|
Why?
I have been play-testing the effects of replacing strength with dexterity to melee damage, and I have come to the conclusion that as the rules stand, this is not a game-breaking mechanic, but rather a balancing one.
What?
What is the most balanced approach to implementing this feat?
How can I improve the wording and structure?
So you know...
I've added a number of different pre-requisites and functions to this version to give you all a picture of all of the ideas I have for possible powers, restrictions, and balancing hoops, though, my personal version currently does not include them all. If you'd like some background as to why I included what I did, feel free to ask.
The debate regarding whether or not this kind of feat should exist, while interesting and worth the time for the community at large, is unnecessary for the purposes of this thread. That being said, please Balance my Feat: Finesse Strike
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: With a light or finessable weapon made for a creature of your size category with which you have Weapon Focus, you may choose to use your Dexterity bonus instead of your Strength bonus on damage rolls. If you have a Strength penalty, it is still added to your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls. You cannot use this feat if you are wearing medium or heavy armor.
Normal: Only your strength modifier is applied to melee damage rolls.
Special: Your Dexterity score counts as your Strength score for the purposes of qualifying for and applying feats that alter attack actions and full-round attacks.
Edit: Added another hoop example.
With this feat, would you add 1.5X DEX to damage if using the weapon in two hands (e.g. Elven Curved Blade)?
EDIT: Similarly, would you only add 0.5X DEX to damage with an off hand weapon?
What would be the benefit of investing in Strength beyond 13 (to qualify for Power Attack) then? Why would everyone not pump dex and use an Elven Curve Blade?
|
|
What would be the benefit of investing in Strength beyond 13 (to qualify for Power Attack) then? Why would everyone not pump dex and use an Elven Curve Blade?
Are you arguing that this shouldn't exist or looking for clarification in order to aid in the building process?
Edit: Also, no offense intended, but your question leads me to believe that you didn't read the entirety of the post, let alone the feat for multiple reasons
What would be the benefit of investing in Strength beyond 13 (to qualify for Power Attack) then? Why would everyone not pump dex and use an Elven Curve Blade?Are you arguing that this shouldn't exist or looking for clarification in order to aid in the building process?
Both? You said it is perfectly balanced, so I am wondering where that balance is. There would appear to me to be no benefit to Strength at all. If you had at least left off the 1.5x Dex thing, then you could argue that Strength is for 2-handers and Dex is for the rest, but if you include the higher multiplier, I just can't figure out why anyone would care about Strength.
|
|
Both? You said it is perfectly balanced, so I am wondering where that balance is. There would appear to me to be no benefit to Strength at all. If you had at least left off the 1.5x Dex thing, then you could argue that Strength is for 2-handers and Dex is for the rest, but if you include the higher multiplier, I just can't figure out why anyone would care about Strength.What would be the benefit of investing in Strength beyond 13 (to qualify for Power Attack) then? Why would everyone not pump dex and use an Elven Curve Blade?Are you arguing that this shouldn't exist or looking for clarification in order to aid in the building process?
So you're saying that the 1.5x/double slice mechanics should be barred from the feat? That's a possible balancing act, so thank you.
Also, I don't want anyone to think the feat is perfectly balanced, in fact, that's what this thread is all about, helping me to balance the feat under the assumption that the mechanic of adding dex to damage is generally a balancing one.
It's already possible with scimitars so why not.
It's already possible with scimitars so why not.
Except it only works if you use a single one-handed weapon with nothing at all in your off-hand, which is a major restriction. That's no dual wielding, no two-handing, and the Scimitar is not actually a finesse weapon, so you lose some synergy with finesse-dependent abilities (Piranha Strike, for example).
I do think that Dervish Dance is balanced and fine, but only because of the above restrictions. I think you're better off keeping the one-handed weapon with nothing in the off-hand requirement, though you could certainly change the feat otherwise (there's no reason you need Perform: Dance as a pre-req, for example).
The end result is that, ignoring attack rolls, Dex is used for quite a few skills, Reflex saves, and AC, while Strength is used for Climb, Swim (two skills that are quickly obsolete) and carrying capacity (again, very quickly irrelevant).
That means if you're going to allow Dex to damage, you have to find some way to make sure Strength is still an attribute worth taking, and that probably means ensuring that Dex to damage is limited enough to be less of a benefit and more of a consolation prize.
Yeah, there is that. I'm just saying a quick houserule of "Dervish Dance works for any one-handed weapon" would probably be balanced
Yeah, there is that. I'm just saying a quick houserule of "Dervish Dance works for any one-handed weapon" would probably be balanced
I agree.
Basically just copy-pasted Dervish Dance, but changed it up so as to work with other weapons:
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: When wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon (for which you have the Weapon Focus feat) with one hand, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the chosen weapon as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The weapon must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
Normal: Only your strength modifier is applied to melee damage rolls.
Special: You may use this feat in conjunction with an appropriately-sized two-handed weapon so long as the weapon would normally be usable in conjunction with the Weapon Finesse feat. You do not gain 1.5x your Dexterity modifier to damage when using such a weapon (such as you would when using your Strength modifier). This does not negate the need of feats or other abilities that require a free hand to use.
Does the special bit make the Elven Curved Blade too powerful?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Your prerequisites are meaningless. Everybody, EVERYBODY who even remotely wants this feat will have that DEX and those feats. Every time. It's like saying that the prerequisite for using a glass of water is being thirsty.
The real problem here is that DEX is already the best ability score in the game. AC, some attack rolls, REF saves, Initiative, lots of skills including some of the most used, most important ones. For just one feat (Weapon Finesse), people can make DEX even more important by upgrading "some" attack rolls to "all" attack rolls (I've never seen a character take Weapon Finesse and then use a non-finesse weapon, ever, so all their attack rolls certainly apply).
Adding one more feat to suck the one remaining use of STR out of that ability score and pile it onto the already overwhelmingly important DEX has been a bad idea from the start. It was a bad idea with all the "dervish" stuff from 3.5 and now in Pathfinder. Too much.
And now your homebrew feat makes it even easier, more universal.
OK, admittedly, losing a couple points of damage by not being able to 1.5x with two hands might mean something, but Finesse users can just go TWF and still get the extra .5 with the second hand anyway.
You're steamrolling STR into non-existence. Worse, you're elevating DEX to be the one ability score that is several orders of magnitude more useful than any other.
TL;dr: yeah, it's unbalanced, but then so is Dervish Dance.
@DM_Blake: Are referring to my version of the feat, or Abadar's? If mine, you can't TWF with it, unless you're using unarmed strikes.
Your prerequisites are meaningless. Everybody, EVERYBODY who even remotely wants this feat will have that DEX and those feats. Every time. It's like saying that the prerequisite for using a glass of water is being thirsty.
So what? Must every feat have a useless prerequisite that you wouldn't take except to qualify for another feat? Feat chains are already problematic, there's no need to nerf martial characters with useless prerequisites. Int 13 and Combat Expertise are just a pain in the ass of every Fighter who wants to focus on combat maneuver
The real problem here is that DEX is already the best ability score in the game. AC, some attack rolls, REF saves, Initiative, lots of skills including some of the most used, most important ones. For just one feat (Weapon Finesse), people can make DEX even more important by upgrading "some" attack rolls to "all" attack rolls (I've never seen a character take Weapon Finesse and then use a non-finesse weapon, ever, so all their attack rolls certainly apply).
Adding one more feat to suck the one remaining use of STR out of that ability score and pile it onto the already overwhelmingly important DEX has been a bad idea from the start. It was a bad idea with all the "dervish" stuff from 3.5 and now in Pathfinder. Too much.
And now your homebrew feat makes it even easier, more universal.
OK, admittedly, losing a couple points of damage by not being able to 1.5x with two hands might mean something, but Finesse users can just go TWF and still get the extra .5 with the second hand anyway.
You're steamrolling STR into non-existence. Worse, you're elevating DEX to be the one ability score that is several orders of magnitude more useful than any other.
TL;dr: yeah, it's unbalanced, but then so is Dervish Dance.
Lots of hyperbole here...
While free Dex to all damage rolls is probably too good, Dervish Dance is okay, if it were that OMGWTFBBQ OP, we'd see a lot of builds with it, and that's not the case (except for Magi, of course).
I actually like DD because it's the one feat that makes Dueling actually viable! And even then, duelists are still not that good... Honestly, if DD worked with any finesse weapon, it'd be a great boon to every player who ever wanted to play a dueling character without having to take a PrC that is not all that great.
OK, admittedly, losing a couple points of damage by not being able to 1.5x with two hands might mean something, but Finesse users can just go TWF and still get the extra .5 with the second hand anyway.
No they can't. Dervish Dance requires you to have a free off-hand.
Unless you're talking about regular Weapon Finesse, but it's kinda silly to complain about that. You're taking -2 to-hit on every hit in a round just to add what is likely a piddling amount of extra damage.
Abadar. There's one part I don't quite understand.
Special: Your Dexterity score counts as your Strength score for the purposes of qualifying for and applying feats that alter attack actions and full-round attacks.
Can you elaborate on this?
OK, admittedly, losing a couple points of damage by not being able to 1.5x with two hands might mean something, but Finesse users can just go TWF and still get the extra .5 with the second hand anyway.No they can't. Dervish Dance requires you to have a free off-hand.
Unless you're talking about regular Weapon Finesse, but it's kinda silly to complain about that. You're taking -2 to-hit on every hit in a round just to add what is likely a piddling amount of extra damage.
In addition, they lose -2 to hit, which also drops their damage further.
OK, admittedly, losing a couple points of damage by not being able to 1.5x with two hands might mean something, but Finesse users can just go TWF and still get the extra .5 with the second hand anyway.No they can't. Dervish Dance requires you to have a free off-hand.
Unless you're talking about regular Weapon Finesse, but it's kinda silly to complain about that. You're taking -2 to-hit on every hit in a round just to add what is likely a piddling amount of extra damage.
Even if they could, TWF sucks. At least this way the character gets to benefit from that absurd Dex requirement...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone's constantly arguing over how the importance of dex as to everything ever makes this feat so OP. My question is, why not make strength more important in some other way?
After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors and still benefit fully from this feat?
[...]After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors [...]
Barring folks completely ignoring encumbrance rules, which is a mistake in my opinion, this is already in place to a certain degree.
Just adding in the following clause, which the OP did to an extent and several other posts above indicate, corrects for this:
The weapon must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand. You cannot use this feat if you are wearing medium or heavy armor.
Now, a huge mistake would be to make additional feats which remove the restrictions listed above, which is a common practice from 3.0 - Pathfinder and in homebrew/house rules.
I've used a similar feat (highly modified version of Dervish Dance) for a long time in my games and it hasn't caused a catastrophic collapse of reality.
Everyone's constantly arguing over how the importance of dex as to everything ever makes this feat so OP. My question is, why not make strength more important in some other way?
After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors and still benefit fully from this feat?
This might not help.
Anyone interested in using DEX for attack and damage rolls probably has a high DEX. Just about anyone with a high DEX realizes that light armor like a mithral chain shirt lets them have the same or better AC as heavy armors without being limited in how far they can move each round. So they all, or at least nearly all, will be in lighter armor anyway.
Besides, the feat the OP suggested already prohibited medium and heavy armor.
To those who responded to me, I was addressing the OP and his feat with all my comments. I know Dervish Dance requires the off hand to be free, but the OP's feat did not.
[...]After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors [...]Barring folks completely ignoring encumbrance rules, which is a mistake in my opinion, this is already in place to a certain degree.
Now I know what to do with my dex magus next. Check his encumbrance. Also, since I'm more focused on him dealing damage with spells... Thought train under the spoiler.
Everyone's constantly arguing over how the importance of dex as to everything ever makes this feat so OP. My question is, why not make strength more important in some other way?
After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors and still benefit fully from this feat?
You kinda do. That's why there are encumbrance rules. (Personally, I think ACPs are exaggerated, but Encumbrance makes a lot of sense and works fine, even if it's a bit of a bother to keep track of)
To those who responded to me, I was addressing the OP and his feat with all my comments. I know Dervish Dance requires the off hand to be free, but the OP's feat did not.
I know. I wasn't doubting your knowledge of how DD works, just disagreeing with the claim that it's OP. The "must have a free hand" is a pretty heavy limitation (except for Magi, of course, since they need a free hand anyway).
That free hand means you can't 2-hand, you can't TWF and you can't use a shield. So DD is not really that good... Well, by RAW, you could TWF with Unarmed Strikes or Armor Spikes, but by RAI, the feat is meant to only affect the damage rolls made with a Scimitar.
Everyone's constantly arguing over how the importance of dex as to everything ever makes this feat so OP. My question is, why not make strength more important in some other way?
After all, the heavier your armor, the, well, heavier your armor, what if you needed a minimum strength score to wear heavier armors and still benefit fully from this feat?This might not help.
Anyone interested in using DEX for attack and damage rolls probably has a high DEX. Just about anyone with a high DEX realizes that light armor like a mithral chain shirt lets them have the same or better AC as heavy armors without being limited in how far they can move each round. So they all, or at least nearly all, will be in lighter armor anyway.
Besides, the feat the OP suggested already prohibited medium and heavy armor.
Fighters DO get that ability to raise the maximum dex bonus on his armor, but I've already thought about it more deeply, and I've changed my opinions past my initial reactions.
How about limiting it in the same manner as precision damage -- ie, don't gain the benefit in concealment, reduced/no damage to certain types of creatures that just are not susceptible to that damage.
Fluff reasoning could be: Dex to damage is hitting that perfect spot with control (much as sneak attack), and therefore, if that spot just doesnt exist (or is concealed), you can't do it.
I am just thinking this through and if I might allow something like this in my home game. My first answer is "nope, no way". With some additional consideration how about the following:
Disallow Power Attack with this feat? Power Attack, by it's very name, seems to mean swinging harder and being more wreckless, to gain bonus damage. Yes, it does not specifify this in the feat but the feat also has a Strength requirements, thus reinforcing the idea.
A Dex based damage would be more finesse and precision rather than brute strenght so, at least in my mind, it's apples and oranges.
Edit: Corrected my poor typing.
I am just thinking this through and if I might allow something liek this in my home game. My first answer is "nope, no way". With soem additional consideration how about the following:
Disallow Power Attack with this feat? Power Attack, by it's very name, seems to mean swinging harder and being more wreckless, to gain bonus damage. Yes, it does not specifify this int he feat but the feat also has a Strength requirements, thus reinforcing the idea.
A Dex based damage would be more finesse and precision rather than brute strenght so, at least in my mind, it's apples and oranges.
This is actually a really good idea. I advise the OP to consider it.
Regarding encumbrance, it's only extra book-keeping for the players. If you're players have somehow convinced you to keep track of it, I would highly advise you revisit that. After you get used to what looks "right", you'll find skimming their encumbrance for accurate or close to accurate values becomes very easy and takes little time.
Now I know what to do with my dex magus next. Check his encumbrance. Also, since I'm more focused on him dealing damage with spells... Thought train under the spoiler.
** spoiler omitted **
I particularly agree with the "Granting such should be restricted to light weapons."
While I do not have my version of the feat for my setting available (on my office computer), it is restricted (in the prerequisites) to light or one-handed piercing weapons. However, I also use something more like the following, to allow for two-weapon fighting use:
"The weapon must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a shield in your off hand. You cannot use this feat if you are wearing medium or heavy armor."
Related Notes After Adding this Feat:
1. I've had 1 player (out of a group of 8) in the past three campaigns actually go two-weapon fighting using this feat.
2. Every rogue takes it. No exceptions, thusfar (an indication of an internal problem, perceived or otherwise, with the rogue class).
3. Resulting dpr of twf/rogue or fighter builds using this feat still do not touch the dpr of a two-handed fighter archetype, though it has gotten close on occasion. I do not, personally, see this as a bad thing.
One-handed weapons only (no 1.5 multiplier), works only against enemies vulnerable to precision damage. There, it's balanced.
This is one of the feats that helps make rogues and dual wielders playable. I would always allow it.
Regarding encumbrance, it's only extra book-keeping for the players. If you're players have somehow convinced you to keep track of it, I would highly advise you revisit that. After you get used to what looks "right", you'll find skimming their encumbrance for accurate or close to accurate values becomes very easy and takes little time.
That's pretty much what I do. I only tell players to keep track of encumbrance if they have a Str score of 10 or lower. And it's not much of a problem because most of us have access to HeroLab, so we don't need to make the calculations ourselves.
I don't see why 1.5 damage is a big deal, if you are using 2 hands to manipulate the weapon's path, can't you guide it easier into the enemy's innards?
I was actually contemplating a similar house feat, calling it Weapon Precision. DEX 17 is a little high imo. I am also a fan of making an errata on Pirhana Strike to work with all finessable weapons.
It's a 3 feat dip, if I am wasting 3 feats for one aspect of my character, it better be worth it.
I still think some direct damage melee power should solely be the domain of Strength.
Has anyone thought about how a feat like this would work with composite bows?
I think it's also important to consider why some people are drawn to the Dex-based warrior.
I think a lot of the anti-dex crowd really likes the heavily armored warrior as being the best at warrioring.
But I'm allergic to any armor greater than medium, as are many heroes in fiction. It's a pre-existing condition. That's what draws me towards Dex builds.
I actually dislike this feat because it's the 3rd feat in a chain. You're not a Fighter or Human? Hope you enjoy waiting until level 5 to actually fight effectively.
I'd axe weapon focus from the requirements.. Weapon Finesse and BAB +1 is enough, same as Piranha Strike.
I'd axe weapon focus from the requirements.. Weapon Finesse and BAB +1 is enough, same as Piranha Strike.
+1
it also doesn't restrict you on weapons this way
I run a similar version of this, but it only allows you half dex to damage, but allow it to be used with TWF. I am going to watch it closely because I still think it may be too much.
TWF + weapon finesse + dex to damage -> best offense and defense in the game
Another thing people forget when playing with these ideas, natural attacks. All natural attacks are finessable. So, Vivisectionst Alchemist with 4 vestigial arms, claws, and bite. That lets you wield 2 daggers with TWF while making 2 claw and 1 bite attack with +dex +5d6 to every attack that hits.
Even with just the standard dervish dance, I can crank out a Ranger 2/Vivisectionist 8 build with a 35 AC that does about 120ish damage a round when flanking.
The thing about homebrew content is, when you implement it... you prove that you are open to homebrew content. You prove that you are a DM who does not follow RAW.
The Vivisectionist? "Yeah, no, that doesn't work." There. Problem solved.
Also, due to RIDICULOUS feat investment, TWF + Weapon Finesse + Finesse Strike + Piranha Strike is a very slow engine to get going. AND it is limited by the maximum dexterity of your armor. If you take off the armor, the "price" of the build, compared to a standard two-hander, is even more pronounced.
The thing about homebrew content is, when you implement it... you prove that you are open to homebrew content. You prove that you are a DM who does not follow RAW.
The Vivisectionist? "Yeah, no, that doesn't work." There. Problem solved.Also, due to RIDICULOUS feat investment, TWF + Weapon Finesse + Finesse Strike + Piranha Strike is a very slow engine to get going. AND it is limited by the maximum dexterity of your armor. If you take off the armor, the "price" of the build, compared to a standard two-hander, is even more pronounced.
Right but talking about 'balancing a feat' cant include 'the dm will disallow anything that isnt balanced'. Thats not what balancing means. If that were the case, you dont need the feat, the dm would just let people use dex for damage on a case by case basis.
To the OP, I am in the crew that believes dex is too strong a stat already. My recomendation to balance this feat is either to limit it to only a single one handed weapon, or to cause it to remove one or more of the other benefits of dex. IE if you take this feat, your intelligence adds to reflex saves instead of dex.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I use scaling feats instead of feat chains. To keep STR viable and still allow Dex subs, Weapon Finesse does the following:
But there are disadvantages as well:
Right but talking about 'balancing a feat' cant include 'the dm will disallow anything that isnt balanced'. Thats not what balancing means. If that were the case, you dont need the feat, the dm would just let people use dex for damage on a case by case basis.
I responded that way because it was a very, very niche problem. Anyone expecting homebrew content to be balanced with every single thing in every single book is out of their mind.
I think a lot of the anti-dex crowd ...
Anti-DEX crowd? Is there such a thing? Is the forum really divided into "Anti-DEX" and "Pro-DEX" groups?
I doubt it.
I am neither anti- or pro- with regard to DEX, or much of anything else.
I think, on any given forum question, the respondents fall into either a "I want to do this because it's cool and I like it" group or a "I want to make sure this is balanced for the good of the game" group.
I am always in that last group, but I rarely reply when someone posts something imbalanced and asks what people think about the cool factor. The OP here asked, specifically, if his feat was balanced. I explained why it seems unbalanced, to me, from a perspective of what's good for the game.
If he had asked if his feat was cool, I would have either declined responding or maybe even responded that his feat is cool, because it is.
As a final question, how many people reading this thread would consider this houserule:
I plan to create two feats, so that when both of them are taken, a character can add his STR bonus (instead of his DEX) to his AC, REF Saves, ranged attack rolls, and initiative rolls.
Doing this will give STR fighters the same ability to completely ignore DEX and used it as a massive dump stat, just like the propsed feat (coupled with Weapon Finesse) does for dumping STR.
To those of you who would support those two feats, then I would say great, implement all of them and maintain balance. And to those of you who wouldn't support those two feats, I would say great, then don't implement any feat that lets DEX add to weapon damage.
|
I think a lot of the anti-dex crowd ...Anti-DEX crowd? Is there such a thing? Is the forum really divided into "Anti-DEX" and "Pro-DEX" groups?
I doubt it.
I am neither anti- or pro- with regard to DEX, or much of anything else.
I think, on any given forum question, the respondents fall into either a "I want to do this because it's cool and I like it" group or a "I want to make sure this is balanced for the good of the game" group.
I am always in that last group, but I rarely reply when someone posts something imbalanced and asks what people think about the cool factor. The OP here asked, specifically, if his feat was balanced. I explained why it seems unbalanced, to me, from a perspective of what's good for the game.
If he had asked if his feat was cool, I would have either declined responding or maybe even responded that his feat is cool, because it is.
As a final question, how many people reading this thread would consider this houserule:
I plan to create two feats, so that when both of them are taken, a character can add his DEX to his AC, REF Saves, ranged attack rolls, and initiative rolls.
Doing this will give STR fighters the same ability to completely ignore DEX and used it as a massive dump stat, just like the propsed feat (coupled with Weapon Finesse) does for dumping STR.
To those of you who would support those two feats, then I would say great, implement all of them and maintain balance. And to those of you who wouldn't support those two feats, I would say great, then don't implement any feat that lets DEX add to weapon damage.
assuming you meant STR to AC, REF saves, etc.
mmmm Heavy armor and STR bonus to AC. Or does "max DEX bonus" turn into "max STR bonus"?
As a final question, how many people reading this thread would consider this houserule:
I plan to create two feats, so that when both of them are taken, a character can add his STR (I'm assuming here) to his AC, REF Saves, ranged attack rolls, and initiative rolls.
Doing this will give STR fighters the same ability to completely ignore DEX and used it as a massive dump stat, just like the propsed feat (coupled with Weapon Finesse) does for dumping STR.
I would not support the implementation of that because it boils down to a strawman argument. Strength is not just melee weapon attack and damage.
Weapon Finesse + Finesse Strike don't touch maneuvers at all, skills and checks, encumberance, etc. Furthermore, it only works with one-handed weapons that are considered light.There's a feat tax and a maximum cap on this. Not overpowered in the slightest.
assuming you meant STR to AC, REF saves, etc.
mmmm Heavy armor and STR bonus to AC. Or does "max DEX bonus" turn into "max STR bonus"?
Good call, thanks for catching my mental typo...
Fixed.
As a final question, how many people reading this thread would consider this houserule:
I plan to create two feats, so that when both of them are taken, a character can add his STR (I'm assuming here) to his AC, REF Saves, ranged attack rolls, and initiative rolls.
Doing this will give STR fighters the same ability to completely ignore DEX and used it as a massive dump stat, just like the propsed feat (coupled with Weapon Finesse) does for dumping STR.
I would not support the implementation of that because it boils down to a strawman argument. Strength is not just melee weapon attack and damage.
Weapon Finesse + Finesse Strike don't touch maneuvers at all, skills and checks, encumberance, etc. Furthermore, it only works with one-handed weapons that are considered light.
There's a feat tax and a maximum cap on this. Not overpowered in the slightest.
OK, then for balance sake, note that Weapon Finesse and (any other DEX-Damage feat) don't affect STR skills, so no need for my imaginary feats to affect DEX skills.
My feats didn't touch maneuvers either, but if you're saying that WF + FS allow people to dump the ability score (STR) that applies to maneuvers but my imaginary feats don't, then I will suggest that my imaginary feats should likewise limited by the fact that they shouldn't apply to mechanical ranged attacks which still require DEX, not STR, so I will leave some very common combat options dependent on DEX, just like WF + FS leave some combat options dependent on STR.
As for Encumbrance, there are so many ways to ignore that, handy haversack, bags of holding, mules, hired porters, asking the party fighter to carry your heavy stuff, etc., that I've never seen any low-STR character really suffer from it, but OK, I'll grant this one for your sake, so I'll take the rest of ranged attack rolls (thrown weapons) off my list of STR conversions.
And I'll restrict my imaginary feats to the weapons that STR users always use, just like Weapon Finesse and (any other DEX-damage feat) restricts to the kinds of weapons those users prefer.
Here's my Feats:
Mighty Quickness (Combat)
Your mighty muscles enable you to leap out of the way of attacks.
Prerequisite: STR 15.
Benefit: You may use your STR modifier instead of your DEX modifier for your Armor Class. Situations that would cause you to lose your DEX modifier will cause you to lose your STR modifier instead.
Special: You may not get the benefits of this feat unless you are wielding a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon and a shield.
Mighty Reflexes (Combat)
Your mighty muscles enable you to react faster than a weaker man.
Prerequisite: STR 15.
Benefit: You may use your STR modifier instead of your DEX modifier for your REF saves and as a bonus to your initiative rolls.
Special: You may not get the benefits of this feat unless you are wielding a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon and a shield.
There you go. Balanced.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, I'm totally for balanced too. And Dex to damage IS balanced in the current format (though it should be expanded be expanded from scimitars to all finesse weapons). That's all it needs really, I don't think OP's feat is necessary.
Consider the two feats Fighters could take to have much of what Dex gives:
Improved Initiative: Effectively +8 to Dex for terms of initiative.
Lightning Reflexes: Effectively +4 to Dex for the purpose of Reflex saves.
Adding Str to AC is unnecessary since builds that disregard Dex just put on Plate. But how about a two feat chain (roughly): You can use Str to AC while unarmored, and follow-up: You can use Str to AC in light armor.
So what are you missing if you take Improved Init and Lightning Reflexes? The ability to disregard Dex for ranged attack rolls. However unlike Dex characters, you get to add your main stat to damage with ranged weapons, and they do not. So perhaps it's fine anyway.
What do you have that Str-dump characters do not? Access to 2handed strikes and power attack, a good CMB, carry cap.
You could totally make Str do the things that Dex does if you have the same limitations, but it would take more feats since Str does have advantages that Dex can get (Agile Manuevers) or some that Dex can't get (2handing, larger weapon dice).
|
|
Thanks for the dialogue guys! This is going awesome!
Abadar. There's one part I don't quite understand.
Special: Your Dexterity score counts as your Strength score for the purposes of qualifying for and applying feats that alter attack actions and full-round attacks.
Can you elaborate on this?
This was one of those powers I threw in to get people's reaction.
From my perspective, there are two visions of what "Finesse" fighting means. Some say that it's quick jabs with thin weapons that quantifies "finesse", but there is the other side that considers the creation of momentum through agility as opposed to raw strength. Perhaps it's both. I encourage to watch THIS
Either way, feats might need to take that into consideration, thus the special:
The simplest example is double slice. It could be argued that the feat grants you your full strength bonus, but doesn't mention your Dexterity bonus. This starts to break when you start looking at qualifying for power attack, and combat maneuver feats.
Disallow Power Attack with this feat?This is actually a really good idea. I advise the OP to consider it.
I think you're right here, thanks for you two's input!
3. Resulting dpr of twf/rogue or fighter builds using this feat still do not touch the dpr of a two-handed fighter archetype, though it has gotten close on occasion. I do not, personally, see this as a bad thing.
I concur with this as of today, which is one of my big motivators. The truth is that this thread is a sister of the "rogue fixes" phenomenon going on.
Has anyone thought about how a feat like this would work with composite bows?
I simply cannot understand how it would work.
To the OP, I am in the crew that believes dex is too strong a stat already. My recomendation to balance this feat is either to limit it to only a single one handed weapon, or to cause it to remove one or more of the other benefits of dex. IE if you take this feat, your intelligence adds to reflex saves instead of dex.
Thanks for your input. If I were to apply something like this, I would more likely take a more direct approach to nerfing Dex, such as
"Until your next turn, your Dex bonus to Reflex Saves is halved." or your AC bonus from dex is halved, or you take a -2 to AC and reflex saves etc etc.Here is a cut down version of the feat with some modifications.
You are trained in using your agility and accuracy in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Weapon Finesse, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: With a light or finessable weapon made for a creature of your size category, you may choose to use your Dexterity bonus instead of your Strength bonus on damage rolls. If you have a Strength penalty, it is still added to your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls. You cannot use this feat if you are wearing medium or heavy armor or a shield. Creatures who are immune to precision damage or have cover are also immune to this damage.
Normal: Only your strength modifier is applied to melee damage rolls.
Special: You may not use this feat together with Power Attack. Double Slice, when used with Finesse Strike, allows you to add your full Dexterity bonus to damage on your off hand instead of Strength.
If there were a Feat to add Str to AC my Monk would be all over that.
+6 from Wis/AC Bonus, 2 from Dex, 6 from Str, already a better AC than he has now with AC boosting items.