When you're trying to break past armor, or swing heavy weapons with enough power to connect, Strength matters.
Tell your DM that Weapon Finesse exists.
When you're trying to break past armor, or swing heavy weapons with enough power to connect, Strength matters.
Tell your DM that Weapon Finesse exists.
Pretty much this.
Generally, Dexterity is important in determining how to pierce through armor, but it might not be the best capability in terms of overall damage.
Characters that excel in using their dexterity for precisive attacks and the like most likely take Weapon Finesse (and use the appropriate weapons) for their attacks.
Another alternative is to use Ranged/Thrown weapons for attacking, but they are treated separately from melee weapons (especially bows/crossbows) because their mechanics to hit are based solely upon timing, which has a set scale with their strings/launchers.
Melee Weapons do not have such limitations. That's why Strength is used to scale instead.
He also intends to use the variant rule: armor is dr
It's not a bad rule. I know our group used it for a while, but discontinued because the added math was a major pain in the *** to keep track of constantly (because people forget).
If the GM wants to keep track of it (as well as the PC's), then it's a good rule, especially in the starter levels to help detract from those 1-hit kills.
He argues that hitting is a matter of hand-eye and therfore melee attacks should be dex based. And with the armor is dr varient rule. I feel as though it would fubar things.
Honestly, Hand-Eye coordination is important for melee, but it also matters that you have the strength to exert the speed and velocity of your weapon to meet that hand-eye (which is countered through the opponent's ability to avoid such attacks).
If I physically propel an object at such a speed that the target can't outright avoid, it's going to hit. The only way Dex would have something to do with it is if I have an innate skill to use its naturally slim but keen-like properties to affect a target better than my physical velocity propelling, which is what Weapon Finesse suggests.
As far as the "Armor is DR" thing, how it scales and how often it is upheld can be a major factor as to how it's included; unless the GM likes dealing with a headache of a math problem, such as adding this, subtracting that (except 50 times more complicated than that), then by all means go for it. It'll help you guys out more than it would them (most likely).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As far as balance goes, yes this would fubar things up quite nicely. It would effectively force most melee classes to pump dex as hard as they do str right now with the downside that they will do MUCH less damage than they do currently. Furthermore, monsters won't be affected nearly as much since they tend to have much higher stats to begin with. Try to explain to your DM that 1. It will SEVERELY gimp most every melee class and destroy the already wonky CR system. and 2. That Dnd and Pathfinder aren't meant to simulate how things work in real life, they're supposed to simulate high fantasy (or low in earlier editions).
If you absolutely HAVE to play with these rules I would reccomend a caster of some sort or a character that would normally use dex such as a rogue or magus (free feat).
He argues that hitting is a matter of hand-eye and therfore melee attacks should be dex based. And with the armor is dr varient rule. I feel as though it would fubar things.
Something to keep in mind - missing an attack doesn't necessarily mean you missed - it could also mean you hit but they blocked, you hit but their armor absorbed it, or even that you had a flurry of blows exchanged, but it was inconclusive. To quote from the Armor Class rules: "Your Armor Class (AC) represents how hard it is for opponents to land a solid, damaging blow on you."
That being said, with armor not making you any harder to hit decisively, that's not as relevant as usual. Other games do use a dex-like attribute to determine melee attacks (Shadowrun 4 uses Agility, for instance).
The main issue is actually the monsters, not the PCs. Trolls are very strong, but not very agile. If this new rule is applied to them, then they'd lose 3 points of their attack (which is only +8 to start with). A hill giant would go from +7 to their attack to -1, which would make them almost ineffective. Make sure your GM is aware of the problems it would cause.
There are many GMs who give everyone the Weapon Finesse feat for free, which might be a good alternative for him.
I have even suggested the corolation of the attack formula to real world physics i was met with.... Your theory dosnt make sense and i even explained how your base attack bonus is a representation of your skill in combat, hence your hand-eye coordination. Lost cause? Lol.
Hand-Eye only has to deal with making contact with the target. AKA, touch AC. Sure, I can touch the target, but will it do anything harmful? No. Because there is no raw power (AKA, force driven by strength) behind the attack.
So, I'm going to deal a straight 1d6 damage because I have a 16 strength but 10 Dex, because of "hand-eye coordination," which is only a part of landing a hit? That makes zero sense, since it's backed up by both laws of real-life physics and the concept of reality itself.
Now the martial classes are MAD. What does he plan to do about the monsters such as dragons, constructs, or giants that have a high strength but typically low des.
Leave them as is. At least thats the impression he gave me.
So the players have to deal with this nonsense but the monsters don't?
I would just play a caster, and not deal with that nonsense. Since monsters don't have to play by the "PC" rule being a summoning specialist is not a bad idea.
Srry i should have specified that it would be like applyinf weapons finnese to all weapons. Dex to hit ans bonus damage from str.
Well; it's a houserule. It's not anything that is completely debilitating. As an 18 Strength, 14 Dex fighter, I would hate having a -2 to hit from my Strength, but it isn't anything horrible (from my perspective).
Realistically, that would make sense, but at the same time I am still in agreement in that power used to propel an attack adjusts the velocity (and thus, the speed in which to connect attacks, which is what Dexterity can affect according to feats and their correlation with realistic physics) in which the attack can hit with. More strength = Faster velocity = more accurate melee attacking.
The logic makes sense with bows and crossbows (Crossbows use dex, since they are mechanical and have limits), since they are based solely on timing, and have a physical limit as to how fast they travel; a melee weapon, again (as I've said before), does not have that limitation, and thus relies on a separate entity (Strength) to power its ability to strike an opponent.
|
For everyone stating monsters with low dex/high str will suffer from this houserule...Correct me if I'm wrong, but with the "Armor as DR" rule, isn't the number required to hit just (essentially) your touch AC under RAW? If that's the case, it won't matter if you have a tank wearing +5 full plate with a +5 tower shield, because his, for lack of a better phrase, DC to hit will be 10+Dex+Dodge+Misc, right? So, the dragon loses 8-12 from its attack...the tank lost 22 from his AC.
Maybe I'm not remembering the Armor DR rules correctly...
EDIT: Went ahead and pulled out Ultimate Combat. AC disappears and the Defense score is introduced, giving a score of 10+Dex+Shield+Other (including armor enhancement). Still, losing several points from AC should go a long way to evening the playing field for those low dex monsters.
FWIW, I kind of like the rule. It seems to me that it's a little less abstract, because when you "hit" with your attack, you actually make contact. The armor then reduces the amount of damage the character takes. Strength will still apply to damage. I also think this rule would work well with the Vitality/Wound system. But that's a whole different conversation.
I meant their stats would remain untouched but will be subjected to the rules changeSo an iron golem would have problems hitting an orc?
Sorry but this is the worst houserule i have seen in a while.
Well; I have learned that there is no "bad" houserule. There is only a "different" houserule, based upon the speculation of the individual(s) supporting it.
I do look at the houserule this way (via your example): Sure, that Golem may suck with bonuses to hit, but when that Iron Golem hits? That Orc is dead; period. (The pluses it gets alone would 1-shot it.)
For everyone stating monsters with low dex/high str will suffer from this houserule...Correct me if I'm wrong, but with the "Armor as DR" rule, isn't the number required to hit just (essentially) your touch AC under RAW? If that's the case, it won't matter if you have a tank wearing +5 full plate with a +5 tower shield, because his, for lack of a better phrase, DC to hit will be 10+Dex+Dodge+Misc, right? So, the dragon loses 8-12 from its attack...the tank lost 22 from his AC.
Maybe I'm not remembering the Armor DR rules correctly...
The way I have worked with the "Armor is DR" rule is that they add DR according to the armor type worn.
I believe this rule also incorporates Natural Armor as DR (scaling based upon the enhancement bonus of the Natural bonus modifier).
Well what the hell. Give your DM the benefit of the doubt for the time being actually play it out. Let us know how it is. There's an awful lot of rules theory to be found on these forums, but not as much in the way of actual evidence, or not as much as I would care for anyway.
Is it ironic that touch attacks use strength, not dex?
|
|
The way I have worked with the "Armor is DR" rule is that they add DR according to the armor type worn.
I believe this rule also incorporates Natural Armor as DR (scaling based upon the enhancement bonus of the Natural bonus modifier).
Right, the various armors give you DR equal to their total armor bonus, including enhancement bonuses. Natural armor gives DR equal to its total value. And those DRs stack. So, a critter with a natural armor bonus of +4 wearing a +2 Breastplate along with Dodge, and a Dex of 16 will have a Defense score of 16 and DR 12/armor.
EDIT: I forgot to mention that the DR increases by +1 every 5 HD, too.
I think the dragons will be ok trying to hit that with their low dex scores.
Is it ironic that touch attacks use strength, not dex?
Yes and no.
Strength and Dexterity can be confused and/or coincide with a character's ability to hit.
A character's ability to propel the velocity of their limbs is drawn directly from their raw power, AKA strength. However, a character's ability to target a subject comes from the character's precision, AKA dexterity.
While they are interchangable, generally a character is more likely to rely on their raw power (because it's overall easier) over their dexterity (or lack thereof).
From a real-life perspective, let's look at a Doctor/Surgeon. Their skill with a Scalpel is beyond equal, and knowing their precision and proper cutting of the skin for surgical procedures requires quite a bit of temperament with their dexterity. Raw power could otherwise kill the subject and/or damage them more than help them.
But if I was some braindead idiot who only saw a subject as a threat, I would rely on what instinctually comes to me first to crush that subject as effectively as powerful; generally, that reliance is strength.
*Edit*
@ Darth_Gator: I would agree that the enhancement bonus of an armor would count toward DR, but anything outside that? Not really. "Armor is DR" relates specifically to armor. Dexterity, Deflection, Dodge, etc. are all concepts of outright avoiding attacks, AKA touch AC additives.
Things such as Natural Armor (which is a type of Armor) would stack and correlate to the rule, since it is still a type of Armor, whereas the subjects I just listed (as well as the others I haven't) are a type of defense.
|
|
From a real-life perspective, let's look at a Doctor/Surgeon. Their skill with a Scalpel is beyond equal, and knowing their precision and proper cutting of the skin for surgical procedures requires quite a bit of temperament with their dexterity. Raw power could otherwise kill the subject and/or damage them more than help them.
But if I was some braindead idiot who only saw a subject as a threat, I would rely on what instinctually comes to me first to crush that subject as effectively as powerful; generally, that reliance is strength.
I look at it from a completely different perspective. Rather than comparing a surgeon to someone who's all brawn, look at baseball players.
It takes TREMENDOUS hand/eye coordination to MAKE CONTACT with a baseball. If you're not brawny besides, you aren't going to hit homeruns, but you'll HIT the ball loads. If you're all brawn, you may hit the ball out of the state when you MAKE CONTACT, but that will only be once in a great while.
Another example, if I get all sorts of mad at someone and focus all my anger and STRENGTH into hitting them with something, my accuracy goes down and I'm actually more likely to miss, despite the fact that I'm "strong".
Another example, how do boxers train? Yes, they work on getting stronger, but they work MORE on hand/eye coordination. Muhammed Ali wasn't a great boxer because of his strength...he was great because he actually made contact because of his hand/eye coordination.
Another example, martial artists are not the strongest people on the planet, per se. Are they going to HIT you a whole lot in a fight? Yup.
I maintain that IRL, dexterity is actually more important to MAKING CONTACT than strength. The reason we use the strength score in RPGs is because Armor Class, To Hit rolls, and Hit Points are all abstractions. When I "miss" a melee attack in PFRPG, that does NOT mean that I "whiffed" and totally missed striking the opponent. It means I didn't land a solid enough blow to matter. The higher armor value on heavy armor doesn't make it harder to MAKE CONTACT with the wearer...it makes it harder to damage them! Heck, IRL wearing full plate actually makes it EASIER to MAKE CONTACT, because you can't move as quickly, you can't dodge the blows.
In summation, adding the "Armor as DR" rule makes the "Dex to hit" rule work in the game. It comes closer to simulating real life. If you prefer the abstraction provided by RPGs, there's nothing at all wrong with that. It just doesn't provide as much realism...
EDIT: Note that I would be completely opposed to the Dex to attack rolls rule WITHOUT the Armor DR rule. It makes the game clunky and disjointed.
Well what the hell. Give your DM the benefit of the doubt for the time being actually play it out. Let us know how it is. There's an awful lot of rules theory to be found on these forums, but not as much in the way of actual evidence, or not as much as I would care for anyway.
Actually finesse build have been shown in games and by math to do less damage than strength based builds, and it was a considerable amount. This is not just theorycrafting.
edit:If the armor DR rules makes the AC lower then it won't be as bad, but those rules can get confusing when multiple types of DR come into play. That is the only reason I have never used them.
|
|
*Edit*@ Darth_Gator: I would agree that the enhancement bonus of an armor would count toward DR, but anything outside that? Not really. "Armor is DR" relates specifically to armor. Dexterity, Deflection, Dodge, etc. are all concepts of outright avoiding attacks, AKA touch AC additives.
Things such as Natural Armor (which is a type of Armor) would stack and correlate to the rule, since it is still a type of Armor, whereas the subjects I just listed (as well as the others I haven't) are a type of defense.
Reread my post, brah. According to Ultimate Combat, Armor as DR:
1. Armor class is replaced by a new stat called "Defense Score". It is equal to: 10+Dex+Shield+Other Modifiers (including enhancement bonuses to armor, dodge, deflection, et al). This is the number you have to roll to "hit" the target.
2. Armor provides DR equal to its total armor bonus, including its enhancement bonus. Natural Armor provides DR equal to its total value. All DR provided by armor/natural armor/etc STACK. Also, this DR increases by +1 for every 5 HD a creature possesses.
EXAMPLE: A 6th level fighter with Dex 16, Dodge, a Ring of Protection +1, and a Dusty Rose Prism Ioun Stone, and Amulet of Natural Armor +1, wearing a +2 Breastplate, and carrying a +1 Large Steel Shield will have:
A.) A Defense Score of 22
B.) DR 10/Armor
The same fighter w/o the variant rule would have AC 28.
That's Variant RAW...
Actually finesse build have been shown in games and by math to do less damage than strength based builds, and it was a considerable amount. This is not just theorycrafting.
The OP should give the GM the benefit of the doubt, for a while at least. I would for my GM.
Pathfinder combat is a poor simulation of RL, but that's because the game is designed for fun and balance, not realism. I would think that a big argument for leaving Str as the mod for attack rolls is that Str isn't good for much else except attack and damage rolls, and carrying capacity. Take away the attack roll bonus, and strong characters are only good for hitting low AC opponents and carrying everyone else's stuff.
And swimming.
Str doesn't give any bonus to Intimidation rolls - unrealistic. But, simple and balanced.
There are other systems built for realism. But I personally find them less fun than the imperfect Pathfinder. It's not intended to be realistic, it's intended to be a fun game.
|
|
Actually finesse build have been shown in games and by math to do less damage than strength based builds, and it was a considerable amount. This is not just theorycrafting.
edit:If the armor DR rules makes the AC lower then it won't be as bad, but those rules can get confusing when multiple types of DR come into play. That is the only reason I have never used them.
Finesse builds with the current AC rules, sure. But a lot of that has to do with the weapons you can use finesse with. The best you can do is, what, the Curveblade? Or is Falcata eligible?
However, with the Armor as DR rule and the reduction to the "To Hit DC" that entails, along with allowing the fighter to use "finesse" with that greatsword will go a long way to evening that difference out. That IS theorycrafting, as I've not run any builds through it. Although the statements on weapon types stand on their own.
I don't think the maths would be that hard/confusing. It doesn't seem to be that much more confusing than something with DR 10/Good and Silver. Not the same, I understand that, but not really any more complex...to me, at least.
|
|
Pathfinder combat is a poor simulation of RL, but that's because the game is designed for fun and balance, not realism. I would think that a big argument for leaving Str as the mod for attack rolls is that Str isn't good for much else except attack and damage rolls, and carrying capacity. Take away the attack roll bonus, and strong characters are only good for hitting low AC opponents and carrying everyone else's stuff.
And swimming.
Str doesn't give any bonus to Intimidation rolls - unrealistic. But, simple and balanced.
There are other systems built for realism. But I personally find them less fun than the imperfect Pathfinder. It's not intended to be realistic, it's intended to be a fun game.
I would never claim that PFRPG is intended to accurately simulate real life. I'm merely pointing out that, if a GM/Gaming Group PREFER a more realistic simulation, these two variant rules go a little way along that path.
And, mind you, with this rule change, Strength is still VITALLY important. You have to get past the DR provided by armor. So, great, you have a ridiculous Dex score and you hit with your rapier every time. ..and you did 10 damage again, vs DR 8. There's 2 more HP down. Strength is still HUGE.
Finally, you CAN add strength to intimidate checks...with Intimidating Prowess.
@ Darth_Gator: Sorry, I am a little..."uncoordinated" right now, so if I cannot make correlations or read the posts properly, then I apologize, as I don't want to come across as an ignorant a**hole, and get my point (or meaning behind my statements) misconstrued (as it has a tendency to happen when I am "uncoordinated" like I am right now). It's just that time of day (or night, over at where I'm at), you know?
But back on topic. Yes, I see your logic thoroughly; it does make sense to make contact with an attack, but not have any meaning behind it. That's why the OP's GM's mention for attacks make sense (realistically), while at the same time not (since AC also classifies itself as being able to inflict a powerful, effective blow, which both Strength and Dexterity contribute to); while the PFSRD system finds Hand-Eye coordination to be a passive sort of thing. Since there is no true way to measure it (through game mechanics and/or realistic simulation), it's sad to say that it may very well be nearly impossible to impose such real-life rules in the game (since such factors aren't exactly taken into consideration, as well as differ between each individual); at least, with universal consent.
Again, I see through the logic, and understand it fully. But as to how it can be applied on a universal level (that is agreed upon with all parties associated), could perhaps never be truly accepted, through the game setting, or otherwise.
|
And, mind you, with this rule change, Strength is still VITALLY important. You have to get past the DR provided by armor. So, great, you have a ridiculous Dex score and you hit with your rapier every time. ..and you did 10 damage again, vs DR 8. There's 2 more HP down. Strength is still HUGE.
If you've got a ridiculously good DEX score, get an Agile weapon.
(this weapon property is found in the Pathfinder Society Field Guide).
Pathfinder combat is a poor simulation of RL, but that's because the game is designed for fun and balance, not realism. I would think that a big argument for leaving Str as the mod for attack rolls is that Str isn't good for much else except attack and damage rolls, and carrying capacity. Take away the attack roll bonus, and strong characters are only good for hitting low AC opponents and carrying everyone else's stuff.
And swimming.
Str doesn't give any bonus to Intimidation rolls - unrealistic. But, simple and balanced.
There are other systems built for realism. But I personally find them less fun than the imperfect Pathfinder. It's not intended to be realistic, it's intended to be a fun game.
I would never claim that PFRPG is intended to accurately simulate real life. I'm merely pointing out that, if a GM/Gaming Group PREFER a more realistic simulation, these two variant rules go a little way along that path.
And, mind you, with this rule change, Strength is still VITALLY important. You have to get past the DR provided by armor. So, great, you have a ridiculous Dex score and you hit with your rapier every time. ..and you did 10 damage again, vs DR 8. There's 2 more HP down. Strength is still HUGE.
Finally, you CAN add strength to intimidate checks...with Intimidating Prowess.
Random query: Would you apply max dex bonus limits from armour on your attack rolls?
|
|
@ Darth_Gator: Sorry, I am a little..."uncoordinated" right now, so if I cannot make correlations or read the posts properly, then I apologize, as I don't want to come across as an ignorant a**hole, and get my point (or meaning behind my statements) misconstrued (as it has a tendency to happen when I am "uncoordinated" like I am right now). It's just that time of day (or night, over at where I'm at), you know?
But back on topic. Yes, I see your logic thoroughly; it does make sense to make contact with an attack, but not have any meaning behind it. That's why the OP's GM's mention for attacks make sense (realistically), while at the same time not (since AC also classifies itself as being able to inflict a powerful, effective blow, which both Strength and Dexterity contribute to); while the PFSRD system finds Hand-Eye coordination to be a passive sort of thing. Since there is no true way to measure it (through game mechanics and/or realistic simulation), it's sad to say that it may very well be nearly impossible to impose such real-life rules in the game (since such factors aren't exactly taken into consideration, as well as differ between each individual); at least, with universal consent.
Again, I see through the logic, and understand it fully. But as to how it can be applied on a universal level (that is agreed upon with all parties associated), could perhaps never be truly accepted, through the game setting, or otherwise.
No worries, brah. I didn't thing you were being an a**hole. I just want to make sure my points are laid out clearly, as I have a tendency to NOT explain things clearly, or too technically, or whatever you'd like to say.
Regardless, I'll reiterate that I don't think you can every truly simulate reality in an rpg. The Armor as DR and Dex to Hit rules appear to be more accurate from a reality standpoint than the extreme abstractions taken by the RAW. I also maintain that I would not introduce the Dex to Hit rule WITHOUT the Armor as DR rule. Of course we'll never have universal consent. On anything. Ever. Look at Grappling...the PFRPG rules are oversimplified. Some people hate it (I'm sure...though I've never actually heard anyone complain about it). I happen to LOVE it as an abstraction...it speeds gameplay and it simplifies what would be IMPOSSIBLE to realistically simulate in an RPG. I believe there was one game system, and I can't think of which one off the top of my head, that had something like 15 pages of rules for grappling, accompanied by a dozen charts to check both parties actions, positions, leverage, etc at every second of a grapple. But I digress...
I wouldn't expect everyone to agree on the rules for this in a gaming setting...it's contrary to what we've done for years. That doesn't necessarily make it good or bad, just different. At no point am I advocating that this variant should be adopted by Paizo and written into RAW. I'm merely explaining how it seems to be a more realistic procedure to the abstraction currently used. Everyone needs to use the rules they prefer. I suppose that if everyone in this GM's group is opposed to the new rule, he should nix it. But there's something to be said for giving it a shot...I mean, the guy is running a game.
Random query: Would you apply max dex bonus limits from armour on your attack rolls?
That's the way I'd rule it. According to UC, all the other stats for armor stay the same, so your Dex to Defense Score is definitely limited by your armor. Since by RAW the max Dex score for armor ONLY applies to AC, though, you could easily argue that the max does NOT apply to attacks. I mean, under the basic rules if you use Finesse you aren't limited on your attacks because of your armor. However, since you've already changed the basis of how you determine hits in combat, I think limiting Dex to attack because of armor makes sense...
|
|
His two optional rules will create a number of problems
1. The math is going to be all wrong. If armor is DR, everyone will be much easier to hit. I can see where he is coming from, but from a realistic standpoint, you then need to track hardness and HP of armor and shields and find out how much pummeling they can take before they break and need to be repaired. Also, bonuses to hit won't scale properly with worn armor and by 10th level, everyone will be hitting everyone most of the time. There are also issues about how Magical DR stacks with Armor DR
2. The reality of dex to attack has some merit, hand eye coord is important, but so is strength and speed. Most melee fighters we see today (boxers, mma, etc) are not gymnast nimble the way a high dex fighters needs to be. Other games deal with this by having a prowess stat the specifically deals with how good you are at hitting a moving target (melee and ranged). PF doesn't have this. I suppose the easiest way to approximate it would be to average your str and dex but that seems like a lot of extra work.
1. The math is going to be all wrong. If armor is DR, everyone will be much easier to hit. I can see where he is coming from, but from a realistic standpoint, you then need to track hardness and HP of armor and shields and find out how much pummeling they can take before they break and need to be repaired. Also, bonuses to hit won't scale properly with worn armor and by 10th level, everyone will be hitting everyone most of the time. There are also issues about how Magical DR stacks with Armor DR
That's not a problem, that's the deliberate intent of the Armor as DR rules. See here for the rules. Basically, you get hit a lot more often for a lot less damage.