which is inherently a Dex-based fighter, due to the prereqs for the various TWF feats) is 'keeping up' with the other options for damage output.
If the TWF is doing fine, then this feat isn't really needed. If TWF is lagging, perhaps it's the sort of thing that's needed to bring their numbers up.
Just a thought.
it is the DPR olympics.
TWF lags a bit behind 2 handed (10% or so less), but as Kolokotroni showed, this feat boosts it way above (20% or so more). So it would be overkill.
There was a thread bouncing around here somewhere were someone calculated the damage output of various fighter 'builds,' such as two-handed, two-weapon, sword and board, etc.
Anyone know where that is? It would see that the need for this sort of feat option would depend pretty strongly on whether or not the two-weapon fighter (which is inherently a Dex-based fighter, due to the prereqs for the various TWF feats) is 'keeping up' with the other options for damage output.
If the TWF is doing fine, then this feat isn't really needed. If TWF is lagging, perhaps it's the sort of thing that's needed to bring their numbers up.
Just a thought.
it is the DPR olympics.
TWF lags a bit behind 2 handed (10% or so less), but as Kolokotroni showed, this feat boosts it way above (20% or so more). So it would be overkill.
TWF has to worry about damage reduction, a lower to hit bonus, has to upkeep 2 magic weapons, and won't have as much str/con and deals with a 2 feat tax, possibly 2 more feats to dispel all the issues, and 2,000 gold pieces as well, also burns 3 feats to get it's extra attacks.
the 2hander has to give up both hands too, but has to worry a lot less from damage reduction, gets a bigger benefit from a bigger variety of damage enhancing feats, has the option of reach, requires less investment to come out ahead. does more damage in one attack than the TWF does in 2 maybe 3.
the feat being allowed to be used 2WF is technically not quite overkill. even if it does build extreme DPR.
dealing with the taxes required for dispelling the weaknesses of low str, high dex exceed the d
This is true, but like i said the fighter will have these feats, so that example is not applicable to an actual game.
Sorry, but no. Just in this thread we're talking about expanding past Core by adding in new rules or using rules in other supplements. You don't get to ignore the existence of other damage feats only when it suits you. I appreciate only using Core feats for the mathematical comparison and have no issue with that, but claiming that 2H Fighters will not have more than 5 damage feats is being obstructionist.
the 2hander has to give up both hands too, but has to worry a lot less from damage reduction, [...snip] does more damage in one attack than the TWF does in 2 maybe 3.
Really? I admit my current sword and board fighter has not yet gotten to a high enough level to test out this theory, but my rough guess is that the TWF fighter who uses Shield Mastery to attack with his shield and still keep the AC from it will generally have the best combination of full attack damage and robustness at high level. I don't really think he would be far behind a two-weapon fighter in damage. Certainly not dealing only 1/3 of the damage per attack...
TWF has to worry about damage reduction, a lower to hit bonus, has to upkeep 2 magic weapons, and won't have as much str/con and deals with a 2 feat tax, possibly 2 more feats to dispel all the issues, and 2,000 gold pieces as well, also burns 3 feats to get it's extra attacks.
the 2hander has to give up both hands too, but has to worry a lot less from damage reduction, gets a bigger benefit from a bigger variety of damage enhancing feats, has the option of reach, requires less investment to come out ahead. does more damage in one attack than the TWF does in 2 maybe 3.
the feat being allowed to be used 2WF is technically not quite overkill. even if it does build extreme DPR.
dealing with the taxes required for dispelling the weaknesses of low str, high dex exceed the d
all good points. TWF does have additional drawbacks that need to be accounted for when balancing. again, I think it is a matter of trying it out.
On a related note, I made a few low level monks, built either with STR or DEX as the primary stat, and it wasn't as cut and dry as I thought.
yes, the dex build had higher AC (comparable to a fighter) and initiative, (also reflex saves and acrobatics, but that isn't a weak spot for STR monks either). melee attacks were equal for the first 2 levels. BUT the STR build had a few advantages: the CMB of the dex build was pathetic and it didn't have the feats to take agile maneuvers, or improved grapple, so that strategy was sub-optimal for sure. The other unanticipated drawback was that flurry with shuriken becomes much less appealing - unless there is a damage bonus it is just plain sad, even if it is hitting more (d2! and enchanting them is just way to expensive), plus there are no feats to spend on quick draw.
at later levels, power attack means the STR build will start to outdamage the DEX build in most circumstances (i.e. lower AC targets).
so, on the whole, not entirely obvious, even for monks, who would seem to benefit the most. just different styles of characters. I think the dex build is truer to the monk concept, and better on defense, but failing power attack, they will do less damage. On the other hand, the STR build has more maneuver options and, surprisingly, better ranged options.
did i accidentally type exceed the d?
i meant exceed the benefits, my dad tried to rush me, he had some appointment he had to take me. turns out it was a movie theater and a movie i've already seen but realized i didn't miss much of.
I've added the following feat to my campaign.
Weapon Celerity
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Base Attack +1
While wielding a weapon listed in the Weapon Finesse feat you may use your Dex instead of Str for you damage bonus. Weapons wielded two handed in this way gain no additional damage bonus. Weapons in your off hand gain 1/2 this bonus. If you wield such a weapon in one hand with nothing in the other then you may add 1 1/2 times your Dex mod to damage. This feat can only be used while wearing medium or lighter armor and cannot be used with a shield.
I posted a more stringent version earlier on and decided to run with this version instead. So far in my game the rogue, the monk and the agent ( homebrew class I made) have the feat. The monk ended up not taking power attack because of this feat, I'll have more updates as the game progresses.
|
I've added the following feat to my campaign.
Weapon Celerity
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Base Attack +1
While wielding a weapon listed in the Weapon Finesse feat you may use your Dex instead of Str for you damage bonus. Weapons wielded two handed in this way gain no additional damage bonus. Weapons in your off hand gain 1/2 this bonus. If you wield such a weapon in one hand with nothing in the other then you may add 1 1/2 times your Dex mod to damage. This feat can only be used while wearing medium or lighter armor and cannot be used with a shield.I posted a more stringent version earlier on and decided to run with this version instead. So far in my game the rogue, the monk and the agent ( homebrew class I made) have the feat. The monk ended up not taking power attack because of this feat, I'll have more updates as the game progresses.
I'd think 1 1/2 times dex damage using a weapon one handed is likely a bad idea especially being able to be used with any weapon finesse weapon. I'd force someone to have to choose the weapon its applied to similar to weapon focus to help keep dex from being the SOLE choice.
I still think the Dervish Dance feat is a good thing to work with and just adapt (like it should have been done anyway) to fit other weapon finessable weapons.
Then again Dervish Dance does seem like a powerful feat in all it does ... but then again I've always felt the scimitar should be finessable anyway so I'm not going to fault it including that.
Why are so many people against just adapting Dervish Dance?
|
|
I've added the following feat to my campaign.
Weapon Celerity
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Base Attack +1
While wielding a weapon listed in the Weapon Finesse feat you may use your Dex instead of Str for you damage bonus. Weapons wielded two handed in this way gain no additional damage bonus. Weapons in your off hand gain 1/2 this bonus. If you wield such a weapon in one hand with nothing in the other then you may add 1 1/2 times your Dex mod to damage. This feat can only be used while wearing medium or lighter armor and cannot be used with a shield.
I like those restrictions. If you want 1.5x bonus, you've got to use a finessable weapon with nothing in the other hand, and if you're dual-wielding, the best you'll get is 1x bonus with the primary hand and .5x bonus with the off-hand. The armor / shield restriction is also neat.
Part of me wants to allow a dual-wielder to go all rapier & buckler, and get 1x bonus with the rapier and .5x bonus with the off-hand buckler hits, but I think it would be confusing to try and add that option. It's easier to just make a blanket rule of 'no shields' than to say 'no shields for 1.5x bonus, only bucklers for dual-weild use.'
Weapon Celerity [Combat Feat]
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse; Dexterity 15.
While wielding a light melee weapon you may use your Dex instead of Str for you damage bonus. Weapons in your off hand gain 1/2 this bonus. This feat can only be used while wearing light armor and carrying a light load. any armor check penalty from your worn armor and shield applies to attack rolls.
Special; If you have the double slice feat, you may add your full dex bonus to your off hand
this removes the elven curve blade cheese. but helps TWF builds deal with DR easier.
The elven curve blade is a two handed weapon. There is no cheese with the feat I wrote up. 1d6 + 1 1/2 dex is the most you're going to get without adding other bonus'.
I do like the idea of allowing Double Slice to interact with the feat, so consider that added. Thanks for pointing that out.
Improved Buckler Use
prerequisite: buckler proficiency, base attack +1
While you have a buckler in your off hand you do not count as having a buckler on, though you still receive the AC bonus from the buckler.
This allows a wizard to cast spells while wielding a weapon and allows Weapon Celerity to apply to a rapier/buckler fighter. The question, does all this really fill a niche? Is this something the game needs? Just curious.
The elven curve blade is a two handed weapon. There is no cheese with the feat I wrote up. 1d6 + 1 1/2 dex is the most you're going to get without adding other bonus'.
I do like the idea of allowing Double Slice to interact with the feat, so consider that added. Thanks for pointing that out.
Improved Buckler Use
prerequisite: buckler proficiency, base attack +1
While you have a buckler in your off hand you do not count as having a buckler on, though you still receive the AC bonus from the buckler.This allows a wizard to cast spells while wielding a weapon and allows Weapon Celerity to apply to a rapier/buckler fighter. The question, does all this really fill a niche? Is this something the game needs? Just curious.
i wasn't insulting the feat, i was talking about the elven curveblade. the most powerful core weapon. i think it's a case of "Elven Superiority". a common trope. i also had rumors of 2nd edition that i heard from friends on my mind. where elves were uber. and 3.5 where elves had more subraces and exclusive PRC's than anyone. before you count thier halfblood kin among them.
Why are so many people against just adapting Dervish Dance?
I think the main complaint is that it is too limiting and potentially "over-balanced".
It does work for the duelist concept, but doesn't allow two weapon fighting, or two handed fighting and it is not easily adapted for monks. well, I suppose the monk could take unarmed strike as the weapon, but then the monk is back to having trouble with overcoming DR. Another complaint is that it can't be taken at 1st level due to the skill prereqs, which makes for sucky level(s). Personally, I loathe the "paying your dues" philosophy of forcing players to be weak in early career to gain power later on.@Shuriken
I like the idea of armor check penalty applying, that would serve as a balancer of sorts, but more for fighters than anyone. But, I still think that power attack shouldn't be allowed with a feat like this, both for balance and for flavor. but, since we are talking homebrew, who cares?
Elven curve blade is just an adaptation of the elven court blade from races of the wild. It is a badass weapon, but I think that is only because critical hitting became so much better in PF. Still, not sure that I would call it cheese. It is only marginally better than a falchion, and certainly no more powerful than TWF with this feat (dual kukris anyone?).
No comment on the Elven resurgence other than half-orcs didn't do too badly either!
@hexcaliber
not sure about the value of the buckler feat. two weapon defense serves the same purpose for the TWF and wizards can just use a mithral buckler without the feat. although... an enchanted buckler is going to be much better AC than the feat. dunno, but I suspect it wouldn't see much play, unless I am missing something?
did you in fact rule that your feat couldn't be used with power attack?
But, I still think that power attack shouldn't be allowed with a feat like this, both for balance and for flavor. but, since we are talking homebrew, who cares?
power attack already balanced itself. huge penalties associated with the damage bonuses.
as for flavor of combining power attack with it (weapon finesse and weapon celerity), watch rurouni kenshin. pay close attention to the 2nd story arc (the Kyoto one) and watch any of the major characters, good or evil. they give good examples of how this works
There's a trait in Iron Heroes called Weapon Bond that allows you to designate ability other than strength for one type of weapon (such as long sword) when assigning damage and attack modifiers.
I once used this trait to wield my masterwork bastard sword (my katana) with my Charisma.
It was amazing. Great fun. Wish it was in any way compatible with D&D 3.5e/PFRPG without totally blowing up the system!
None of my players who took weapon celerity have nor can have power attack. They all lack the Str.
I'll have to stat up an NPC villain who does this and see how they fair. I can't imagine it would be better than a two handed fighter with powe attack. My real concern was Combat Expertese with this because it could throw the AC over the top.
The buckler feat is more of a toss out. I never found two weapon defense to be all that impressive. An enchanted buckler was what I had in mind.