Stacking is more balanced for low Str (like 6 or 8), but it seems too good for characters with both high Str and high Dex.
I think it's okay if it requires three feats (with combat expertise). And it's how it's done in most similar abilities.
Stacking is more balanced for low Str (like 6 or 8), but it seems too good for characters with both high Str and high Dex.I think it's okay if it requires three feats (with combat expertise). And it's how it's done in most similar abilities.
Yeah, I was coming around to liking it the more I thought about it.
I thought combat expertise was an alternative to 13 Int. If so, I like that for two reasons: 1) I wasn't sure about leaving avg Int characters out in the cold, and 2) as I think you're suggesting, three feats is a lot to pay, so a path that costs only two feats is nice.
EDIT: I do still like the idea of free Weapon Finesse. Could that work with Dabbler's feat? I guess not, since it reduces the cost by one feat. Assuming it's not free, should Weapon Finesse also stack Dex and Str modifiers to attack?
That's too good. Only Str should be able to do that. The feat I proposed only gives the average of Dex and Str modifiers instead of Str, because that gives a less dramatic boost for a single feat than full Dex mod (I'm trying to make it better balanced alongside Weapon Specialization). If that's too weak, surely full Dex mod is enough?Weapon Celeterity (Combat)
... Add 1 ½ times your Dexterity modifier to damage
lol, one handed gets 1 1/2 dex, with nothing in the other hand and power attack only gives +2 per -1 instead of 3. Trust me, it's not only balanced, but flavorful. The only one that seems strong with it is the monk, but there's a feat (allows 1 1/2 times Str for unarmed) that I've used as a basis, so no craziness with flurry.
Now that that's out of the way onto the current discussion.
Str and Dex as a bonus to damage? It really should be one or the other. Both is all too abusable. There's a prestige class out of races of the wild that allows this, but it's pretty much the only reason the enter the class.
Free WF? If you're tiny, yes. That already exist. You can find it somewhere in the bestiary (not in front of me right now). If that's your thing then let the players play gremlins and enjoy!
Seriously though. I'm still baffled people think Dex for damage is too good. The math simply doesn't support that.
Stacking is more balanced for low Str (like 6 or 8), but it seems too good for characters with both high Str and high Dex.
Well, look at it this way, you would need very high strength and dexterity along with passable intelligence to make it count a lot, and if you have all of those something else has to be suffering badly. Now if the typical finesse character is like the build I made for a swashbuckler type, that'd be 14 strength + 18 dexterity and 16 intelligence. That stacks to +6 damage, the same as a fighter with 18 strength using a two-handed weapon. That does not seem too unbalanced to me ... especially for 3 feats. Stacking with strength is one reason I wouldn't go with the 1-1/2 times dex bonus option.
Also, there is nothing stopping you from stacking this with Power Attack (or the modifier Deadly Aim), and with the duelist's bonus damage.
Well, look at it this way, you would need very high strength and dexterity along with passable intelligence to make it count a lot, and if you have all of those something else has to be suffering badly. Now if the typical finesse character is like the build I made for a swashbuckler type, that'd be 14 strength + 18 dexterity and 16 intelligence. That stacks to +6 damage, the same as a fighter with 18 strength using a two-handed weapon. That does not seem too unbalanced to me ... especially for 3 feats. Stacking with strength is one reason I wouldn't go with the 1-1/2 times dex bonus option.
Also, there is nothing stopping you from stacking this with Power Attack (or the modifier Deadly Aim), and with the duelist's bonus damage.
Whoa now. You're not thinking far enough ahead. Try looking at magic items in a PC's possession around 10th level. 2 +4 stat items is cheaper than 1 +6 item (unless it's the same slot, but I digress). The reason why you only real want damage to be off of one stat (barring prestige classes) is because of magic items. In a no magic game then you could entertain this thought, but in the game we all play that just isn't the case.
As a PrC I would agree with you, as a non-epic feat? Not so much.
Well, look at it this way, you would need very high strength and dexterity along with passable intelligence to make it count a lot, and if you have all of those something else has to be suffering badly. Now if the typical finesse character is like the build I made for a swashbuckler type, that'd be 14 strength + 18 dexterity and 16 intelligence. That stacks to +6 damage, the same as a fighter with 18 strength using a two-handed weapon. That does not seem too unbalanced to me ... especially for 3 feats. Stacking with strength is one reason I wouldn't go with the 1-1/2 times dex bonus option.
Also, there is nothing stopping you from stacking this with Power Attack (or the modifier Deadly Aim), and with the duelist's bonus damage.
Whoa now. You're not thinking far enough ahead. Try looking at magic items in a PC's possession around 10th level. 2 +4 stat items is cheaper than 1 +6 item (unless it's the same slot, but I digress). The reason why you only real want damage to be off of one stat (barring prestige classes) is because of magic items. In a no magic game then you could entertain this thought, but in the game we all play that just isn't the case.
As a PrC I would agree with you, as a non-epic feat? Not so much.
Well in PRPG you'd need a Belt of Physical Might to boost both Strength and Dexterity, which for +4 comes in at 2/3 of your wealth by level at 10th level, which is generally considered out of reach. If it isn't, then the guy with the +6 Belt of Giant Strength is paying less for his item, and with a two handed weapon is getting the same or better damage boost out of it (+4.5 {for +3 to Str mod x 1.5} vs +4 {for +2 from Str and Dex mods}), and he likely has a higher starting base in his Strength, plus he's getting the +50% bonus from power attack, so ... yeah, I think I thought far enough ahead, thanks.
Also, there is nothing stopping you from stacking this with Power Attack (or the modifier Deadly Aim), and with the duelist's bonus damage.
Sure there is. Duelist is a great big massive trap.
Yes, the duelist now is a lot better then it was in 3.5. It's still pretty eh.
You can have two items, one for str and one for dex in different slots. Again, this is why you don't want to do that.
You can have two items, one for str and one for dex in different slots. Again, this is why you don't want to do that.
Which two items? In Pathfinder it is belts for ALL physical stats, headbands for ALL mental stats - and if you could have two items in different slots that both gave a physical stat bonus, why would there be single items that give you a boost to two or more stats? If you follow the 3x principal, then you have to spend even more on the second item than you would have to pay extra for two abilities in one item. In 3.5 you'd have a point, but this is not 3.5, it's Pathfinder.
Sigh. My bad for not being more clear on the issue. If you're using just PF then it comes down to what items you can create as per the magic item creation rules. Which does allow you to create ability boosting items that aren't belts and not always at a penalty. If you have the full scope of 3.5 available then you're right it becomes a different discusion.
A belt of str or dex +4 is 16000. A belt of +2 str AND dex is 10000. Also, a belt of str caps out at +6 for 36000 while a belt of +4 str and dex is only 4000 more. The numbers are close though, so you may be right about it not mattering.
Ultimately I disagree with amending the game completely. I am all for adding feats or PrC's that give players what they want. Most people probably feel the same way and I sure some of those people view adding such a feat as a change to the overall game. Again, it will come down to whether or not Paizo releases such a controversial feat or not.
Stacking is more balanced for low Str (like 6 or 8), but it seems too good for characters with both high Str and high Dex.Well, look at it this way, you would need very high strength and dexterity along with passable intelligence to make it count a lot, and if you have all of those something else has to be suffering badly. Now if the typical finesse character is like the build I made for a swashbuckler type, that'd be 14 strength + 18 dexterity and 16 intelligence. That stacks to +6 damage, the same as a fighter with 18 strength using a two-handed weapon. That does not seem too unbalanced to me ... especially for 3 feats. Stacking with strength is one reason I wouldn't go with the 1-1/2 times dex bonus option.
Also, there is nothing stopping you from stacking this with Power Attack (or the modifier Deadly Aim), and with the duelist's bonus damage.
Agreed, I posted something at the end of the previous page conceding the balance of this.
It slipped my mind that Combat Expertise requires 13 Int; I wanted to believe it was an alternative to the proposed 13 Int prereq because a Dex damage character without smarts also seems like it should be playable.
I'm not sure your feat makes the game playable for my 1st level halfling fighter with 6 Str, 16 Dex, and a dagger. There are too many prereqs in the way of Improved Weapon Finesse, so his only option is Deadly Aim modified for finesse weapons. If I give him that and Weapon Finesse, his combat dice are attack +2 (+1 BAB, -1 Deadly Aim, +1 size, -2 Str, +3 Dex), 1d3 damage (-2 Str, +2 Deadly Aim).
Improved Weapon Finesse instead of Deadly Aim would give him 1d3+1 damage, which would be more fun. Dropping the Combat Expertise prereq would make that possible. If Weapon Finesse were free, he could stack Deadly Aim to get 1d3+3 damage at first level, making him a lot more fun. This still seems low for a fighter, and a fair trade for another high stat besides Str.
Well, I have had another thought regarding low strength and smaller weapons. Basically, Small sized weapons are doing less damage anyway, and also Small sized characters tend to have Strength penalties.
An amendment I would make is that each size reduction the weapons suffer eliminates one -1 to hit and damage due to low strength.
Hence, your 6 Str fighter with a dagger would not be on 1d3-2 but 1d3-1 as their basic. Also, remember that Weapon Finesse replaces strength for to hit bonus, so his atack in the old system would be +4 (+1 BAB, -1 Deadly Aim, +1 Size, +3 Dex/Weapon Finesse). Damage would then be 1d3+1 with just Deadly Aim, 1d3+2 (at +5 to hit) with just Improved Weapon Finesse and 1d3+4 with both.
All things considered, Deadly Aim itself would be an appropriate pre-requisite feat for Improved Weapon Finesse instead of Combat Expertise. The point of both of these feats is that you need to know where to hit to do the extra damage.
when making ranged attacks with non-thrown weapons i allow the attacker to deal dmg equal to dex mod.
same with Weapon Finesse, except with melee weapons.
it has not broken my game, and little green men have not jumped out of our table and gobbled us up.
A good way always allow str to be relevant, low str still reduces damage. This way it never becomes a dump stat, which is what many people had a beef with.
Though I like the idea of low str having less of an impact on damage for small fighters, it adds an unnecessity to the game.
I have read this whole thread and I don't understand why people think that weak characters should be good fighters. Weapon Finesse is nice, it let's low Str characters contribute to the fight, but it doesn't allow them to do more damage. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
To me saying that a 3' tall, 10 Str 18 Dex Halfing should be able to do almost as much damage with his small (1d6) longsword as a 6' tall, 18 Str 10 Dex human with his larger (1d8) longsword is ridiculous. It's even more ridiculous if the Halfling only has 6 Str.
I would also like to point out that, all other things being equal, the Halfing has +1 more to hit and +1 to AC in exchange for that -1 damage because of his smaller sword.
If you are going to allow this maybe you can make this feat as well.
Power Defense
(Can't think of a logical description of how this would happen, but...)
Benefit: You may add your Strength modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier to AC. You may only use this feat when wielding two-handed, non-finesseable (<- new word!) weapons.
Maybe another feat so he can use Str to hit with ranged weapons as well. This way the big fighter can dump Dex just like the Dex fighter dumps Str. After all, if a 6 Str fighter should be viable, then why not a 6 Dex fighter?
You clearly have not read through the thread because we've covered both why a not-high strength character should be able to do damage and why it won't make strength a universal dump stat.
I have read this whole thread and I don't understand why people think that weak characters should be good fighters. Weapon Finesse is nice, it let's low Str characters contribute to the fight, but it doesn't allow them to do more damage. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
To me saying that a 3' tall, 10 Str 18 Dex Halfing should be able to do almost as much damage with his small (1d6) longsword as a 6' tall, 18 Str 10 Dex human with his larger (1d8) longsword is ridiculous. It's even more ridiculous if the Halfling only has 6 Str.
I would also like to point out that, all other things being equal, the Halfing has +1 more to hit and +1 to AC in exchange for that -1 damage because of his smaller sword.
If you are going to allow this maybe you can make this feat as well.
Power Defense
(Can't think of a logical description of how this would happen, but...)
Benefit: You may add your Strength modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier to AC. You may only use this feat when wielding two-handed, non-finesseable (<- new word!) weapons.Maybe another feat so he can use Str to hit with ranged weapons as well. This way the big fighter can dump Dex just like the Dex fighter dumps Str. After all, if a 6 Str fighter should be viable, then why not a 6 Dex fighter?
That logic is undeniable...
I have read this whole thread and I don't understand why people think that weak characters should be good fighters. Weapon Finesse is nice, it let's low Str characters contribute to the fight, but it doesn't allow them to do more damage. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
To me saying that a 3' tall, 10 Str 18 Dex Halfing should be able to do almost as much damage with his small (1d6) longsword as a 6' tall, 18 Str 10 Dex human with his larger (1d8) longsword is ridiculous. It's even more ridiculous if the Halfling only has 6 Str.
I would also like to point out that, all other things being equal, the Halfing has +1 more to hit and +1 to AC in exchange for that -1 damage because of his smaller sword.
If you are going to allow this maybe you can make this feat as well.
Power Defense
(Can't think of a logical description of how this would happen, but...)
Benefit: You may add your Strength modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier to AC. You may only use this feat when wielding two-handed, non-finesseable (<- new word!) weapons.Maybe another feat so he can use Str to hit with ranged weapons as well. This way the big fighter can dump Dex just like the Dex fighter dumps Str. After all, if a 6 Str fighter should be viable, then why not a 6 Dex fighter?
Lord Twig, you make me sad. For one thing, you completely miss the point. Combat in PF is an utter abstraction. Bows do not work this way IRL, neither do any of the other weapons. Your 10 str halfling example could still kill you or I IRL with a simple kitchen knife. Skill with a weapon or sheer dumb luck, not a high str or high damage weapon.
As a game it's only fair and reasonable to create ways for players to play the characters they want to play within a small margin of reason. Do I think a halfling with a 6 str should be doing as much damage as the human swordmans? Of course not, because this is a fantasy whereas IRL either one could kill us dead in seconds.
As for your feat, you forgot to add sarcasm as a prerequisite.
I have read this whole thread and I don't understand why people think that weak characters should be good fighters. Weapon Finesse is nice, it let's low Str characters contribute to the fight, but it doesn't allow them to do more damage. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
To me saying that a 3' tall, 10 Str 18 Dex Halfing should be able to do almost as much damage with his small (1d6) longsword as a 6' tall, 18 Str 10 Dex human with his larger (1d8) longsword is ridiculous. It's even more ridiculous if the Halfling only has 6 Str.
I would also like to point out that, all other things being equal, the Halfing has +1 more to hit and +1 to AC in exchange for that -1 damage because of his smaller sword.
Well for one thing, high strength characters already add their strength bonus to their to-hit rolls. The justification for this is that it helps penetrate armour, but it applies even on touch attacks or against opponents that have neither natural nor worn armour.
For another, if you want to use real-life examples it takes 14 pounds of pressure to kill somebody if you hit them in the right place. A one-inch blade can inflict a mortal wound. It's just a matter of hitting the right place rather than hitting harder. Therefore what we are proposing are options for hitting smarter rather than harder. In many real combat situations brains and skill can and does beat brawn and toughness. Why should we not construct the feats that allow this?
I will add, most of the feats and ideas we have suggested are open to the high-strength fighter as well, should he choose to use them, but his proportional gain from them will likely be less. They don't make the 'smart' fighter better than the 'hard' fighter, they just stop him from being second rate.
Sigh. My bad for not being more clear on the issue. If you're using just PF then it comes down to what items you can create as per the magic item creation rules. Which does allow you to create ability boosting items that aren't belts and not always at a penalty. If you have the full scope of 3.5 available then you're right it becomes a different discusion.
A belt of str or dex +4 is 16000. A belt of +2 str AND dex is 10000. Also, a belt of str caps out at +6 for 36000 while a belt of +4 str and dex is only 4000 more. The numbers are close though, so you may be right about it not mattering.
Ultimately I disagree with amending the game completely. I am all for adding feats or PrC's that give players what they want. Most people probably feel the same way and I sure some of those people view adding such a feat as a change to the overall game. Again, it will come down to whether or not Paizo releases such a controversial feat or not.
Keep in mind that 3.5 rules stat bonuses never get a +50% kicker, which is what Paizo is tacking on here. A +4/+4 belt is 32k, a +6 belt is 36k. The +50% kicker for the second stat is n/a.
Still high at level 10. But the problem with most stat-based feats and stuff is high level, not mid level. Everyone can get +11 to a starting stat if you include +6 Enhancment and +5 Inherent. Once stats start stacking, bonuses get silly quick.
===Aelryinth
I do agree that Dex could do damage, and so could inteligence and wisdom. Following logic that is. But to keep the system "in place" as I stated earlier, there should be no way to add 1-1/2 Dex and I would even frown on 1 time Dex. The way for this to work for me would be Half Dex to damage, that would make it good, but not "totally replacable"
I do agree that Dex could do damage, and so could inteligence and wisdom. Following logic that is. But to keep the system "in place" as I stated earlier, there should be no way to add 1-1/2 Dex and I would even frown on 1 time Dex. The way for this to work for me would be Half Dex to damage, that would make it good, but not "totally replacable"
That depends on what you conceive of a typical attribute score for a player likely to take this feat is. I'm guessing 16-18, to make it worthwhile, but they are still a fighter and so strength and constitution are not exactly dump stats, and neither is intelligence. It's a kind of MAD style of making a character, where the scores are not going to be huge. A half-dex mod increase will likely be just a +1 or +2 at most in such a situation until at least mid to high level, which isn't that impressive considering what bonuses other feats can give you.
I do agree that Dex could do damage, and so could inteligence and wisdom. Following logic that is. But to keep the system "in place" as I stated earlier, there should be no way to add 1-1/2 Dex and I would even frown on 1 time Dex. The way for this to work for me would be Half Dex to damage, that would make it good, but not "totally replacable"
Well, if that's how you feel then that's how you feel. I included it in the feat I created to off set the 1 1/2 times str two handers get (by applying it to one-handers so as to add some variety).
Again, I have what I've been running and so far no abuse. I did have to amend the feat so slurry of blows couldn't be applied to it. Other than that I think it's a success, , , for my group. I imagine it's not for everyone.
Now I really can't wait for the APG. Over 100 feats added to the game. I wonder if one of them adds Dex to damage?
I agreeThat logic is undeniable...I have read this whole thread and I don't understand why people think that weak characters should be good fighters. Weapon Finesse is nice, it let's low Str characters contribute to the fight, but it doesn't allow them to do more damage. That seems perfectly reasonable to me.
To me saying that a 3' tall, 10 Str 18 Dex Halfing should be able to do almost as much damage with his small (1d6) longsword as a 6' tall, 18 Str 10 Dex human with his larger (1d8) longsword is ridiculous. It's even more ridiculous if the Halfling only has 6 Str.
I would also like to point out that, all other things being equal, the Halfing has +1 more to hit and +1 to AC in exchange for that -1 damage because of his smaller sword.
If you are going to allow this maybe you can make this feat as well.
Power Defense
(Can't think of a logical description of how this would happen, but...)
Benefit: You may add your Strength modifier instead of your Dexterity modifier to AC. You may only use this feat when wielding two-handed, non-finesseable (<- new word!) weapons.Maybe another feat so he can use Str to hit with ranged weapons as well. This way the big fighter can dump Dex just like the Dex fighter dumps Str. After all, if a 6 Str fighter should be viable, then why not a 6 Dex fighter?
I love quoting myself
You clearly have not read through the thread because we've covered both why a not-high strength character should be able to do damage and why it won't make strength a universal dump stat.
Partially because it feels so empowering, and partially because it gives me warm fuzzy feelings knowing that people have to ignore my comments because they can't answer to them :3
Can I have a feat that let's me use my dex bonus instead of my int bonus for determining my skill points and bonus spells?
There is a race for that Illumians in Races of Destiny.
They don't have a stat bonus so Pathfinder would likely add one if converted but the race is decent either way.
You can get Dex used for determining Bonus spells.
They are basically humans with magical glyphs written on them from birth.
Oh... I was being fascetious. I didn't think that would fly anywhere.
No, although I take your point. However, if you had suggested wisdom rather than dexterity as a casting stat, that would have been rather more likely, don't you think?
Damage comes from two sources:
Hitting hard. This is covered by strength & power attack, and is pretty easy to do.
Hitting in the right place. This is covered by dexterity (to hit the right place) and intelligence (to know where it is), and is a bit harder to do.
Hence dealing damage should have additional options for using dexterity and/or intelligence to deal extra damage.
Oh... I was being fascetious. I didn't think that would fly anywhere.Can I have a feat that let's me use my dex bonus instead of my int bonus for determining my skill points and bonus spells?There is a race for that Illumians in Races of Destiny.
They don't have a stat bonus so Pathfinder would likely add one if converted but the race is decent either way.
You can get Dex used for determining Bonus spells.
They are basically humans with magical glyphs written on them from birth.
It doesn't help your DCs, only bonus spells, and DCs are crazy important.
If any of my players ever asked for that feat, I would scalp them.
precision attack, uses Dex or maybe Int. Though, ancient scalpers were rednecks, so I'd go with Dex.
If any of my players ever asked for that feat, I would scalp them.
It's not a feat. It's a racial ability.
Illumians have a choice of multiple racial abilities. One of them lets you use dexterity as your stat for bonus spells instead of whatever other stat it would be.
Purely mechanically, it's honestly not that big of a deal. Bonus spells are small time compared to DCs. If anything, all it does is make most casters worst.
The idea behind Illumians, mechanically speaking, is to make them really good at multiclassing, so they were given abilities such as the above. How well it worked is up for debate.
Should I have asked about con to my skill points instead? And how could that even work? That's almost as wonky as the psychoportation discipline from 3rd edition Psionics Hand Book.
Oh, I don't know of any way to get con to skill points or anything like that. Maybe Illumians have some way of doing it - I don't know the race that well.
The only real "___ to skill points" that I know of is one feat that replaces a few thief-style skills with dexterity instead of intellect (which is old school as hell, quite frankly), and the other is the factotum ability Brains Over Brawn, which replaces nothing, but simply adds your intelligence to strength or dexterity checks due to you working smarter, not harder.
Oh wait, marshal could add Charisma to skill checks of others due to him using SUPER AID ANOTHER.
But yeah.
As for "how does that work," the answer is "It's magic. No, literally, it is due to magical properties in both the race and in the use of spell casting. I'm not just going 'ho ho ho, a wizard did it' and using it as an excuse, I'm saying that the person in question is indeed a wizard, was in fact made by wizards, and is, in truth, doing it."
Oh... I was being fascetious. I didn't think that would fly anywhere.No, although I take your point. However, if you had suggested wisdom rather than dexterity as a casting stat, that would have been rather more likely, don't you think?
Damage comes from two sources:
Hitting hard. This is covered by strength & power attack, and is pretty easy to do.
Hitting in the right place. This is covered by dexterity (to hit the right place) and intelligence (to know where it is), and is a bit harder to do.Hence dealing damage should have additional options for using dexterity and/or intelligence to deal extra damage.
Well stated.
Unlike your suggestion, Ironicdisaster, ours actually does make sense. Dex for determining skill points ....? how does being agile make you better at "learning" anything?
I could see the Wisdom argument, though (and like Dex to dmg, etc, it can be balanced with feat investments I'd think for making the change from default system assumptions in the first place).
:shrugs:
The way I look at it, if we can suspend belief to allow strength (hittan hard) to add to attack bonus, we can suspend belief to allow dexterity (coordination) to add to damage bonus, so long as it's done in a way to ensure that strength doesn't become perma-obsolete as it did in, say, oVampire.
So your way of mocking people who have listed fluff, mechanical, and cool reasons why dexterity to damage would work is to make up a really, really, really terrible strawman? And your reasons for wanting to insult them is "Well I disagree" over game mechanics?
You...
You're not very good at internets, are you?
Yeah ... this is the point in time where "ignore 'em" becomes the best option as clearly a self-admitted "ass hat" is contributing nothing of use or utility to the discussion any longer.
I don't know ... is intentionally de-railing discussions and going out of your way to mock those engaged in discussion something report-worthy to the mods?
Honestly ... once he's admitted to ass-hattery here, I've NO reason left to engage him ... at all.
:shrugs:
*sits back and listens to the points brought up and ponders again more ways in which to adjust the system defaults*
|
Yeah ... this is the point in time where "ignore 'em" becomes the best option as clearly a self-admitted "ass hat" is contributing nothing of use or utility to the discussion any longer.
I don't know ... is intentionally de-railing discussions and going out of your way to mock those engaged in discussion something report-worthy to the mods?
Honestly ... once he's admitted to ass-hattery here, I've NO reason left to engage him ... at all.
:shrugs:
*sits back and listens to the points brought up and ponders again more ways in which to adjust the system defaults*
Yeah, I think you may be right. Is the some sort of corollary to Godwin's Law that accounts for qqing or mocking crying?
Getting dexterity to damage as precision damage that does not double or go to 1.5 due to two handedness and isn't increased by a crit and requires you take two feats and have a minimum BAB and dexterity check will make strength COMPLETELY NONEXISTANT guys!
Also, you said you were going to leave this discussion, like, three pages ago, Ironic. Not a man of your word, it seems.