Odd question: Weapon Finesse replaces str with dex when applied to swinging weapons. Is there a way to replace str with dex for damage besides using the grace enhancement on weapons?
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Only with a scimitar. That's why there are so many scimitar magi.
At the moment, there is the agile enhancement, dervish dance for scimitars only, and mythic weapon finesse. That's it. It's my firm hope that there is another option included In the release version of the ACG for non-mythic Dex to damage.
Firstly, remember that it only applies to Light Weapons. Thus, it works for a Light Shield or Spiked Light Shield, but not a Heavy Shield. You'd also want Improved Shield Bash so as not to lose your shield bonus to AC.
Secondly, the best ways to get DEX to damage with weapons are to either A) Use a scimitar and the Dervish Dance feat, or B) Use Agile weapon enchantments, as you noted. Otherwise, I think you're pretty much stuck with STR to damage.
EDIT: Alternatively, you COULD play a human and use Dervish Dance along with Martial Versatility (a human feat). It's a debatable thing, but you have a pretty good argument for using that to say "Yeah, I can get a DEX bonus to attack and damage when swinging a longsword, bastard sword, broadsword, and other such heavy swords!"
Where this came from was looking at the warpriest in the new Advanced Class Guide. My idea was taking a light shield, and create a build around that since the damage increases much like a monk's with the sacred weapon bonus.
Any thoughts? I mean, I know it's too soon, but while the class is the way it is, I'd like to test it out.
|
1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
|
Define 'debatable':
In the Blog where Martial Versatility was announced, the author states: Jason Nelson wrote: You could argue that Net Adept works with nets, therefore it only "applies to a single weapon." I would hope that calling out Weapon Focus as a specific example is sufficient to demonstrate that the intent of the feat is to apply to any feat for which a single weapon must be specifically selected in order for the feat to apply to that weapon. Nomenclaturally, any feat that requires you to put the name of a specific weapon in parentheses after it (for example, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Rapid Reload, Close-Quarters Thrower) is what is intended as "feat that applies to a single weapon." To use a specific example of what I meant by that phrase, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (net) would be valid, while Net Adept would not.
Quandary wrote: So I take it that MV/MM aren't intended to allow using Dervish Dance with any 1-handable Heavy Blade? That is correct.
WAS debatable =/= IS debatable. ;-)
Quandary wrote: Define 'debatable':
In the Blog where Martial Versatility was announced, the author states:Quote: You could argue that Net Adept works with nets, therefore it only "applies to a single weapon." I would hope that calling out Weapon Focus as a specific example is sufficient to demonstrate that the intent of the feat is to apply to any feat for which a single weapon must be specifically selected in order for the feat to apply to that weapon. Nomenclaturally, any feat that requires you to put the name of a specific weapon in parentheses after it (for example, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Rapid Reload, Close-Quarters Thrower) is what is intended as "feat that applies to a single weapon." To use a specific example of what I meant by that phrase, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (net) would be valid, while Net Adept would not.
Quandary wrote: So I take it that MV/MM aren't intended to allow using Dervish Dance with any 1-handable Heavy Blade? That is correct.
I never actually saw that blog post, thus why I saw it as debatable. If that's the intent, then it's considerably less debatable.
Sure thing... I /am/ baffled why they never posted that clarification to the original FAQ.
I'm certain that not just Jason Nelson was reading that thread amongst Paizo's Rules Devs/Editors.
You are going to need to give it the Agile enchantment.
Not really any other way to do it.
Nullmancer wrote: Where this came from was looking at the warpriest in the new Advanced Class Guide. My idea was taking a light shield, and create a build around that since the damage increases much like a monk's with the sacred weapon bonus.
Any thoughts? I mean, I know it's too soon, but while the class is the way it is, I'd like to test it out.
Hm... I'm guessing you want to go with Two-Weapon-Fighting? That's the only way I see you maximizing the benefit from a high DEX.
Personally, just go with TWF, spiked light shields, and get the Agile enchantment for your spikes on each shield. Use Improved Shield Bash, too. It's a bit silly, of course, since you're swinging two shields around at people, but it works mechanically. It's too bad that the Warpriest only gets a single weapon they can focus on, or I'd make a sword-and-board styled Warpriest, too...
Thank you kindly for posting that. You just cleared up a debate I would have proceeded to go through with my DM, haha.
If it is for the Warpriest, you don't even need the Shield Spikes.
That's when I thought, "Wait, Captain America just invaded Pathfinder!"
blackbloodtroll wrote: If it is for the Warpriest, you don't even need the Shield Spikes. I'm not sure on that. Unless the shield itself can be given weapon enchantments, it can't be given the Agile enchantment. I know that in 3.5 you could only give the spikes on a shield weapon enchantments, not the shield itself, but they had separate enchantments. (This was abused when using the 'Defending' enchantment and what-not.) If that's been changed in Pathfinder (I honestly don't know if it is), then you're right; otherwise, shield spikes are the way to go.
...Shield spikes would probably be the way to go anyway, since you could have separate enchantments for the weapon and the shield itself. It's a more expensive route, but it allows you to have all sorts of enchantments if you have the money for it.
Well, that would be a strength build.
Ol' Cap is pretty ripped.
Ranger does that build the best.
Just dip 2 levels in Ranger for 2WF without DEX pre-req.
You may eventually like Imp 2WF if you go for 2WF, but a +4 DEX item will work if you start out with 13 DEX: not that hard.
Greater 2WF is just not really worth the investment, it's at -12 to-hit, and only when Full Attacking of course.
Build around STR and save your Feats and WBL budget.
Shielded Ranger Style also lets you get Shield Master WITHOUT 2WF at all.
Hell, you can still carry 2 Shields in order to benefit from situationally useful Armor/Weapon enhancements, just not actually 2WF (i.e. get bonus attacks).
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
A Shield is a weapon.
It can be enchanted with weapon enchantments, just like every other weapon.
You can choose it with Weapon Focus, and is in the Close Fighter Weapon Group.
The Shield is a weapon.
Thank you all for the awesomeness that was proven this hour. You just made my day, haha.
PFSRD wrote: Benefit: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you (see “spiked shields” on Table: Weapons). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.
Insinuating that you cannot normally enhance spiked shields as weapons, at least as far as +1-+5 enhancement bonuses go. If you can't use a spiked shield's enhancement bonus to deal damage, then why would you be able to use a non-spiked shield to improve its damage?
You can still enchant the shield with weapon enchantments I think, now that I've done a bit of cursory research, but your enhancement bonus is only ever applied to your AC. So, a shocking +1 heavy shield would deal shocking damage and give you +1 AC. At least, that's how I'm translating this. An FAQ post may say differently if someone can drum one up.
EDIT: Also, BlackBloodTroll actually made a good point in an older thread you may want to consider - you can use a Heavy Shield or Spiked Heavy Shield with two hands and wield it as a two-handed weapon. That means you get 1 1/2 times your strength bonus, meaning you have no need for TWF at all.
Because it's distinguishing between Enhancement Bonuses to Shield/Armor Class, vs. Enhancement Bonuses to Weapons/Attacks.
You also do not benefit from your Headband of INT +2 Enhancement bonus when Headbashing.
If both effects are on the same item, then both are usable.
Your quote there is in the Armor section, while Shields (Spiked and not)
also count as weapons and appear in the WEAPON section with no rule excluding them from Weapon Enhancements.
The Shield can be enchanted both as a shield, with increases to it's bonus to AC, and as a weapon, with increases to attack and damage.
One enchantment of one kind, does not effect the other.
You pay for both separate, and they work independently.
That's what they are pointing out.
Huh. That's very interesting, and it makes a shield-based build more viable in my head. I may have to try playing a Captain America character myself, now.
Amir Hiram wrote: It's too bad that the Warpriest only gets a single weapon they can focus on, or I'd make a sword-and-board styled Warpriest, too... Actually, they are not limited to a single weapon. They can make ANY weapon a sacred weapon by taking weapon focus in it.
|
