RE: Modified damage amounts for specific weapon types
Two-Handed weapons: "Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls..." (page 141)
One-Handed weapons: "... 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand." (page 141)
Would this also apply to a negative Strength modifier? Would a character with a 7 Strength score (-2 modifier) then suffer a -3 on damage rolls with a 2-handed weapon and -1 with an off-hand weapon?
Since the weapons consistantly reference "Strength bonus" and not "Strength modifier" I believe that these modifiers would only apply to a positive Strength modifier, otherwise it should reference "Strength bonus or penalty"?
hmmm...an interesting question.
Firstly, i believe the wording is confused. If you look just above the entry you quoted, in Light weapons it says:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.
There's a discrepancy there. I suggest that 'modifier' is the appropriate wording.
That poses the problem of if you're wielding a one handed weapon with 2 hands, and you're weaker than average (negative Str mod) are you worse off than if you use it with one hand?
I'd interpret it as you only take your normal penalty. It just doesn't make sense otherwise. But i'm interested to see if the dev's intend otherwise.
|
RE: Modified damage amounts for specific weapon types
Two-Handed weapons: "Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls..." (page 141)
One-Handed weapons: "... 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand." (page 141)
Would this also apply to a negative Strength modifier? Would a character with a 7 Strength score (-2 modifier) then suffer a -3 on damage rolls with a 2-handed weapon and -1 with an off-hand weapon?
Since the weapons consistantly reference "Strength bonus" and not "Strength modifier" I believe that these modifiers would only apply to a positive Strength modifier, otherwise it should reference "Strength bonus or penalty"?
actually i think penalty's get applied 1 time full str to any weapon, so a 2 handed weapon (from the example) would only get -2, not -3. but a twf character would have -2 damage on both weapons
I also tried this example with Hero Lab, and it appears to apply the modified damage (x1.5 or x0.5) only when there is a Strength bonus, and not when there is a Strength penalty.
hmmm...an interesting question.
Firstly, i believe the wording is confused. If you look just above the entry you quoted, in Light weapons it says:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.
There's a discrepancy there. I suggest that 'modifier' is the appropriate wording.
That poses the problem of if you're wielding a one handed weapon with 2 hands, and you're weaker than average (negative Str mod) are you worse off than if you use it with one hand?
I'd interpret it as you only take your normal penalty. It just doesn't make sense otherwise. But i'm interested to see if the dev's intend otherwise.
RE:
"Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand."This might also have been an intential wording. Rather that saying "add half the wielder's Strength modifier if they have a positive Strength modifier", they have instead chosen to say "add half the wielder's Strength bonus". Of course, my theory of this being intentional wording is then shot to hell when you read the One-Handed weapon description:
"Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand".
It would then appear that you do not suffer a "Strength penalty" on damage rolls when using a 1-handed melee weapon with a low Strength score. I think there's enough of an inconsistency here that inclusion to the Core Rulebook errata thread is now needed.
RE:
"Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand."This might also have been an intential wording. Rather that saying "add half the wielder's Strength modifier if they have a positive Strength modifier", they have instead chosen to say "add half the wielder's Strength bonus". Of course, my theory of this being intentional wording is then shot to hell when you read the One-Handed weapon description:
"Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand".
Especially as it says 'add' the wielder's Strength mod, not 'apply'.
Very confusing.
You might have to houserule it to remove confusion unless we can get an official word tho.
|
RE: Modified damage amounts for specific weapon types
Two-Handed weapons: "Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls..." (page 141)
One-Handed weapons: "... 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand." (page 141)
Would this also apply to a negative Strength modifier? Would a character with a 7 Strength score (-2 modifier) then suffer a -3 on damage rolls with a 2-handed weapon and -1 with an off-hand weapon?
Since the weapons consistantly reference "Strength bonus" and not "Strength modifier" I believe that these modifiers would only apply to a positive Strength modifier, otherwise it should reference "Strength bonus or penalty"?
The Paizo developers shouldn't have to answer this for you. The wording is actually clear. Modifier implies either positive or negative, whereas bonus implies positive because there is no negative bonus, only a negative modifier.
Agreed, but nonetheless, it's needlessly confused wording. There's many instances where they use the word apply to describe the mechanic. For example on the very same page:
1) Thrown Weapons: Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears,
darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents,
shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder
applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown
weapons (except for splash weapons).
2) Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a twohanded
melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the
character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee
attacks with such a weapon.
3) Projectile Weapons:If the character has a penalty for low Strength,
apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.
And on the last example it's plainly stated what happens if you have a penalty to Strength.
In my experience, if there's a change in wording it's for a specific purpose, this seems just careless.
The Paizo developers shouldn't have to answer this for you. The wording is actually clear. Modifier implies either positive or negative, whereas bonus implies positive because there is no negative bonus, only a negative modifier.
So why then do you apply the penalty with projectile and light weapons - but not one-handed or two-handed weapons?
The language is correct. If you have a positive strength MODIFIER i.e. the BONUS, you can add 1 1/2 times your bonus to damage. If you have a negative MODIFIER i.e. PENALTY you only add your modifier not 1.5xyour penalty.
There is similar language with dex mod and bonus in flat-footed. If you're caught flat-footed you do not get to add your dex BONUS to your AC. However you ALWAYS add your dex PENALTY. Your AC doesn't go up just because you aren't aware of which way to lean into your opponents' swords.
I have explained this inconsistancy better now in the Core Rulebook errata thread
So you're saying it's implicit that you always apply your negative modifier to melee attacks? I see that. Probably why i leant that way to begin with.
Unfortunately, that doesn't explain this terminology: "Light:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the
wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.
Why the discrepancy?
|
|
Agreed, but nonetheless, it's needlessly confused wording. There's many instances where they use the word apply to describe the mechanic. For example on the very same page:
1) Thrown Weapons: Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears,
darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents,
shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder
applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown
weapons (except for splash weapons).2) Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a twohanded
melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the
character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee
attacks with such a weapon.3) Projectile Weapons:If the character has a penalty for low Strength,
apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.And on the last example it's plainly stated what happens if you have a penalty to Strength.
In my experience, if there's a change in wording it's for a specific purpose, this seems just careless.
They establish this on pages 15 & 16 under Determine Bonuses:
"The modifier is the number you apply to the die roll.... A positive modifier is called a bonus and a negative modifier is called a penalty."
It carries throughout the entire core rulebook.
If I seem contentious, I apologize and wish to assure you that I'm not. I just don't understand why it seems so clear to me but not to you.
|
|
Agreed, but nonetheless, it's needlessly confused wording. There's many instances where they use the word apply to describe the mechanic. For example on the very same page:
1) Thrown Weapons: Daggers, clubs, shortspears, spears,
darts, javelins, throwing axes, light hammers, tridents,
shuriken, and nets are thrown weapons. The wielder
applies his Strength modifier to damage dealt by thrown
weapons (except for splash weapons).2) Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a twohanded
melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the
character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee
attacks with such a weapon.3) Projectile Weapons:If the character has a penalty for low Strength,
apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.And on the last example it's plainly stated what happens if you have a penalty to Strength.
In my experience, if there's a change in wording it's for a specific purpose, this seems just careless.
They establish this on pages 15 & 16 under Determine Bonuses:
"The modifier is the number you apply to the die roll.... A positive modifier is called a bonus and a negative modifier is called a penalty."
It carries throughout the entire core rulebook.
If I seem contentious, I apologize and wish to assure you that I'm not. I just don't understand why it seems so clear to me but not to you.
Wow! I just read my last post and though I may have answered your question, it comes off as being alot angrier than I would like. And for that I would apologize. I probably should go to bed and get some naptime now.
If I seem contentious, I apologize and wish to assure you that I'm not. I just don't understand why it seems so clear to me but not to you.
Please review my above referenced post in the errata thread, which should help clarify the matter. Keep in mind that the subject is what to do with a "Strength penalty" which is not clear, since all the references are to a "Strength bonus".
In 3rd Ed/3.5 and I guess Pathfinder, the distintion between Strength modifier (-/+) and bonus (+) was intentional. A bonus is a possitive modifier, never a negative number.
In some cases the designer doesn't want to use the penalties because it doesn't make sense.
I.e. Flatfooted characters loose their bonus to AC, not the modifier, otherwise characters with a negative modifier would have better AC when flatfooted.
It also makes sense for weapons:
Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls:
Otherwise, a character with a -2 Strength modifier would have -2 damage with one handed weapons and -3 with thw, and you should do better with thw.
Note that the rules in pag 141 are NOT the same than those in the page 179, and tt is FAR more clearly explained in page 179. I have added that error to the errata thread.
Weedy William then has a go at trying out the two handed grip. Should hea) hit the target with the same force as when he used the sword in one hand?
b) hit the target with more force, afterall, he is using two hands?
c) hit the target with less force as the sword becomes unbalanced in his hands when used in this way due to his poor strength?In my head I go with c, but I understand that the RAW do not seem to support this position.
If we are considering it realistically, I would definately go with b.
If William does not have the strength to wield the bastard sword i two-hands, he most certainly cannot balance it (and put force behind the blow) using only one hand.Consider a kid playing baseball. He/she can without a doubt hit the ball harder using both hands instead of just one.
Note that the rules in pag 141 are NOT the same than those in the page 179, and tt is FAR more clearly explained in page 179. I have added that error to the errata thread.
Thanks for noting the info on page 179, that indeeds helps. Thanks.
I wish page 141 would have referenced 179 for additional info.
|
Negative modifiers less than +1 would need a different formula or a table. For the case of 7 Str, I would say that two-handed would be at -1 and off-hand would be at -3. It follows the consistency of two handed being slightly more power and off-handed being less. There could be an extra statement added for strength below 14 as being +1 extra to damage on two handed, -1 extra damage on off hand
Wow! I just read my last post and though I may have answered your question, it comes off as being alot angrier than I would like. And for that I would apologize. I probably should go to bed and get some naptime now.
Not at all mate! We're cool. We're just trying to figure out the RAW, nothing personal :)
It's probably not worth repeating, but it's this sentence i don't get:
"Light:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.
Does this really make sense to you?
meh. whatever, i'm houseruling it the same way i always have.
It's probably not worth repeating, but it's this sentence i don't get:
"Light:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.Does this really make sense to you?
Easy peasy, the light weapon in the primary hand gets the strength modifier whether positive or negative. Used in offhands it is only affected by a positive strength modifier, not the negative one.
Makes sense? Forget about it. RAW has spoken!
Makes sense? Forget about it. RAW has spoken!
LOL!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow! I just read my last post and though I may have answered your question, it comes off as being alot angrier than I would like. And for that I would apologize. I probably should go to bed and get some naptime now.Not at all mate! We're cool. We're just trying to figure out the RAW, nothing personal :)
It's probably not worth repeating, but it's this sentence i don't get:
"Light:Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand.Does this really make sense to you?
meh. whatever, i'm houseruling it the same way i always have.
Using 1/2 of the Str bonus is supposed to be a penalty for using weapons in the off hand. You can't apply it to Str penalties because otherwise -2 from Str would become -1 from Str, you would do more damage with the off hand! That's why it is bonus instead of modifier in the last sentence.
yeh that makes sense.
the important thing is that if you're wielding a one-handed weapon with two hands you're not worse at it, and if you're weak and wielding two weapons you're not suddenly better at it.
all good :)