~Chuckles at the argument then goes back to shredding everything in his Dex based twin handaxe wielding barbarians path.~
twin hand axes him that is an interesting thought, let me know how that works, although it sounds like it is going pretty well, and I do not doubt that a happy go lucky slashing barbarian must be a very happy one.
To Christopher Walken, you sir are alright I shall drink to your health.
Possibly, but then there are a few weapons - like the elven curveblade - that are two-handed and finesse weapons (IMHO, this category should include the katana which would be functionally the same as the elven curveblade, but that's just me) ... how about this?
Two-handed Control
You can wield a weapon that is normally one-handed with greater control as a two-handed weapon.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, weapon proficiency with the weapon chosen.
Benefit: Select one weapon you can use as a one-handed weapon. You may use this weapon two-handed as a finesse weapon. You gain the other advantages of using a two handed weapon and those of wielding it as finesse weapon.
I came up with this same exact idea, however it is such a week difference in power, that I opted for a simple weapon alteration, rather than a feat or exotic weapon.
oh as Dabbler mentioned Katanas does anyone else remember the Iajitsu master from Oriental adventures, it took a while to get the prestige class but once you did you could use katanas with weapon finesse.
I actually have been reworking that prestige class for pathfinder, it never seems that hard for updating things to pathfinder (finished most of OA, and Rokugan)
oh as Dabbler mentioned Katanas does anyone else remember the Iajitsu master from Oriental adventures, it took a while to get the prestige class but once you did you could use katanas with weapon finesse.
I actually have been reworking that prestige class for pathfinder, it never seems that hard for updating things to pathfinder (finished most of OA, and Rokugan)
Yeah, I remember it. Pretty cool class.
Something I would point out though, is that I 'really' do not see somebody finessing a Katana in one hand, and you get the exact same effect as a weapon finesse two-handed Katana out of an Elven Curve-blade, and it even comes with a higher crit-mod.
Personally, I'd just reflavor the Elven Curveblade as a Katana (infact, I'm likely going to be suggesting that to one of my players in a game I'm starting soon.
Absolutely, it pretty much is that as far as I can see!
I would call it a finesse weapon and a monk special weapon (a lot of Japanese martial arts use them) in both hands, but not in one.
~Chuckles at the argument then goes back to shredding everything in his Dex based twin handaxe wielding barbarians path.~My dual handaxe warrior does pretty damn good too. Love playing him.
Yes, if you take two light weapons it may seem counter-intuitive, but it works out better than a light and a one-handed weapon because you get the bonuses from weapon specialisation and weapon training twice.
just a point to mention, on the katana yes it does have 5% less crit chance, but it also doesn't take an extra feat to wield two handed since it is considered a masterwork bastard sword. Still you raise a point few Japanese warriors wielded a sword one handed, in fact before Miyamato Musashi it was considered in effective and pointless to wield them in that style.
Hmm wait but if he is a barbarian he does not get weapon training or weapon spec, unless he is multi classing.
on the other hand, weapon focus still counts twice, if he doesn't have that he could also choose to go battle axe, hand axe, but in general I feel it is some time better to go with a good set of balance, hand axes balance each other weight wise for the character.
just a point to mention, on the katana yes it does have 5% less crit chance, but it also doesn't take an extra feat to wield two handed since it is considered a masterwork bastard sword. Still you raise a point few Japanese warriors wielded a sword one handed, in fact before Miyamato Musashi it was considered in effective and pointless to wield them in that style.
Hmm wait but if he is a barbarian he does not get weapon training or weapon spec, unless he is multi classing.
on the other hand, weapon focus still counts twice, if he doesn't have that he could also choose to go battle axe, hand axe, but in general I feel it is some time better to go with a good set of balance, hand axes balance each other weight wise for the character.
Not to mention his preferred weapon was a staff, boken or club. He killed more men by beating them to death than by chopping them up I think ...
Yes, if you take two light weapons it may seem counter-intuitive, but it works out better than a light and a one-handed weapon because you get the bonuses from weapon specialisation and weapon training twice.~Chuckles at the argument then goes back to shredding everything in his Dex based twin handaxe wielding barbarians path.~My dual handaxe warrior does pretty damn good too. Love playing him.
This is why I have suggested a feat called Two Weapon Expertise in another thread. The feat would allow you to apply all bonuses with a one-handed weapon to a light weapon in your off hand.
Or I would just allow taking Weapon Focus: Long and Short Sword, etc. So you would get the bonus as long as you were wielding both weapons (even if you only attacked with one), but not when just wielding just the long sword or just the short sword.
I still think adding a feat to add (or replace) your Dex bonus to damage is a bad idea. ;-)
Ah, the good old Main Gauche ... how about this?
Maine Gauche
You are adept at the sword-and-dagger style of two weapon fighting.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Two-Weapon Fighting.
Benefit: You can add any bonuses to hit and damage you would normally only apply to one weapon to both, as long as you are using two finesse weapons and your off-hand weapon is a dagger. This would apply to the duelists precise strike, Improved Weapon Finesse, Power Attack/Deadly Aim and so on.
Actually that seems a little too limited. I was thinking more along the lines of:
Two Weapon Expertise
Your skill in combat with two weapons allows you to translate you expertise with your main weapon to your off hand weapon.
Prerequisites: BAB +3, Two Weapon Fighting
Benefit: You can apply any feat or abilities you possess with your main weapon to your off-hand weapon. Identical feats or abilities do not stack. Example: If a Fighter had Weapon Focus: Long sword, Weapon Focus: Short sword, Weapon Specialization: Long sword, Weapon Training: Heavy Blades +2, and Weapon Training: Light Blades +1, and was wielding a long sword and short sword, both the long sword and short sword would get +3 to hit and +4 to damage.
Actually that seems a little too limited. I was thinking more along the lines of:
Two Weapon Expertise
Your skill in combat with two weapons allows you to translate you expertise with your main weapon to your off hand weapon.
Prerequisites: BAB +3, Two Weapon Fighting
Benefit: You can apply any feat or abilities you possess with your main weapon to your off-hand weapon. Identical feats or abilities do not stack. Example: If a Fighter had Weapon Focus: Long sword, Weapon Focus: Short sword, Weapon Specialization: Long sword, Weapon Training: Heavy Blades +2, and Weapon Training: Light Blades +1, and was wielding a long sword and short sword, both the long sword and short sword would get +3 to hit and +4 to damage.
Yeah, that works!
Not to mention his preferred weapon was a staff, boken or club. He killed more men by beating them to death than by chopping them up I think ...just a point to mention, on the katana yes it does have 5% less crit chance, but it also doesn't take an extra feat to wield two handed since it is considered a masterwork bastard sword. Still you raise a point few Japanese warriors wielded a sword one handed, in fact before Miyamato Musashi it was considered in effective and pointless to wield them in that style.
Hmm wait but if he is a barbarian he does not get weapon training or weapon spec, unless he is multi classing.
on the other hand, weapon focus still counts twice, if he doesn't have that he could also choose to go battle axe, hand axe, but in general I feel it is some time better to go with a good set of balance, hand axes balance each other weight wise for the character.
that is true, he used a boken or wooden katana, which was normally used as a practice sword, he killed many men with this and he wielded it one handed most of the time which is what was so frightening about it. eventually he got his own Daisho (I think I spelled that right, I am good with history not with spelling)
that is true, he used a boken or wooden katana, which was normally used as a practice sword, he killed many men with this and he wielded it one handed most of the time which is what was so frightening about it. eventually he got his own Daisho (I think I spelled that right, I am good with history not with spelling)Not to mention his preferred weapon was a staff, boken or club. He killed more men by beating them to death than by chopping them up I think ...just a point to mention, on the katana yes it does have 5% less crit chance, but it also doesn't take an extra feat to wield two handed since it is considered a masterwork bastard sword. Still you raise a point few Japanese warriors wielded a sword one handed, in fact before Miyamato Musashi it was considered in effective and pointless to wield them in that style.
Hmm wait but if he is a barbarian he does not get weapon training or weapon spec, unless he is multi classing.
on the other hand, weapon focus still counts twice, if he doesn't have that he could also choose to go battle axe, hand axe, but in general I feel it is some time better to go with a good set of balance, hand axes balance each other weight wise for the character.
He was born into a family of minor but noble blood (when he gives his full formal name as he sees it in The Book of Five Rings, it's Shinman Musashi no Kami Fujiwara no Genshin which makes the point that his family claims to be an offshoot of the Fujiwara clan, who all but ruled the country in the 10th and 11th century, while Musashi no Kami was actually a court title which linked him to governing the Musashi province in some fashion). Thus he was allowed to wear the daisho as a symbol of his status as soon as he was old enough.
Onè of his duels was fought with a bokken he carved from an oar on the way to the duel.
I've heard that story too. He used his own apparent unpreparedness to seize the psychological initiative.
book of five rings is a good read.
And yes he should have been allowed to wear the Daisho as soon as he came of age, I just for some reason when I think about it I don't remember ever hearing him of having or using one early on.
I imagine it went something like: Wake up late. "Oh crap!" Jump in boato "Damn! Forgot my sword! What do I have? Bait knife? I'm screwed. Wait, idea!" Row, row, carve. Row, row, carve.I've heard that story too. He used his own apparent unpreparedness to seize the psychological initiative.
Onè of his duels was fought with a bokken he carved from an oar on the way to the duel.
Actually it was "guy I'm fighting is known for his skills, but I'm smart, so I'm gonna carve a bokken out of this oar that's a bit longer than usual so that I can smack him and not get hit back," more or less.
His adversary, Kojiro, used a sword that was longer than a katana but smaler than a No-dachi (some say it was a no-dachi). Musashi was strong and skilled enough to wield a boken as a weapon as deadly as a katana. And he wanted to prove a point. Which he did.
His adversary, Kojiro, used a sword that was longer than a katana but smaler than a No-dachi (some say it was a no-dachi). Musashi was strong and skilled enough to wield a boken as a weapon as deadly as a katana. And he wanted to prove a point. Which he did.
I almost put the longer sword bit in, but I couldn't quite remember if I was right or not there...thanks for confirming it. ^_^
Yes, it enabled him to use a weapon as long or slightly longer than his enemy's without looking as if that was his intention.
Having seen pictures of a better done replica he is said to have made himself of the original (with a little extra time and effort), I have no problem believing that it could be used to kill a person. Made from a nice, strong, decently heavy wood, that thing would be like smacking someone on the top of the head with an extra long baseball bat or the narrow side of an extra long cricket bat. I used to have bookmarked a page that had pics of the replica, but seems they might have been on a prior laptop. Buggery.
As far as what he used, I'm thinking it was whatever was at hand. He won his first duel with a bo staff, knocking the poor shmuck to the ground and beating him to death with it, he trained in the use of the jitte, obviously used both katana and wakizashi, he trained with monks who were renowned for their skill with yari (long spear) and polearms in general, and various and sundry other things, I'm sure.
lol ... just to make a point about the system's existing mechanic assumptions:
[sarcasm] "That Mushashi has CRAP for dexterity and no hand-eye coordination what so ever! He killed everyone 'cuz he was strong as hell and not smart at all, or interested in striking with precision. Nah ... he just muscled RIGHT through the defense of every opponent he ever encountered. Yup! That's the ticket!" [/sarcasm]
:-D
lol ... just to make a point about the system's existing mechanic assumptions:
[sarcasm] "That Mushashi has CRAP for dexterity and no hand-eye coordination what so ever! He killed everyone 'cuz he was strong as hell and not smart at all, or interested in striking with precision. Nah ... he just muscled RIGHT through the defense of every opponent he ever encountered. Yup! That's the ticket!" [/sarcasm]
:-D
Musashi is a good example of a dex fighter. much like a good portion of samurai that either made it to the history books or made it to become a character in some anime series. samurai had amazing hand/eye coordination. much better than those western fools who wore tin cans to survive.
He was supposed to be both bigger and stronger for his age than the local average at that time, but he won fights from speed, aggression, psychological advantage and skill - his father was himself a skilled swordsman and taught Musashi from an early age. There were lots of big and strong people in Japan, very few of them were amazing swordsmen.
He was supposed to be both bigger and stronger for his age than the local average at that time, but he won fights from speed, aggression, psychological advantage and skill - his father was himself a skilled swordsman and taught Musashi from an early age. There were lots of big and strong people in Japan, very few of them were amazing swordsmen.
[sarcasm]"What's this 'skill' nonsense? No skill needed here! Just wind up and smash 'em hard! Strength wins all fights! Not 'skill', boy! Skills are for sissies wearing frilly hats and pantaloons!!!" [/sarcasm]
;-)
Musashi is a good example of a dex fighter. much like a good portion of samurai that either made it to the history books or made it to become a character in some anime series. samurai had amazing hand/eye coordination. much better than those western fools who wore tin cans to survive.lol ... just to make a point about the system's existing mechanic assumptions:
[sarcasm] "That Mushashi has CRAP for dexterity and no hand-eye coordination what so ever! He killed everyone 'cuz he was strong as hell and not smart at all, or interested in striking with precision. Nah ... he just muscled RIGHT through the defense of every opponent he ever encountered. Yup! That's the ticket!" [/sarcasm]
:-D
Musashi did also armor himself up more than a few times, just not for individual duels. He participated in several large battles, though mostly on the losing side, from what I remember.
Besides, having seen people in full plate doing tumbling routines and having watched an actual German longsword (hand-and-a-half or two-hander) fighting demonstration, "those western fools" were no strangers to dexterity, themselves.
I think the Conan RPG had it about right. It gave weapon finesse away for free, essentially, but only with specific weapons. I do like the idea of the "dex for damage instead of str" feat, though, personally.
Yeah .... all sass aside, *most* of us that have been contributing think it's worthwhile to at least pursue as an option.
:shrugs:
It's just so EASY to make fun of the "str is king" design paradigm D20's rule set bought into (and that PF propagates).
Just for the record, Musashi is a poor example of a dex fighter. He was MUCH larger and stronger than all his opponents, according to most acounts. In fact, Nitten was created simply because it was easier for him to wield a Katana and a Wakisashi in each hand with precision, because of his strength and size. I'm not saying he wasn't dextrous or an AWESOME warrior, he was, but without his "natural" advantages (Strength and size) he wouldn't become the legend he became.
Note that a katana is simply a bastard sword, and a courtblade is an exotic two handed weapon. You need exotic for the courtblade, but exotic gets you the katana one-handed. Personally I'd just use a longsword and two-hand it as needed for the extra dmg. The extra 2.5 avg dmg vs being able to use a shield when needed? Defense keeps you in the fight.
I'll note that the majority of OA classes, like most Prestige Classes, are just feat trees. The IM shouldn't really exist...it's just a collection of Iajitsu Feats.
==Aelryinth
Just for the record, Musashi is a poor example of a dex fighter. He was MUCH larger and stronger than all his opponents, according to most acounts. In fact, Nitten was created simply because it was easier for him to wield a Katana and a Wakisashi in each hand with precision, because of his strength and size. I'm not saying he wasn't dextrous or an AWESOME warrior, he was, but without his "natural" advantages (Strength and size) he wouldn't become the legend he became.
Yes, but being strong didn't win you fights as much as being fast when your weapons are that lethal. Musashi often won fights by getting the first blow in - his size and strength just meant that a club in his hands was as lethal as a katana in the hands of a smaller man and tended to end the fight.
Just for the record, Musashi is a poor example of a dex fighter. He was MUCH larger and stronger than all his opponents, according to most acounts. In fact, Nitten was created simply because it was easier for him to wield a Katana and a Wakisashi in each hand with precision, because of his strength and size. I'm not saying he wasn't dextrous or an AWESOME warrior, he was, but without his "natural" advantages (Strength and size) he wouldn't become the legend he became.Yes, but being strong didn't win you fights as much as being fast when your weapons are that lethal. Musashi often won fights by getting the first blow in - his size and strength just meant that a club in his hands was as lethal as a katana in the hands of a smaller man and tended to end the fight.
Yes. Imp. Initiative and high dex. :) I find it hard to compare musashi to the thread above.
Just for the record, Musashi is a poor example of a dex fighter. He was MUCH larger and stronger than all his opponents, according to most acounts. In fact, Nitten was created simply because it was easier for him to wield a Katana and a Wakisashi in each hand with precision, because of his strength and size. I'm not saying he wasn't dextrous or an AWESOME warrior, he was, but without his "natural" advantages (Strength and size) he wouldn't become the legend he became.
Point stands that D20's str emphasis does NOT handle "realism" in combat even slightly.
Musashi is a good example of someone that was strong, agile, and incredibly fast.
D20's design rewards only the one in combat to the exclusion of the others presently, thus, the bulk of Musashi's effectiveness in D20 would be revolving around his Str and to be "optimized" he would be a str-heavy build to the near exclusion of everything else we know about him historically.
Compare it to a more "realistic" system like say GURPS and it's more likely that, while strong, his key/definining attribute would be dexterity in order to make him a great warrior (as it determines skill in combat over all else - str ONLY works out damage inflicted, weight moved, encumbrance, etc). He'd be an "agile" fighter in the one system and devastatingly effective in his build for the investment - and the system integrates *most* things that impact combat in a realistic manner for the most part. To do the same in D20, you HAVE to beef up Str ... and we know the guy was more than just brawn at work. If anything, there's greater evidence to say his speed and skill were the greater factors (ie: dexterity by d20).
:shrugs:
This same would hold true for *most* historically "great" warriors - they were more than muscles on muscles (unless you read stuff like Homer as fully "spot on" accurate in describing the likes of Achilles killing literally WAVES and hundreds of Trojans with a single swing of the arm because he was so strong and overwhelming a force on the field of battle).
At the same time, note the derision I placed upon the "pantaloon" wearing dex-only concept. I do not claim Musashi to be one of these either - the whole point was about the DESIGN PARADIGM and not Musashi, though he was on hand at the moment.
Point stands that D20's str emphasis does NOT handle "realism" in combat even slightly.
Musashi is a good example of someone that was strong, agile, and incredibly fast.
D20's design rewards only the one in combat to the exclusion of the others presently, thus, the bulk of Musashi's effectiveness in D20 would be revolving around his Str and to be "optimized" he would be a str-heavy build to the near exclusion of everything else we know about him historically.
Exactly - Musashi would actually qualify for the example of somebody with high strength AND high dexterity maximising his damage potential from BOTH of those features.
I'd like to put up a quick post voting against a feat to give full Dex mod to damage on weapon finessed attacks. I figure people from Paizo probably read this stuff, and I'd really hate that feat. A lot of other people I know would hate it too. Even some who think it would be great would probably later regret having it around. This was much the case when we used 3.5's Tome of Battle. It looked pretty cool, but soon there were very badly broken PCs running around (often with Dex to damage) and things were out of control. Several DMs banned the book, and I'd hate to see Pathfinder tread the same broken roads 3.5 fell off.
Of course if this many people want bonus damage for Dex based fighters I suppose Paizo might have to do something. Maybe a feat more like Power Attack for Dex would be better here, something which scales in a controllable way. I mean, if it were "Precision Attack" instead of Power Attack and had a fairly high Dex prereq it would let halfling bards and whoever get some bonus damage without unsettling things. The bonus damage on Power Attack is theoretically balanced against the penalty to hit. Sure, the Dex fighter still wouldn't be getting any bonus damage from his Dex, but the Str fighter isn't getting any bonus AC or Reflex saves from his Str either.
I'd like to put up a quick post voting against a feat to give full Dex mod to damage on weapon finessed attacks. I figure people from Paizo probably read this stuff, and I'd really hate that feat. A lot of other people I know would hate it too. Even some who think it would be great would probably later regret having it around. This was much the case when we used 3.5's Tome of Battle. It looked pretty cool, but soon there were very badly broken PCs running around (often with Dex to damage) and things were out of control. Several DMs banned the book, and I'd hate to see Pathfinder tread the same broken roads 3.5 fell off.
Of course if this many people want bonus damage for Dex based fighters I suppose Paizo might have to do something. Maybe a feat more like Power Attack for Dex would be better here, something which scales in a controllable way. I mean, if it were "Precision Attack" instead of Power Attack and had a fairly high Dex prereq it would let halfling bards and whoever get some bonus damage without unsettling things. The bonus damage on Power Attack is theoretically balanced against the penalty to hit. Sure, the Dex fighter still wouldn't be getting any bonus damage from his Dex, but the Str fighter isn't getting any bonus AC or Reflex saves from his Str either.
I'd *hope* they don't make the same design mistakes ... after all, the fall out is still pretty recent on ToB's front, no?
That said, I'm not about clinging to sacred meat for the sake of it being "sacred" either.
I do find your alternative idea, a sort of PA mechanic applying to dex-based damage as ... very interesting, however.
Nice to get a nay-sayer come in with something positive for a change, though. *thumbs up*
Exactly - Musashi would actually qualify for the example of somebody with high strength AND high dexterity maximising his damage potential from BOTH of those features.
Exactly!
Weren't we talking about the stacking potential just a few pages back?
It's Musashi!!!!
We're on the path to letting a living, breathing (figuratively speaking for fictional characters anyway), Musashi walk the game worlds fully realized!!!
I, for one, am now THAT much more excited about the premise.
:-D
I'd like to put up a quick post voting against a feat to give full Dex mod to damage on weapon finessed attacks.
I vote FOR the idea of a feat that allows dex damage to be added to finesse weapons, along the lines of the feat I suggested. We already have a power-attack like feat that adds damage, it's called Deadly Aim and it just needs the scope expanding a little to finesse weapons, and that is a separate issue. Everything I have seen so far has convinced me that doing this is NOT broken, would not result in death and woe, but would enable many people's favourite fighter concept to become viable.
From what the Paizo folks have already posted in this thread they are thinking along similar lines, and about time too I say!
Tome of Battle having a "fallout" or being "overpowered" is just lame :|
Tome of Battle having a "fallout" or being "overpowered" is just lame :|
The problem with ToB was not it being over or underpowered, it's that it kind of re-wrote the rules on melee characters, making existing ones in effect less effective by comparison. The changes we are proposing don't effect existing builds based on strength, they are as effective as ever.
Tome of Battle having a "fallout" or being "overpowered" is just lame :|The problem with ToB was not it being over or underpowered, it's that it kind of re-wrote the rules on melee characters, making existing ones in effect less effective by comparison. The changes we are proposing don't effect existing builds based on strength, they are as effective as ever.In fact, if not working with a concept, I'd have to say the people in my games have generally gone for the Strength meelee approach instead, because it means they have two more feats to work with to diversify their options.
Also an interesting side note, ToB did make Meelees more entertaining and diverse, but it didn't make them any more powerful than 3.5 Splat Melee was. There were maybe 12 different potential builds that outperformed ToB melees in an area of effective expertise, such as rape-pouncing.
The problem was not with the ToB classes in 3.5, though. Yeah, sure, any of them were better than the fighter, but in 3.5, fighters sucked. It took the super broken stuff like getting pounce to make them even halfway worthwhile. All ToB did was give melee people classes in Tier 3. Previously, the best they could hope for was classes that were good (but not the best) at something (I.E. Tier 4, and the fighter was Tier 5), but that something was almost never non-magic-using combat. Lords of Kobol forbid non-casters actually get nice things in 3.5.
Calling ToB classes and stuff in there broken because it was better than the fighter in 3.5 is hilarious to me. It's like calling the fighter and barbarian broken because they're better than the Complete Warrior Samurai or the Warrior.
I'd also like to add that Pathfinder fighters are leaps and bounds ahead of their 3.5 counterpart. They've got nothing to fear from ToB, mechanically.
Besides, I don't think we're talking about adding dex and strength to damage...are we? That could get a little crazy, yeah, but dex instead of strength would be fine, and allow for a lot of concepts that don't really work right now (any sort of swashbuckler comes to mind...they aren't all rogues!).
Actually, we've run the numbers and it works if you restrict the dex damage to needing feats and working with finesse weapons only.
Put it this way, your 18 Str 14 dex fighter with a two-handed sword is doing 2d6+6 damage as base, while your finesse fighter with 14 str and 18 dex with a rapier and adding dex and strength to damage is doing 1d6+6.
Replacing strength with dex can make strength a 'dump stat', which makes no sense for melee combat.
In practice, adding dex to strength plays catch-up with strength only - if you go through the thread above you'll see the number-crunched examples we've worked through.
Actually, we've run the numbers and it works if you restrict the dex damage to needing feats and working with finesse weapons only.
Put it this way, your 18 Str 14 dex fighter with a two-handed sword is doing 2d6+6 damage as base, while your finesse fighter with 14 str and 18 dex with a rapier and adding dex and strength to damage is doing 1d6+6.
Replacing strength with dex can make strength a 'dump stat', which makes no sense for melee combat.
In practice, adding dex to strength plays catch-up with strength only - if you go through the thread above you'll see the number-crunched examples we've worked through.
It works until you get a 30 Dex dude with 24 Strength. Adding is hardly a good idea.