|
If there's anything this has answered, it's that weapon finesse is viable for one type of one class, not any combinations or any other classes. Even as an archer character, you do such little damage without strength in melee that you may as well serve the bad guy a cup of tea to go with your soothing massage.
Err So? Archers will not be as dangerous in melee as characters designed for melee, this is not a terrible thing.
Even if the feat is only viable for rogues (I'll accept that for the moment) that's fine with me. Arcane strike is really only useful for bards. Extra Rage is only useful for barbarians. Weapon Specialization is only useful for fighters...
Some feats aren't for all classes.
I consider it a necessary feat for my 3rd level human wizard when he occasionally has to defend himself in melee.
Stats:
STR 10
CON 12
DEX 16
INT 16
WIS 8
CHA 12
That +3 to his tiny BAB from weapon finesse means he can actually hit with that rapier and do 1d6. It also means his touch AC is 13. Yes, he does most of his damage with spells. But when he's out of offensive spells or doesn't have time to cast, he can protect himself to a point. Likewise, it means his REF and WILL saves are both pretty decent. Moreover, it works for his concept - a clever, nimble, somewhat naive or trusting, pleasant young man with decent health and average muscle. In time, no, it won't matter too much. But at low levels, it has been a lifesaver on numerous occasions.
So Str as adump stat is bad, but Cha as a dump stat is okay???
Any stat can be a dump stat for the right character. Weapon Celerity was made to allow and to some degree encourage Dex based combat types. The game as is over-encourages high Str. Without this feat the game exist as is, with the feat I have a twin rapier rogue that doesn't always have to move into flank to deal damage, a small Druid who is deadly in his animal forms, a monk who isn't Str dependant and an agent (homebrew class) who can deal a fair amount of damage as well. Does a Power Attacking fighter type do more damage? Yes! But, I get a little sick and tired of seeing the same types of characters across the table. Two-handed with PA is all a fighter is with the current rules, I prefer to see more diversity.
I for one believe this thread has proven it's point. Without homebrew material Weapon Finesse works for one type of character only, and many people will base an opinion on absolutely nothing. I wanted to see how a Dex damage feat would work out and it hasn't torn my campaign apart (4 years running as of this month, 8 players and three sets of characters all in the same homebrewed world).
If you want to SAY it'll break a game without any facts to support it then do so. I will enjoy knowing the truth.
If there is anything the DPR olympics have shown, it is that getting +1 to attack is better than +1 to damage. Weapon Finesse is a perfectly viable feat for characters to take, it significantly increases their DPR.
If you must have a feat that gives you bonus damage for your weapon finesser, I'd present the following:
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: You deal +1 sneak attack damage. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the bonus to damage increases by +1.
Special: The bonus sneak attack damage does not stack with the rogue's sneak attack class ability or any other source of sneak attack. Furthermore the sneak attack damage granted by this feat cannot be used to qualify for a prestige class or feat that requires sneak attack.
WoTC put out a feat that allows dex to damage.
Pathfinder put out a feat that allows dex to dmg...Twice! once for xbows and once for scimitars.
Testing has shown that Dex to dmg doesn't break anything.
I think we can all safely say that if you force a character to spend two feats to max out his dex/weapon mix, there's nothing wrong with it.
==Aelryinth
So Str as adump stat is bad, but Cha as a dump stat is okay???
Yes, for a fighter. No for a sorcerer. But strangely, these feats are more about fighting than sorcery, so the classes that will use them the most will be the ones for whom they are broken.
Would you support a feat that let a sorcerer begin play with a 6 CHA and just his DEX for his spellcasting? I wouldn't. Suddenly he is just as powerful as a normal sorcerer but with a 20 DEX, too, with all the benefits of high AC, fast initiative, better CMD, awesome ranged attacks, great REF saves - all the stuff normal sorcerers don't have.
If he wants a super-nimble sorcerer with tons of DEX, he's going to have to deal with trying to figure out how to have a high DEX -AND- a high CHA, hard to do. But just giving it away and letting him dump his primary spellcasting stat into DEX would be massively broken.
Just like letting a fighter dump all his STR into DEX (with some of the spillover going into CON). Such a fighter would have more AC, more HP, higher REF save, higher FORT save, faster Init, better CMD, and overall better skills, all while having the same hit and damage as a normal fighter.
Broken.
Any stat can be a dump stat for the right character. Weapon Celerity was made to allow and to some degree encourage Dex based combat types.
I am all for encouraging that, and I have agreed that something should be done along this front.
I just don't think breaking the system is the right thing to fix it.
Two-handed with PA is all a fighter is with the current rules, I prefer to see more diversity.
Me too.
But I still want someone to consider playing a 2H fighter with PA, which wouldn't be the case if we break the system and make DEX the only combat stat that matters.
I for one believe this thread has proven it's point. Without homebrew material Weapon Finesse works for one type of character only,
Agreed.
and many people will base an opinion on absolutely nothing.
This thread has proven that?
I wanted to see how a Dex damage feat would work out and it hasn't torn my campaign apart (4 years running as of this month, 8 players and three sets of characters all in the same homebrewed world).
If you want to SAY it'll break a game without any facts to support it then do so. I will enjoy knowing the truth.
Do you roll for ability scores? That makes a huge difference, as I've mentioned upthread. Do you have other home-brew stuff that helps balance this out?
Because, I have facts, too. I used a feat exactly like the Greater Celerity propoesed in this thread for many years playing 3.5. I also used a point-buy system. During this time I had RPers, min-maxers, munchkins, good players, bad players. Lots of players of all sorts.
I found that, among the melee classes, everyone wanted to be a Drizzt-clone with a super DEX and while they didn't all drop their STR below 10, very few of them put any points into it. I found that almost nobody wanted to be the big brute fighter unless it was for RP reasons. And when they did, if there was a Drizzt-clone in the group, he usually embarrassed the big brute fighter by having better all-around combat capability.
I fixed it by houseruling some prerequisites on the feat, much like the ones I have proposed here. Now the DEX guys had something to work for, and couldn't cripple their STR because it's hard to survive 4 levels of combat with a 6 STR. And the STR guys weren't so outclassed by the less-super DEX guys.
Maybe your 8 players do things differently, or maybe some of your other homebrew stuff makes it less of a concern, or whatever. But my experience differs greatly from yours.
I consider it a necessary feat for my 3rd level human wizard when he occasionally has to defend himself in melee.
I don't believe that 3rd level wizards belong in melee. I'd rather suggest you take something to help you stay out of melee.
Eventually you might be, say a 12th level wizard, and weapon finesse or no weapon finesse... it's not going to matter.
Hrm...everyone typically assumes you're fighting CR = Level opponents (where wizard in melee = suicide); but you can get swarmed by much lower level targets as well. That's the sort of case where you can't avoid melee (too many targets), but having a +hit boost that's large comparative to your BaB will help. Not to mention that Wizards can get AoO's as well - before he even gets a chance to move. 15% more chance to hit? Good thing - could stop a grapple, which would shut you down entirely.
But of course wizards should avoid melee - but one feat to help you survive it when it happens? Not a terrible idea. And yeah, it sure helps on those touch based attacks. Personally, though, I took Leadership to give me defense against melee ^_^.
If there is anything the DPR olympics have shown, it is that getting +1 to attack is better than +1 to damage. Weapon Finesse is a perfectly viable feat for characters to take, it significantly increases their DPR.
If you must have a feat that gives you bonus damage for your weapon finesser, I'd present the following:
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: You deal +1 sneak attack damage. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the bonus to damage increases by +1.
Special: The bonus sneak attack damage does not stack with the rogue's sneak attack class ability or any other source of sneak attack. Furthermore the sneak attack damage granted by this feat cannot be used to qualify for a prestige class or feat that requires sneak attack.
That doesn't help a bit. I think just about everyone on this thread agrees that the Rogue is the one class that can take full advantage of the Weapon Finesse feat as-is. Creating a new feat to make the rogue, and only the rogue, shine even further is going the opposite direction of the main thrust of this thread.
Even if it was needed, a meager little +4 damage at 20th level, when the rogue without this feat is dishing out an average of 60ish points per hit, probably isn't worth a feat. If nothing else, it's woefully misnamed.
|
|
WoTC put out a feat that allows dex to damage.
Pathfinder put out a feat that allows dex to dmg...Twice! once for xbows and once for scimitars.
Testing has shown that Dex to dmg doesn't break anything.
I think we can all safely say that if you force a character to spend two feats to max out his dex/weapon mix, there's nothing wrong with it.
Excellent, then there is no problem, use those feats.
If there is anything the DPR olympics have shown, it is that getting +1 to attack is better than +1 to damage. Weapon Finesse is a perfectly viable feat for characters to take, it significantly increases their DPR.
If you must have a feat that gives you bonus damage for your weapon finesser, I'd present the following:
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: You deal +1 sneak attack damage. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the bonus to damage increases by +1.
Special: The bonus sneak attack damage does not stack with the rogue's sneak attack class ability or any other source of sneak attack. Furthermore the sneak attack damage granted by this feat cannot be used to qualify for a prestige class or feat that requires sneak attack.That doesn't help a bit. I think just about everyone on this thread agrees that the Rogue is the one class that can take full advantage of the Weapon Finesse feat as-is. Creating a new feat to make the rogue, and only the rogue, shine even further is going the opposite direction of the main thrust of this thread.
Even if it was needed, a meager little +4 damage at 20th level, when the rogue without this feat is dishing out an average of 60ish points per hit, probably isn't worth a feat. If nothing else, it's woefully misnamed.
No no, the special specifically does not make it stack with the rogue's sneak attack - it gives everybody else a tiny sneak attack progression.
And at level 20 it would be +6.
|
|
WoTC put out a feat that allows dex to damage.
Pathfinder put out a feat that allows dex to dmg...Twice! once for xbows and once for scimitars.
Let me make a more practical reply.
I'm not entirely familiar with WotC's feats, there were many and many were horrible or broken so I'm not going to comment on that.
Why would you make a feat that grants a bonus to a few specific weapons when a more generic one would do the job? What that proves to me is that Paizo wanted to grant a bonus in a specific case without making a huge change to the basic game system. The scimitar and the crossbow are good examples because there are built in controls in those weapons.
Scimitar cannot be used in an off hand for TWF. It is also a martial weapon that requires a feat for most classes to use.
Crossbow cannot have strength damage applied to it. Also, that feat is at the end of a fairly long feat chain.
If there is anything the DPR olympics have shown, it is that getting +1 to attack is better than +1 to damage. Weapon Finesse is a perfectly viable feat for characters to take, it significantly increases their DPR.
If you must have a feat that gives you bonus damage for your weapon finesser, I'd present the following:
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: You deal +1 sneak attack damage. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every 4 points thereafter, the bonus to damage increases by +1.
Special: The bonus sneak attack damage does not stack with the rogue's sneak attack class ability or any other source of sneak attack. Furthermore the sneak attack damage granted by this feat cannot be used to qualify for a prestige class or feat that requires sneak attack.That doesn't help a bit. I think just about everyone on this thread agrees that the Rogue is the one class that can take full advantage of the Weapon Finesse feat as-is. Creating a new feat to make the rogue, and only the rogue, shine even further is going the opposite direction of the main thrust of this thread.
Even if it was needed, a meager little +4 damage at 20th level, when the rogue without this feat is dishing out an average of 60ish points per hit, probably isn't worth a feat. If nothing else, it's woefully misnamed.
No no, the special specifically does not make it stack with the rogue's sneak attack - it gives everybody else a tiny sneak attack progression.
And at level 20 it would be +6.
Ah, then, you should update it to be more clear. When I see "+1 Sneak Attack" I think you are adding to Sneak Attack, which would usually mean you must first have Sneak Attack in order to have something to add to.
I wouldn't think +1 Caster Level would apply to a fighter any more than I think +1 Sneak Attack will.
And you're right, a full BAB class would be +6 at 20th level, but my reference was to a rogue who never gets a BAB of 16 or 20, so would cap at +4.
Oh, and since anyone can do this, then yes, it does make the idea of the feat quite a bit more appealing. But why not just make a DEX version of Power Attack and call it good? No new mechanics to learn, just the same old mechanic applied to a different ability score.
That aside, your feat would probably be just as useful as most combat feats, meaing, if you build your character for it, it's awesome, otherwise, it's probably not worth it - which can be said of ~80% of the combat-related feats, so no, that's not picking on your or your feat.
... Crossbow cannot have strength damage applied to it. Also, that feat is at the end of a fairly long feat chain.
Sorry, but I must have missed this Pathfinder feat - where can I find it?
As far as a feat adding dex to damage, I'm with DM Blake that if a new feat were to be created it should add 1/2 dex to damage and add with strength bonus. A feat adding full dex to damage that works with two weapon fighting is just stacking too many good things on one ability score.
Ah, then, you should update it to be more clear. When I see "+1 Sneak Attack" I think you are adding to Sneak Attack, which would usually mean you must first have Sneak Attack in order to have something to add to.I wouldn't think +1 Caster Level would apply to a fighter any more than I think +1 Sneak Attack will.
And you're right, a full BAB class would be +6 at 20th level, but my reference was to a rogue who never gets a BAB of 16 or 20, so would cap at +4.
I fully agree - I used the term "sneak attack" for the sake of brevity.
That aside, do you think the weapon-finessers would be happy to use such a feat? Maybe modify it as follows:
(version 2)
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: When you attack an opponent that is flat-footed or that you flank you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to calculate damage
Special: A character that has the sneak attack class ability gains no benefit from this feat
I consider it a necessary feat for my 3rd level human wizard when he occasionally has to defend himself in melee.
I don't believe that 3rd level wizards belong in melee. I'd rather suggest you take something to help you stay out of melee.
Eventually you might be, say a 12th level wizard, and weapon finesse or no weapon finesse... it's not going to matter.
Hrm...everyone typically assumes you're fighting CR = Level opponents (where wizard in melee = suicide); but you can get swarmed by much lower level targets as well. That's the sort of case where you can't avoid melee (too many targets), but having a +hit boost that's large comparative to your BaB will help. Not to mention that Wizards can get AoO's as well - before he even gets a chance to move. 15% more chance to hit? Good thing - could stop a grapple, which would shut you down entirely.
But of course wizards should avoid melee - but one feat to help you survive it when it happens? Not a terrible idea. And yeah, it sure helps on those touch based attacks. Personally, though, I took Leadership to give me defense against melee ^_^.
Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what kind of situation I'm talking about. Like the time we got jumped by about a dozen goblins - the fighter was fighting against half of them himself and doing quite well, but they didn't all go for him. Three decided that my skinny, unarmored character was just the thing.
Drizzt clones? Wow! I haven't played with people who've done that since 2nd Ed! Two weapon fighting used to be more ineffectual than it is now. Granted, with today's rogues, rangers, paladins, cavaliers and inquisitors two weapon fighting can deal out the hurt, but is still weaker unless it's a full round attack.
As Jean above shows it really is how you play it. He (she?) has made a perfectly viable fighter type. With the stats the way they are Power Attack might've been a better choice than WF, but that's a -2 to hit for a +2 to damage (+1 in the off hand). So if he(she?) fought something with a very low AC then he'd (she'd?) be missing out, but at 1st level many things have anywhere from a 14 to 18 AC, so he's (she's?) doing something right.
Kudos to you Jean.
Edit: before I get flamed (probably deservedly so) I know two Jean's, only one of which is a guy.
(version 2)
You are able to take advantage of foes who aren't paying full attention to you.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, Dexterity 15
Benefit: When you attack an opponent that is flat-footed or that you flank you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to calculate damage
Special: A character that has the sneak attack class ability gains no benefit from this feat
Wow! Pretty cool concept here ... I'm not the greatest fan overall of the "flank/flat" thing, BUT ... pretty cool.
My thoughts here:
1) flank/flat is where the damage dealing potential needs to rely for the rogue-types. They NEED to be using SA as much as possible, IMO. PF gave them that d8 hd boost, and it's a great asset for them in hangin' and bangin' with melee. If they've been empowered, it's with "staying power" for melee durability. For them, finesse is the way to bump the bab and "to hit" chances ... that's it. SA does SO much more damage that any further investment is probably better spent elsewhere.
2) 2-wpn guys that are NOT rangers (a proven *poor* choice via Treantmonk's guide if nothing else), are in a rough spot, though. They need to boost dex constantly just to hit their concept requisites ... but their damage is only impacted by Str. Of necessity, they're being pulled in opposite directions, and IF they can't hit/connect with those 2-hand attacks, then their entire combat style is nothing but a feat sink-hole ... and THAT sucks WAY more than anything else. So, IMO, the *only* concept that needs this kind of a damage-boosting feat to help along beyond what WF already grants is the non-SA character concepts (ie: 2-wpn rangers, or fighters). Feats should focus on these guys for improvement and let rogues waste 'em if they want by choosing 'em. For the dedicated 2-wpn dudes, it's STILL a massive feat-sink and investment that would (essentially) just add one more feat to the crazy "must have" list that already exists ... and their damage output won't even approach the bonus SA damage either.
The SA guys get plenty of damage by doing what they're supposed to in the first place - let 'em work it out that way.
The 2-wpn guys (non SA types) really do need something/anything to help them out, though. Even something like "add 1/2 dex" to damage, or "add 1/2 dex instead of str" to daamge, would help a lot in terms of just making the concept a bit more viable and competitive compared to other styles.
A weapon finesser is not only going to do less damage, they are also going to have a higher AC.
Does that balance out?
A higher AC than who?
{definitely doesn't balance out, though - but I don't think they'll have a better AC}
Sword + board can do the 2-wpn AND get even more AC overall ...
2-handed already does more damage overall, and gets more opportunities to dish out that damage (ie: 2-wpn is only for Full Attacks vs. Standard). So ... he does more damage (AC *may* be less, though - depends I guess).
Hrm...everyone typically assumes you're fighting CR = Level opponents (where wizard in melee = suicide); but you can get swarmed by much lower level targets as well. That's the sort of case where you can't avoid melee (too many targets), but having a +hit boost that's large comparative to your BaB will help. Not to mention that Wizards can get AoO's as well - before he even gets a chance to move. 15% more chance to hit? Good thing - could stop a grapple, which would shut you down entirely.But of course wizards should avoid melee - but one feat to help you survive it when it happens? Not a terrible idea. And yeah, it sure helps on those touch based attacks. Personally, though, I took Leadership to give me defense against melee ^_^.
I would suggest that a feat that doesn't scale and will help less and less as you level isn't that good of a choice.
As you, yourself said, you went with leadership. It's a better call in that it at least scales with level.
I would suggest that the OP look at consumables to handle 'mooks' rather than a feat to let his 'skinny, unarmored character' deal with them.
Consider a staff of burning hands for around 2,160gp or so that would deal 5d4 to all 3 goblins, instead of a feat that improves his chances of dealing 1d6 damage to one of them. Or simply pull out that level 1 wand of magic missiles (750gp) that will average better damage.
Do the math and let's use expected damage rather than spikes, as characters have to live through the long haul:
15% chance to deal 3.5 damage is around half a point of damage more for having the feat. Regardless you have a chance to miss with or without it.
A level 1 magic missile wand will deal 3.5 surely to one.
And a staff of burning hands will deal 6.25 surely (12.5 on failed save) to one or more... if you're being 'swarmed' then this is a damage based solution at your level.I'd go with the devices and use the feats to improve your character. They do the job better and you're not permanently...
Yes, but when you adventure with the equipment your character actually has, instead of what would be optimal...
You know, I get that this is conversation primarily about damage and all, but what about a WF-user slapping on Agile Maneuvers and focusing on Tripping/Disarming people? A high Dex means a big payoff for Combat Reflexes...
The assumption is that a person who focuses on a finesse weapon can also focus on having a high dex, whereas a person who focuses on a non-finesse weapon must, at the very best, focus their stats between str and dex. The one who has a higher dex will have a higher AC. After all, I know of no rules which say that a sword and board guy can't focus on finesse.
Ok, but wouldn't the guy w/the sword and board, bashing, 2wpn build also need a pretty high dexterity, though? He's also got the Shield AC bonus going on too ... Advantage goes to Sword and Board on AC guy (needs to still split abilities like the 2-wpn guy, and still has Dex as a premium to qualify for the feats in the first place).
I'm not seeing the 2-wpn guy w/a higher AC for his efforts ... at all.
Oo!!! Hey, new thought:
What *IF* for 2-wpns users, they can (as a standard action) make 1 attack from each hand?
as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
...Actually, it was shown that a heavy strength big weapon rogue is MORE then viable, and at times better then the dual wielder ;p
Strength is very much relevant when compared to 3.5 damage (which is what a d6 is)
|
|
as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
...Actually, it was shown that a heavy strength big weapon rogue is MORE then viable, and at times better then the dual wielder ;p
Strength is very much relevant when compared to 3.5 damage (which is what a d6 is)
For certain definitions of "viable". The finesse rogue is always going to be better at all the skills which define the class. A hard hitting strength based rogue could be super fun to play and I'm not trying to cut that concept down but there are advantages in the game other than just combat. It could be argued that the whole reason finesse exists is to make rogues able to be good at being skills monkeys and still capable in combat.
For certain definitions of "viable". The finesse rogue is always going to be better at all the skills which define the class. A hard hitting strength based rogue could be super fun to play and I'm not trying to cut that concept down but there are advantages in the game other than just combat. It could be argued that the whole reason finesse exists is to make rogues able to be good at being skills monkeys and still capable in combat.as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
...Actually, it was shown that a heavy strength big weapon rogue is MORE then viable, and at times better then the dual wielder ;p
Strength is very much relevant when compared to 3.5 damage (which is what a d6 is)
There's strength skills too, you know :U
|
|
For certain definitions of "viable". The finesse rogue is always going to be better at all the skills which define the class. A hard hitting strength based rogue could be super fun to play and I'm not trying to cut that concept down but there are advantages in the game other than just combat. It could be argued that the whole reason finesse exists is to make rogues able to be good at being skills monkeys and still capable in combat.There's strength skills too, you know :U
I assume that's meant to be a joke... I have given a rogue player a hard time in the past because he couldn't climb (at all).
as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
...Actually, it was shown that a heavy strength big weapon rogue is MORE then viable, and at times better then the dual wielder ;p
Strength is very much relevant when compared to 3.5 damage (which is what a d6 is)
Professor, PLEASE! Cite your sources.
Professor, PLEASE! Cite your sources.as long as you have an additonal source of dmg on you hits then finesse is viable.
e.g. sneak attack loves finesse , since it give char high AC high attack , bonus dmg possibel gained from Strength is irrelvant in comparison to the bonus d6's
also many monsters would not be viable for combat without finessing thier natural weapons.
...Actually, it was shown that a heavy strength big weapon rogue is MORE then viable, and at times better then the dual wielder ;p
Strength is very much relevant when compared to 3.5 damage (which is what a d6 is)
Ye Olde Olympics I think, or perhaps a rogue thread elsewhere. Don't have it offhand. And I'm a professor of laser - we don't have sources to cite in Gensokyo.
Yes the dual wielder could sometimes do more sneak attack, but not only were the penalties striking (no strength to damage, less attack bonus, the third attack misses rather often), but if I recall correct, all it takes is a single casting of haste, and THF rogue leaps ahead. THF rogue also has access to a much better sneak attack, and can more easily justify heavy armor.
For Dex, there was Shadow Hand Somethingerever from Tome of battle that added dexterity to damage with a few specific weapons.
Your chosen Shadow Hand focus weapon specifically. I think it was something like that-- or only specifically Shadow Hand school weapons.
That feat made for a very ridiculous build I made for one of my first games... the DM gave out 'traits' that were feats, and one of them was Intuitive Strike. Looking back, it was a mistake for him. My Swordsage used his Wisdom to hit and added his dexterity to his damage-- and Swordsages got bonus damage on maneuvers equal to their wisdom, so he also added his wisdom modifiers to the damage he dealt. I gave up some minor class bonuses (light armor prof... and then wore a mithral chain shirt... oh, 3.5e!) for the unarmed strike progression of a monk, and took as many feats as I could to stack up my unarmed dice progression. At level 9 I was doing 2d8+10 base damage before any additions from maneuvers. And that's with the magical item budget of a 5th level character. I could've been doing a whole lot more if we actually got the money we should have been getting!
That character was the perfect embodiment of what I feel most monk characters should be. Light, agile, extremely mobile and extremely hard to hit, blowing around destroying anyone who looks at him funny... and then staggering around half-dead after the one or two attacks that _did_ get through.
In my games, I give duelists their dexterity bonus to damage. It helps to compensate for all of their back-and-forth lackluster class features. Rogues who use weapon finesse... I think a full-attack from the rogue in my last game is enough to say otherwise to them getting dex to damage. By the end, on a sneak attack vs. an evil target, they were dropping 1d6+9+2d6+6d6. They had four attacks. Giving her an extra 9 damage would've been the cherry on the overkill sundae.
Thinking about it.....
I would more like a feat that would allow you to take a single swing with your off hand as well as your main hand as a standard action.
I am trying to make my guy a skirmisher. It would be very nice to be able to move and then swing both hand rather than just the main.
Something maybe like this:
OFF HAND EXPERTISE:
Prerequisite : weapon finesse, two weapon fighting, BAB +1, Dex +14
Benefit: Allows you to take a swing with your offhand weapon as well as main as a standard action.
Special: A character that has the sneak attack class ability gains no benefit from this feat, only works with light weaponsThis would make it some skirmishers could still get the benefit of their off hand, even after moving.
I made it have higher pre-reqs to round it out a bit more. You would have to already take 2 feats making this something you would have to really want.
Some thoughts:
1. The pros over at WotC once talked about feat creation, and one thing they said was that Aibility Scores give you a big benefit at every even value (the bonus goes up) so they always use the odd value for feat prerequisites, just so those odd values can be beneficial for something. You might consider following this practice and moving the DEX requirement to 13 or 15.2. Your two feat prerequisites are extremely common feats. Nothing wrong with that, but your comment that you put them there to make people "really want" to take your feat may not be as true as you think it is.
3. Many skirmishers rely on sneak attack. The 3.5e Scout had an almost identical ability (extra d6 on attacks) and was built for skirmishing. Taking away the sneak attacks from this feat means that an awful lot of skirmishers won't want it at all. Likewise, many (most?) characters with Weapon Finesse rely on sneak attack, so excluding sneak attack also excludes the majority of charcters who could benefit from your feat.
Combat Mobility [Combat]
You are mobile in combat and can take multiple attacks after moving in combat.
Prerequisites: Dodge, Mobility, BAB >= Number of times you have taken this feat x3 (so to take this feat one time you must have a BAB of 3+, to take it four times you must have a BAB of 12).
Benefit: You may use a standard action to take some or all of the attacks you normally could make with a full round action. You do not gain extra attacks with this feat – you only gain the ability to use the extra attacks you already know how to make. The number of attacks you can make is equal to the number of times you have taken this feat +1. For example, if you are a 12th level fighter who normally can make three attacks per round with a full-round action (+12, +7, +2) and you have taken this feat one time, you may make a normal move-equivalent action and still attack twice after moving (+12, +7). If you take this feat twice, you may attack with all three of your attacks (+12, +7, +2).
Special:Creatures using their own natural weapons may apply this feat to each attack type even if those attack types allow more than one attack. For example, a bear normally can only bite after moving. After taking this feat one time, a bear can move and bite and use its claws – both of them. The feat allows the bear to gain its claw-type of attack and use all its claw attacks.
Normal: Without this feat, you may only attack once with a standard action no matter how many attacks you know how to make.
The point of weapon finesse for non rogues is the same as TWF for non rogues. The critical effects. You take weapon finesse only if you are going with a high dex build that uses dex for something else in addition. So if you want weapon finesse go with a TWF build. My suggestion, Elven curve blade/armor spikes. That way you can take power attack on the side and get a good ratio, but really using two identical weapons that can be finessed is the best option.
The point of weapon finesse for non rogues is the same as TWF for non rogues. The critical effects. You take weapon finesse only if you are going with a high dex build that uses dex for something else in addition. So if you want weapon finesse go with a TWF build. My suggestion, Elven curve blade/armor spikes. That way you can take power attack on the side and get a good ratio, but really using two identical weapons that can be finessed is the best option.
Oh god the can of worms you have just opened up.
I always viewed the point of weapon finesse as being a boost to hit for characters that had good dex but not good strength. I'd like to see a feat or ability that gave characters with weapon finesse a boost to their damage by precision.
I always viewed the point of weapon finesse as being a boost to hit for characters that had good dex but not good strength. I'd like to see a feat or ability that gave characters with weapon finesse a boost to their damage by precision.
I'd second and support that, too.
On a different note: when I mentioned "standard attack" getting 1 extra swing w/the off hand (vs. the 1 attack period) for 2-wpn types, I was specifically thinking about the "move and ..." situations. Essentially, it would just let the 2-wpn guys still get to use their two weapons, even when moving. It's not a lot, though (still only 1 hit, but in the 2-wpn's case, it's 1 hit per movement).
:shrugs:
Shield-bashing kind of breaks this all down, though (which is crappy - and makes me think the style is simply too good).
There was a 3.5 feat that did that, although the hit penalty was fierce, -6 or something similar. I certainly wouldn't object to a lesser penalty, like -4.