Which weapons should be better?

[TheSideKick]

Mike Schneider wrote:

That's silly -- then everybody except a non-elf straight-class wizard has it.

thats silly because he gave 2 options

[LilithsThrall]

Mike Schneider wrote:

LilithsThrall wrote:

Put me firmly on the side of giving anyone proficient in a light weapon weapon finesse for free.

That's silly -- then everybody except a non-elf straight-class wizard has it.

Why is that silly? The Wizard and Sorcerer aren't going to use it. The Bard and Rogue could stand the power boost. What's the problem?

Like TheSidekick says, it's one of a couple of options, but why is it bad?

[Atarlost]

Finesse is a basic enabler for an already inferior build. And it costs a feat. The classes most likely to want it are those that can least afford it. The only purpose to having it as a feat is to be a tax on dervish dancers, everyone else is better without it.

Dex AC suffers diminishing returns because of armor dex limits. Damage from Strength doesn't.

Reducing the length of the fight by killing things faster also reduces damage taken, offsetting the defensive advantage of a dex build.

Nobody ever suggests dex based melee builds as optimal or even really viable except for sneak attackers who are trying to qualify for the TWF chain.

Why should it require a feat to use an already inferior dex melee build? Should we require a feat to add strength bonus to to hit rolls and force everyone who doesn't take one feat or the other to just use their BAB alone? That would at least be fair.

[ProfPotts]

The Conan d20 game allows anyone to choose to use their Dexterity instead of Strength when attacking with a 'finesse weapon' without charging a Feat for the privillage, and seems to do so without any problems. Then again, it changes quite a few aspects of combat (it has armour as DR - a much better system than the one in UC, IMHO - for example) and allows quite a few 'combat tricks' to anyone, without charging Feats or Class Features for them. It's catering to a different (sub-)genre than basic Pathfinder, though, so that's something to keep in mind - but I'd say it's worth a look if that sort of thing interests you.

[Mike Schneider]

Atarlost wrote:

Finesse is a basic enabler for an already inferior build.

Anybody who thinks DEX builds are inferior doesn't know how to build one, and probably has a DM who never makes them face the consequences of having a garbage Ref-save and lousy touch-AC.

In many fights, DEX builds do most of the damage because the spam-cans take way too long to actually get into the fray.

[stringburka]

Mike Schneider wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

Finesse is a basic enabler for an already inferior build.

Anybody who thinks DEX builds are inferior doesn't know how to build one, and probably has a DM who never makes them face the consequences of having a garbage Ref-save and lousy touch-AC.

In many fights, DEX builds do most of the damage because the spam-cans take way too long to actually get into the fray.

Well, it depends. Movement speed isn't really much affected by dex since most of the str-based builds are either lightly armored or fighters or ranged combatants. Initiative is though, so you have a valid point regardless. Still, if the match was on damage dealt, I'd put my money on a strength build ANY day. It simply does so much more damage.

On the other hand, dex-based builds are more versatile, having higher AC, better reflex saves, higher initiative, easier to switch-hit, and by far better skills.

I think both strength and dex are very valid options in combat and neither should be dumped, but when the sh*t hits the fan and I'm attacked in a dark alley, I'd rather have a big strong fighter than a guy sleighting with his hand (bad joke :(). On the other hand, when I'm about to ambush someone in a dark alley... That's a different matter.

[LilithsThrall]

Mike Schneider wrote:

Atarlost wrote:

Finesse is a basic enabler for an already inferior build.

Anybody who thinks DEX builds are inferior doesn't know how to build one, and probably has a DM who never makes them face the consequences of having a garbage Ref-save and lousy touch-AC.

In many fights, DEX builds do most of the damage because the spam-cans take way too long to actually get into the fray.

Honestly, touch AC attacks and Ref saves aren't the majority damage inflictors - not by a long shot. Standard attacks are. And it's just not true that Dex builds do most of the damage. They attack sooner, but that doesn't mean much because most targets aren't "one shot kills".

[Skerek]

the pathfinder society field guide makes an effort to balance out dex builds by introducing the Agile weapon ability(+1 ability mod), which allows the user to deal extra damage equal to their dex modifier. you can only apply it to finesseable weapons. But to be honest i'd that more feats in line of the dervish dance to get this damage, maybe something like this

The back of my mind wrote:

Weapon Finesse -> Agile Strikes -> Improved Agile Strikes

where Agile Strikes gives 1/2 dex mod min 1 extra damage(instead of strength) and Improved Agile Strikes gives full. two feats because getting dex as damage is pretty damn powerful

[Mike Schneider]

LilithsThrall wrote:

Honestly, touch AC attacks and Ref saves aren't the majority damage inflictors - not by a long shot.

In my observation, they are very common causes of PC death.

[mage4fun]

Dragonsong wrote:

Artanthos wrote:

They should have kept weapon speed at the very least.

That was a rule I always used in my campaigns.

As for weapon effectiveness vs specific armor types: I preferred the system used by Rolemaster.

I actually liked the Everquest d20 version of weapon speed where it determined when you got iterative attacks. Most weapons were as normal (BAB-5) some were BAB-4 some were BAB -6 with the max number of attacks (barring off hand or haste and such) was 4. Mixing weapons (long sword dagger for instance) used the worst of the two iterative determinations. I have no idea if it would totally shift things too far from 2 handed to TWF optimized builds but would love to hear if someone decides to try it out.

I used to play in a game where weapon speed came into play with iterative strikes. The GM did not think that if you had 3 attacks that all of them came at the same time. Using a dagger with weapon speed of 2 we used your initiative as the starting point. So if you had an initiative of 15, your attacks would come on 15, 13, and finally on 11. So if your opponent went on a 12, it would get its first attack just before you landed your third and final attack.