Mythic weapon finesse seems unbalanced...


Player Feedback

151 to 186 of 186 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Foofer wrote:

Even if a rewording of the feat does makes it clear that it only works for finesse weapons -and- that you may not add 1.5x your dexterity to damage, it will still invalidate strength for all builds that aren't strictly two-handed weapon fighters. That said, the minor loss to damage won't balance out with the gains provided to your AC, Initiative, Reflex saves and Skills that dexterity provides.

There's no real comparison here, unless they change strength to do double stat damage, but that would simply imbalance the game further.
Then of course there is the issue that all the other strength based builds are no longer viable. Sword and board and strength based two weapon fighters are laughable when compared to their dexterity based counterpart. It'll also completely change class rolls, as rogues take up the mantle of greatest overall damage dealers and AC tanks with their ability to sword and board and two weapon fight as effectively as any strength based fullplate wearing fighter with the added bonus of sneak attacks.

The feat, Mythic weapon finesse, shuffles everything around when it comes to melee combat. The division between what dexterity can do and what Strength can do is important. It's what creates the balance between AC and damage, ranged and melee, defense and offense, risk and reward. I don't believe for a second that adding this feat adds more options for people, if anything it will simply limit what viable options people use. Right now there's a lot of creative builds that use both strength and dexterity, after this, because you won't have to way merits of both stats, you'll limit how people choose to build their characters.

the dexterity bonus is still limited by armor choice. and you are constantly buying new armor to benefit from progressively more dexterity. and it takes nonfighters a +11 dexterity bonus for a haramaki to break even with mithril plate. most PCs don't have a 32+ dexterity score until epic levels.

a martial character shouldn't feel a desire to go first, that is the arcane caster's job (wizard or similar class), so initiative isn't as needed, and it is better for your foe to approach you, so you get to make the first full attack. unless you have pounce or a similar power.

reflex saves only reduce the impact of hit point damage from specific AoE type powers. most of said damage is minimal unless the character in question invests a boatload of resources and it still isn't too good. evocation damage can generally be reduced to a mere joke by a mere 2nd level spell on most classes lists.

ranged attacks are a great means to face flying foes, but those generally need both strength, AND, dexterity to be effective. short of a few classes and archetypes.


You are forgetting the Armor Master mythic champion ability that plays a key role in furthering dexterity's mastery over strength. For, by mythic tier 3, long before any of the better mythic ability options unlock, you could be wearing full-plate with no maximum dexterity modifier.

As for the previous statement about skills, I would say that tumble checks, balance checks and stealth checks come in to play far more than climb or swim checks in the average D&D game, and are not so easily by-passed with things like a knotted rope, or first level spell to allow you to breath in water.

I have seen many of you make statements as to why the benefits of dexterity are not necessary, or valuable to a fighter (though I disagree with those statements); I have yet to see someone explain to me just how strength, which adds to your melee attack, melee damage and two skills, will be balanced with a dexterity that adds to your attack bonus, melee damage, armor class, reflex saves, initiative and 6 skills.
Show me how they are balanced, and don't simply say that dexterity requires the spendature of two regular and one mythic feat, because I doubt any strength based fighter would turn down the chance to add their strength to AC, Initiative, Reflex saves and ranged attack at the same feat cost.


Foofer wrote:

You are forgetting the Armor Master mythic champion ability that plays a key role in furthering dexterity's mastery over strength. For, by mythic tier 3, long before any of the better mythic ability options unlock, you could be wearing full-plate with no maximum dexterity modifier.

As for the previous statement about skills, I would say that tumble checks, balance checks and stealth checks come in to play far more than climb or swim checks in the average D&D game, and are not so easily by-passed with things like a knotted rope, or first level spell to allow you to breath in water.

I have seen many of you make statements as to why the benefits of dexterity are not necessary, or valuable to a fighter (though I disagree with those statements); I have yet to see someone explain to me just how strength, which adds to your melee attack, melee damage and two skills, will be balanced with a dexterity that adds to your attack bonus, melee damage, armor class, reflex saves, initiative and 6 skills.
Show me how they are balanced, and don't simply say that dexterity requires the spendature of two regular and one mythic feat, because I doubt any strength based fighter would turn down the chance to add their strength to AC, Initiative, Reflex saves and ranged attack at the same feat cost.

Taking Armor Mastery three times is a huge investment to have Ungodly AC. Including the shield feats you can get normally, sure, you will have great AC and damage. But, now the Strength guy can use those three paths you used on Armor Mastery on other, more offensive builds. He can have Aerial Assault, Always a Chance, and Precision at Tier 1 while you have to wait till Tier 4 to start grabbing that.


Being able to take mythic abilities other than Armor Mastery is not an advantage strength based characters have over dexterity based characters. It's just another choice, and another advantage that dexterity based characters have at their disposal.


Foofer wrote:
Being able to take mythic abilities other than Armor Mastery is not an advantage strength based characters have over dexterity based characters. It's just another choice, and another advantage that dexterity based characters have at their disposal.

let's look at the disadvantages of using Dexterity for melee damage

you have to expend 2 feats to become purely dexterity based

you cannot use most decent 2handed weapons anywhere near as effectively

2WF has the downside of going against Damage Reduction more often than a 2handed weapon, and takes more attacks to resolve.

except for a few very specific cases, your static damage still won't be enough to make your AoOs worthwhile, and you effectively cut yourself off from any reach weapons.

your lower strength, will make it harder to deal damage with that composite bow. unless you have access to static bonuses from elsewhere.

your AC may indeed be ridiculously high, but that merely encourages foes to damage others, especially when you have fewer attacks than your foe.

it is actually much easier to stack strength bonuses than it is to stack dexterity bonuses.


Don't forget that the version you see of this isn't even the updated version. Look below:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So... yeah.

This feat somehow slipped through as an older version. It is supposed to only apply to the weapons that you can use with Weapon Finesse. That said, I am still a little worried about the balance on this one. Obliviating the need for Strength was not the intent, although even with this revision, assuming the right character build, that might still be an issue.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

So essentially, this is a great deal of feats that only apply to a select amount of weapons. Of those weapons in the core line, only the elven curved blade and the spiked chain can be two-handed. And both of those require exotic feats (unless you are an elf for the curved blade). And even the scimitar with Dervish Dance cannot be two-handed (look at the feat).

It's a lot of feats to get to where you are "better" than the Strength user. You can't really power attack with most of the options. And, we can't really agree on whether you get 1.5x the damage added when you two-hand it. Meanwhile, the Strength user will have more feats to use that isn't on Dervish Dance, Weapon Finesse, or Weapon Focus. Sorry, but I just don't see this as broken.


the strength user can also complete feat chains 2-4 levels earlier. and while you CAN, power attack with a light weapon. you CANNOT hold a light weapon in both hands. a light weapon receives all the same benefits as a 1handed weapon for the purpose of power attack and there is no rule saying that you cannot combine weapon finesse with power attack.


Lumiere Dawnbringer wrote:
the strength user can also complete feat chains 2-4 levels earlier. and while you CAN, power attack with a light weapon. you CANNOT hold a light weapon in both hands. a light weapon receives all the same benefits as a 1handed weapon for the purpose of power attack and there is no rule saying that you cannot combine weapon finesse with power attack.

You are right. I was equating light weapon with off hand weapon for some reason. Still can't get the bonus damage for it for two handing though.


I don't see how it's that bad when the Scimitar and Agile Enhancement exist.

Improved Critical=1 feat to do what a +1 Enchantment does.
Mythic Weapon Finesse=1 feat to do what a +1 Enchantment does.
Dervish Dance=1 feat do to what Mythic Weapon Finesse does, albeit with one weapon that is one of the best weapons to use Dex with.

The problem here is that dex covers way too many things, not the feat itself.


Urist The Unstoppable wrote:

I don't see how it's that bad when the Scimitar and Agile Enhancement exist.

Improved Critical=1 feat to do what a +1 Enchantment does.
Mythic Weapon Finesse=1 feat to do what a +1 Enchantment does.
Dervish Dance=1 feat do to what Mythic Weapon Finesse does, albeit with one weapon that is one of the best weapons to use Dex with.

The problem here is that dex covers way too many things, not the feat itself.

I don't actually think that Dervish Dancer is that great. Or perhaps... it's good but highly limited. Two-weapon fighters can't use it, and you can't two hand it. You might be able to use it to good effect as a freehand fighter or a duelist, but there's a reason why it sees predominate usage with magi (well, the occasional bard can use it too).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Foofer you can debate all day long. Theorycrafting is not proof. Throw up a build. Otherwise you are wasting your time.


Well perhaps they can add in a level req and feat tax for Mythic Weapon Finesse, like having Dervish Dance too.


Urist The Unstoppable wrote:
Well perhaps they can add in a level req and feat tax for Mythic Weapon Finesse, like having Dervish Dance too.

It already has a feat tax (Weapon Finesse) AND a limitation on the weapons it can use (see Jason's post). Any more would be overkill.

Truthfully, everything people (including myself) has said has all been theorycrafting and conjecture. I'd rather we actually make builds and playtest them to really see how they fare.


Alright, I'll get on converting my builds to text. What levels do you want to see them at? Originally I was going to post them at 1,5,10,15 and 20, but it got to be too much work and take up too much space. Also, do you want damage tables, full equipment?.. what do you want, what does a posted build require?


I agree 5 builds is too many. I would say 5, 10, and 15.

Core races(options from the ARG are allowed)

Full builds.

Wealth according to the WBL chart

20 point buy.

2 traits per the trait rules from the APG.

CRB, APG, UC, UM, and the playtest document of course.


Whoo, got some playtest results of this. Player originally wanted to use Guided property, but I wanted this to be core-PF only, not 3.5. Stand-alone post to follow.


Well, what I see as the problem here is as soon as the feat gets introduced, it's all about numbers.

X does more than Y
Y is more likely to dodge than X and still do Z
Z is hindered if X is used as opposed to Y

These are great and all, but it assumes you're going for optimal. That's a 1-position field you have there.

What I look at when I see this feat:

I have a character, who aspires to be nimble yet deadly. What, exactly, is still unknown. But as it is, if I don't pump STR, I'm really not doing anything worthwhile. Introduce new feat:

Now I can be swift and deadly. I still roleplay that I can't carry beans (extremely heavy beans) and I can't climb or swim worth a hoot. But at lesat my years of training allows me to use the natural flow of things to deliver stronger, swifter blows.

The doors open. Top numbers mean nothing, numbers as a whole are what I'm interested in.

If I had to relate this feat to another feat, I'd relate it to Intimidating Prowess. How intimidate isn't a STR based feat I still continue to wonder. But here I am, this giant of a man, able to behead things twice my size and kick in doors like I was pulling apart chopsticks. Yet if I try to make the main man squeal, I can't do diddly. But with this feat, when I slam my mug on the table and it shatters into the onlookers, they know that I mean business.

In short: stop fighting for the top, and look at how wide the mountain has become.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've never understood the anti-Dex for damage camp. I've allowed a feat in my home game for YEARS now that gives Dex for damage.

It applies to finesse weapons only.
The off hand does half as much damage.
If using a one handed weapon in one hand and actively using the other hand for balance the character adds times and a half damage.
I added some restrictions because of comments on these forums.
The times and a half cannot be combined with flurry, rage, spellstrike or natural attacks. These restrictions haven't even come up in game and I had three characters in one adventure using it as an intentional stress test.

I just don't understand. Between power attack and times and a half with big weapons it just doesn't compare nor keep up with the damage output of strength. With an armor training focused character wearing celestial armor it could be considered broken, but that's true without this feat.

I may not be super strict with encumberance rules, but every time I've done a character audit everything was in order. Could someone explain the basis of the arguement to me?


I think there is something that a lot of people are missing when they make the argument that the dex to damage build does not allow for 1.5X damage from dex and from power attack:

Pathfinder SRD wrote:


Curve Blade, Elven
Essentially a longer version of a scimitar, but with a thinner blade, the elven curve blade is exceptionally rare.

Benefit: You receive a +2 circumstance bonus to your Combat Maneuver Defense whenever a foe attempts to sunder your elven curve blade due to its flexible metal.

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an elven curve blade sized for you, even though it isn't a light weapon.

Weapon Feature(s): finesse

It is an exotic two-handed melee weapon with a critical range of 18-20 and 1D10 damage for medium creatures.

Notice that the description of elven curve blade specifies that it is finessable, but it is also a two-handed (not light) weapon. This means that it can be used to power attack. Further, the power attack is multiplied by 1.5 because it is two-handed.

As for dexterity adding 1.5X dexterity to the damage of an attack made by a mythic weapon finesse fighter wielding this weapon: my -gut- reaction is to say that the dexterity mod added to damage is not multiplied, BUT,

Mythic Play-test Document wrote:


Weapon Finesse (Mythic)
You are an expert with weapons that rely on your agility.
Prerequisite: Weapon Finesse, 1st mythic tier.
Benefit: You can use your Dexterity score on all melee
attack rolls and damage rolls instead of your Strength
score.

It states that you use your dexterity score instead of your strength score. It does not specify whether or not the damage is multiplied when using a two-handed weapon. If I were interpreting strictly from the way the rules are written, I would end up giving the 1.5X dex mod damage because it states, "...instead of your strength score." This leads me to believe that once this feat is taken, dexterity just functions as strength once did in relation to damage.

On the other side of things, if mythic weapon finesse does not get the 1.5X damage bonus from the dex mod, would that mean that a two-weapon wielder would do full dex mod damage with the off-hand?

Regardless of whether or not this feat is unbalanced, its final version definitely needs to have its wording tightened up.

Something else that people are doing that I perceive as a mistake is comparing the power of this feat to the power of path abilities to create a benchmark. I don't believe that this should be done, as they are different currencies. For examples, I would not say the dodge feat is underpowered because it only gives +1 to AC while the monk gets +5+wis mod to AC.

Likewise, saying that a powerful feat is not a problem because casters are more powerful than melee characters anyway does not actually address anything. Due to the difference in roles and playstyles of the two varieties of classes (casty vs melee) it makes the most sense to find benchmarks for a melee character by comparing it to another melee character. The disparity between casters and non-casters actually makes this even more true. It makes the most sense to compare within a category to bring things 'in line' and once things are 'in line' (if ever) to work on bringing the categories in line with one another.

Personally, I like the concept of the swift and deadly character, but I don't see this feat as being balanced. As Foofer said, if a strength based character was given the option of a line of feats to add strength mod instead of dex mod to initiative, reflex, AC I would have difficulty imagining them not doing it. I mean, compare those benefits to lightning reflexes, improved initiative, and dodge (okay, I realise those are not mythic feats, but if it suits you better you could instead compare weapon finesse to weapon focus). If such a feat line did exist, would this character also qualify for the swift and deadly concept?

Overall I think the problem is in the marriage of specific properties of a character to specific ability scores, rather than each property being independent of one another, but that's not going to change any time soon.

Okay, this got way too long. I'm looking forward to reading that playtest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You should compare the paths and the Special Tier attacks to mythic feats for one reason it is setting the precedent as to what mythic abilities are and can accomplish. So yes they should stand up to the power level being thrown around using mythic rules otherwise just make them regular feats not Mythic ones.

Many people are assuming that mythic is going to be the new core so they compare Mythic Feats to Regular Feats and they seem over powered, but when you put them in context with what mythic characters can accomplish using their "mythic" abilities they seem much less overpowered.


Realmwalker wrote:

You should compare the paths and the Special Tier attacks to mythic feats for one reason it is setting the precedent as to what mythic abilities are and can accomplish. So yes they should stand up to the power level being thrown around using mythic rules otherwise just make them regular feats not Mythic ones.

Many people are assuming that mythic is going to be the new core so they compare Mythic Feats to Regular Feats and they seem over powered, but when you put them in context with what mythic characters can accomplish using their "mythic" abilities they seem much less overpowered.

I agree with you in that you mean you need to look at mythic as a whole, rather than individual components (that can be said of any system) to get a sense of what's possible in mythic. I disagree in that path abilities are essentially mythic class abilities and mythic feats are... well.. mythic feats.

Path abilities and feats are not (as far as I know) interchangable. Which is more valuable? I don't know, but my point is that a mythic feat choice does not come at the expense of a path choice and vice versa, so once we start looking at specific numbers and details, it makes the most sense to compare within each category rather than between them.


LostWormOnItsWayHome wrote:

I agree with you in that you mean you need to look at mythic as a whole, rather than individual components (that can be said of any system) to get a sense of what's possible in mythic. I disagree in that path abilities are essentially mythic class abilities and mythic feats are... well.. mythic feats.

Path abilities and feats are not (as far as I know) interchangable. Which is more valuable? I don't know, but my point is that a mythic feat choice does not come at the expense of a path choice and vice versa, so once we start looking at specific numbers and details, it makes the most sense to compare within each category rather than between them.

But why do we need to compare numbers? What's the point? To prove that one is going to out-blast the other?

Will players really be "forced" to play this way? If so, I think the DM would be doing it wrong.

If a character 'wants' to play a dastardly dervish rogue who mystical is renown for dealing devastating blows via his speed, and a feat exists that lets him, do it!

If a character 'wants' to be the power-house beast-blasting strengh man who can carry oxen and carriages in his hands, and a feat exists that lets him, do it! (even if the feat doesn't exist, I'm sure he could pump STR enough to make it viable)

If a STR character wants to be Dexterous as well, he'll pick the stats to do so.

But why would he do that if he could just take a feat to bypass it? Like Improved Initiative (Mythic)? Like Dodge(Mythic)?

So, we're left with those who really want to min/max. Have a Min/Max dungeon. I'd love to see them handle a nearly completely underwater cave situation. Or a chase up a cliff wall.

When the players start complaining that the dungeon is obviously tailoring to their weaknesses, confirm that every dungeon should be challenging, and that they have combat down pat.

Or odds are, they're CHR is crap. Make them deal with a social situation.

Surely there's some creatures that bypass AC? Or disable DEX bonuses to AC?

I don't know, I don't see why this is such a big deal. As a bard I should be having a riot over the fact that Intimidating Prowess allows them to add their STR bonus to a CHR check. A useless stat made even more useless?

Let the people play <3


KHShadowrunner wrote:


But why do we need to compare numbers? What's the point? To prove that one is going to out-blast the other?

Will players really be "forced" to play this way? If so, I think the DM would be doing it wrong.

If a character 'wants' to play a dastardly dervish rogue who mystical is renown for dealing devastating blows via his speed, and a feat exists that lets him, do it!

If a character 'wants' to be the power-house beast-blasting strengh man who can carry oxen and carriages in his hands, and a feat exists that lets him, do it! (even if the feat doesn't exist, I'm sure he could pump STR enough to make it viable)

If a STR character wants to be Dexterous as well, he'll pick the stats to do so.

But why would he do that if he could just take a feat to bypass it? Like Improved Initiative (Mythic)? Like Dodge(Mythic)?

So, we're left with those who really want to min/max. Have a Min/Max dungeon. I'd love to see them handle a nearly completely underwater cave situation. Or a chase up a cliff wall.

Fundamentally I agree with you; I'm all for options. I do enjoy examining things and debating, so to a certain degree that's what this is.

Not every player is as happy and free about -options- as you are (I realise that may have seemed condescending, but it is not meant to be; I'm just having trouble articulating what I mean in a more neutral manner). They may see suboptimal options as not an option at all (in some cases I also feel this way; why take +2 when you can have +3). Also, a player may have multiple desires that conflict with one another due to constraints of the system.

Using pre-mythic as an example:
A player wants a character who is agile and lethal; perhaps by careful examination or just intuitively over time they come to realise that their character can't be as lethal as a STR character due to the limitations the system places on DEX. By comparison, the character is no longer 'lethal'.

Now post-mythic:
A player wants a character who is strong, lethal, and fairly resilient. Once again, perhaps by careful examination or just intuitively over time they come to realise that while their character is as lethal and stronger than other characters, their resilience is lesser than that of a DEX character due to the limitations the system places on STR. By comparison, the character is no longer 'resilient'.

Much like someone with an IQ of 100 is awfully smart when they're surrounded by people with IQs less than 80, or a person who can lift 1000lbs looks weak if they're in a city of people who can mostly lift 2000lbs.

Also, if

KHShadowrunner wrote:


When the players start complaining that the dungeon is obviously tailoring to their weaknesses, confirm that every dungeon should be challenging, and that they have combat down pat.

Or odds are, they're CHR is crap. Make them deal with a social situation.

This is a balancing mechanism of DnD/Pathfinder that I don't agree with. It's inherent in the system, but it rationalises such things as "Class Y does not have to be as good in combat as class X because class X is better out of combat than class Y."

I just don't think that's great game design. What it does is creates a scenario where it is okay for a player(s)/character(s) to be useless/less useful in one scene because they will be useful in another scene. I believe this detracts from the enjoyment and involvement in the game. Ideally the game should be balanced around each character receiving various opportunities to shine WITHIN a scene at different junctions, rather than different character shining in different scenes. I believe this would be more exciting and hold the attention of players better than what is currently provided.

That's just my own philosophy, of course.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

We're comparing apples to oranges. Before Mythic Adventures is even considered, STR based Fighters are superior to DEX based Fighters in damage every time. But do you know what? A DEX absed Fighter is going to be built differently -- he's going to likely be using different actions in combat opposed to attacking each round. Trip? Yes. Disarm? Yes. Feint? Yes. Traditionally, DEX based characters use light armor to retain mobility. When I think about such a character, the Duelist PrC comes to mind. So, what is it that everyone is really worried about? Every player has the right to have fun and if something allows their concept to work better, are you really going to be that guy who says, "No, that won't be fair to X since he uses Y to do Z?" This thread has already pointed out numerous GMs do what this feat does in their home game without issue. People should be having fun, not crying wolf because they don't like something unless its a genuine issue.

Scarab Sages Contributor

Word.


LostWormOnItsWayHome wrote:

This is a balancing mechanism of DnD/Pathfinder that I don't agree with. It's inherent in the system, but it rationalises such things as "Class Y does not have to be as good in combat as class X because class X is better out of combat than class Y."

I just don't think that's great game design. What it does is creates a scenario where it is okay for a player(s)/character(s) to be useless/less useful in one scene because they will be useful in another scene. I believe this detracts from the enjoyment and involvement in the game. Ideally the game should be balanced around each character receiving various opportunities to shine WITHIN a scene at different junctions, rather than different character shining in different scenes. I believe this would be more exciting and hold the attention of players better than what is currently provided.

That's just my own philosophy, of course.

To which I agree. It's not the optimal way of handling a situation. But it's one way.

Plus, there's only so many was you can handle a situation when you have one character who excels at melee combat, one character who excels at ranged combat, one character who excels at healing, one character who excels at controlling, and one character who does nothing during combat and excels at social skills.

I don't know how many times (well, 2, but to be fair that's 100% so far) I've been with my party of 2, have come up to an area full of mobs, and while I see an opportunity for diplomacy, they ready their bow and swords. There's only so much you can do. :)

Sovereign Court

Foofer wrote:

I really can't understand where you people (those defending the feat) are coming from. It's not balanced, clearly. Not one of you have brought up any points to the contrary. You're just calling me a whiner. It's not like it effects me as a player, it just allows me to build that much more powerful a character, and it's not like it would adversely effect me as a DM, because I could just ban the feat. All I'm doing is pointing out that it's unbalance. Are there other things that are unbalanced? of course. That doesn't mean this isn't.

Now do me a solid, and if you're going to reply, do so in a constructive way. I'm willing to have my mind changed if you make some legitimate points on the subject matter.

You do realize that a finessable weapon like a shortsword does 3.5 less damage than a greatsword?

Comparing STR 10 DEX 18 weapon finesse fighter to that same fighter with weapon finesse and Mythic weapon finesse, all he gains is +4 damage right? That is barely enough to make up for using the weaker weapon to begin with. Even taking the exotic proficiency to use an Elven Curve Blade only increases your net benefit to 2.5 damage. Plus its not clear whether Mythic Weapon Finesse gives you a damage bonus equal to 1.5 times your Dex bonus when using a 2-hander.

Mythic Power Attack, mythic vital strike, etc. would give about the same benefit. Plus you still need strength to be wearing that heavy armor, or else you are losing that armor benefit as well.

Mythic Weapon Finesse is a huge boost only for dual-wielding fighters, but they are already behind two-handed fighters because they suffer a penalty to hit, cannot benefit from the extra power attack bonus or extra strength bonus, and derive relatively less benefit from iterative attacks.

Sovereign Court

Foofer wrote:

You are forgetting the Armor Master mythic champion ability that plays a key role in furthering dexterity's mastery over strength. For, by mythic tier 3, long before any of the better mythic ability options unlock, you could be wearing full-plate with no maximum dexterity modifier.

As for the previous statement about skills, I would say that tumble checks, balance checks and stealth checks come in to play far more than climb or swim checks in the average D&D game, and are not so easily by-passed with things like a knotted rope, or first level spell to allow you to breath in water.

I have seen many of you make statements as to why the benefits of dexterity are not necessary, or valuable to a fighter (though I disagree with those statements); I have yet to see someone explain to me just how strength, which adds to your melee attack, melee damage and two skills, will be balanced with a dexterity that adds to your attack bonus, melee damage, armor class, reflex saves, initiative and 6 skills.
Show me how they are balanced, and don't simply say that dexterity requires the spendature of two regular and one mythic feat, because I doubt any strength based fighter would turn down the chance to add their strength to AC, Initiative, Reflex saves and ranged attack at the same feat cost.

As others have said, you have to compare this DEX fighter to the STR fighter who isn't wasting his Champion abilities on armor master x 3. armor master also doesn't help you with the weight of the armor. Mithral full plate is 25 pounds, which leaves you only 8 pounds to spare with STR 10 if you want to keep a light load. A heavy mithal shield is another 7 pounds or so.


GM Kyle wrote:
We're comparing apples to oranges. Before Mythic Adventures is even considered, STR based Fighters are superior to DEX based Fighters in damage every time. But do you know what? A DEX absed Fighter is going to be built differently -- he's going to likely be using different actions in combat opposed to attacking each round. Trip? Yes. Disarm? Yes. Feint? Yes. Traditionally, DEX based characters use light armor to retain mobility. When I think about such a character, the Duelist PrC comes to mind. So, what is it that everyone is really worried about? Every player has the right to have fun and if something allows their concept to work better, are you really going to be that guy who says, "No, that won't be fair to X since he uses Y to do Z?" This thread has already pointed out numerous GMs do what this feat does in their home game without issue. People should be having fun, not crying wolf because they don't like something unless its a genuine issue.

Agree 100%.

As someone who loves Dex-based combat builds (and finds their treatment in Pathfinder woefully inadequate), I find it highly hypocritical to criticize the addition of minor abilities like this into the rules when the ones who trumpet their objections so loudly are the ones who constantly scream about how "fighters don't get nice things".

Got news for you: Dex-based combatants get EVEN LESS.


How about some math shall we?
max PFS level, fighter 12/tier 6 point buy 20
stats 16 14 14 10 10 10 (no dump, no minmaxing)
main stat 16 starting +2 racial +3 bump + 6 mythic +4 item= 31 (+10 modifier)

Strenght based fighter deals (greatsword) 2d6 + 15 (22) damage before any static modifier. His CA assuming the best armor he can ever dream to buy (Full Plate +5) is 14 from armor and 4 max from dex (he needs a +4 dex item to get the full benefit)

Dex based fighter deals (elven curve blade) 1d10 + 15 (20,5) damage befor any static modifier. His Ca in a mithril breastplate +5 is 11 + 10 from dex with only one Armor Master

So the sum for the dex build is, he has invested 1 normal feat, 1 epic feat and a path ability. He has gained 3 in CA, 6 on the reflex saves, 6 on initiative rolls. He still has 14 in strenght for weight. He also saved up 24k from the secondary physical stat +4 item. And should be noted for the games that go higher, the bonus are going to go up every time the stats are going to be increased.

And still, the warrior case, while bad as it is, is not the most abusive. The problematic one is a monk with his already ridiculus Ac and saves that takes this feat.


@dekalinder....

Well, those numbers are all well and good, but you have to take into account the feat, mythic feat, and the path ability that the str based fighter would have spent as well.

Power attack, mythic power attack, and, say, precision to improve his hit chance. Now that str fighter is at an additional +16 (+18? not sure how that +50% works) to damage that doubles on a crit, and is hitting more often.

To be blunt, in my group AC doesn't matter at all. The difference between ac 18 and 21 is nothing when the monsters we fight are routinely hitting at a +15, and by 12th lv thats easily a +20.

When everyone has a +20 on initiative rolls an additional +6 is negligible as well.

+6 reflex saves is a decent situational boost, but AoE spells at 12lv? Rarely used because there are so many better spells for that kind of thing.

Sovereign Court

And let's not forget that your dex fighter did not spend 1 feat + 1 mythic feat + 1 path ability. You forgot Exotic Weapon Profiency(Elven Blade), which means it's 2 feats + 1 mythic feat + 1 path ability in order to have a +4 bonus to AC and less damage than a fighter spending no feats/mythic feats/path ability.

I think that the 2 feat + 1 mythic feat + 1 path ability is a good enough tax in order to have a little more AC and less damage than a STR fighter who spent no feat/mythic feat/path ability.

And please, do not underestimate high STR stat. Having a huge light load is something really cool and useful that people seem to underestimate most of the time... And don't forget that those mythril armors/shield you seem to be fond of to say that Dex-based thing are too powerful have an extra cost...

And I'd like to thank you to show use that a dex-based fighter with an elven-blade isn't that much better than a STR-based fighter...

I still think that we could make Mythic Weapon Finesse apply to all weapons, if you take out the 1.5x Dex modifier to damage roll when using 2 handed-weapons (which was never really clear in the first place...).

And if you want to know why? Well... because otherwise you take out a lot of options, and people will tend to go take the elven-blade...

Scarab Sages

Dicussing pure DPR without a complete character and understanding all the ramifications of a change is pointless. Here is sample character I will be using during playtest Shazzara using Mythic Weapon Finesse with a Katana - best possible weapon for a bladebound magus.

Changing the character to drop Mythic Weapon Finesse, she would pick up Mythic Power Attack. She would also drop Eschew Materials for Dervish Dance using a scimitar and drop aerial assault for component power.

Total changes to the character: weapon die changes from 1d8 to 1d6. Power attack changes from +4 dmg to +6 dmg. Aerial assault is delay 2 tiers, at which point I would be picking up Mythic Power Attack on the exisiting build. Level 10 happens to be at a point where the Katana deals 1 less damage on average, this changes in a few levels.

Applying restrictions to Mythic Weapon Finesse similar to those currently applied to Dervish Dance will result in similar results. Everbody interested in a two-handed Dex build will resort to the Elven Curve Blade. Maguses will still use Dervish Dance + Scimitar. Two-weapon fighters will still use light weapons.

Scarab Sages

I think its fine. It hardly invalidates strength build by allowing dex builds to be possible. Two feet investments is hardly free IMO. I run have a similar feet that I call Improved Weapon Finesse that doesn't require mythic status in my home game and have found that it great reduces the cookie cutter nature of combatants. Its defiantly preferable to everyone using a scimitar.

Scarab Sages

Matthew Trent wrote:
I think its fine. It hardly invalidates strength build by allowing dex builds to be possible. Two feet investments is hardly free IMO.

In addition to the build above I created two strength builds. One of them, Ulflafaan oracle of battle with a greatsword, I considered as a dex build with an elven curve blade.

She would have at a baseline we have, +8 AC/Ref/Init. Damage increases due to the higher threat range. Sounds good.

Looking deeper: she's giving up tougness and cleaving finish in exchange for weapon finesse and exotic weapon proficiency. She's giving up either mythic cleave or mythic vital strike for mythic weapon finesse.

Even worse: the character uses either enlarge or righteous might to extend reach and increase damage. Comparing enlarge, she would suffer -2 to-hit -2 damage in order to extend her reach (necessary to take full advantage of mythic cleave) as opposed to usig the spell on a strength based character. Now consider the spell deadly juggernaut, which allows her to continue increasing her strength the longer she fights: usless on a dex build.

151 to 186 of 186 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Mythic Adventures Playtest / Player Feedback / Mythic weapon finesse seems unbalanced... All Messageboards
Recent threads in Player Feedback