| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean if you were getting stabbed by a scrawny person, wouldn't you take barely any damage, compared too a strong guy, whom would probably kill you with that blow?
If someone is accurate enough to get a blade between the proper ribs, it doesn't take much force to kill you. Meanwhile someone slashing wildly but forcefully against your ribcage well hurt you, but is less likely to kill you.
Someone precisely striking your larynx with a baton can kill you with about 8lbs of force, not much more than crushing a Styrofoam cup. A strong (but less precise) beating with a baton will leave welts, and fractures most often.
Sometimes it is being able to hit the right spot.
Do you not understand that the whole point to strength, other than carrying capacity and swim and climb checks, is to deal damage and to see your attack bonus? I mean with me having a 9 strength, I don't do any damage, but with weapon finesse, I hit all the time, but it would make Dexterity an overpowered score if you had my scores, and strength almost useless? I mean strength is supposed to be your most important score (unless you are a magical character other than the magus) and Dexterity supposed to be its equal? If i had this feat(Improved Weapon Finesse), i would be even deadlier than the 20 strength Barbarian on our team, which is absurd. So, think would it make sense in Pathfinder, not in real life.
Do you not understand that the whole point to strength, other than carrying capacity and swim and climb checks, is to deal damage and to see your attack bonus? I mean with me having a 9 strength, I don't do any damage, but with weapon finesse, I hit all the time, but it would make Dexterity an overpowered score if you had my scores, and strength almost useless? I mean strength is supposed to be your most important score (unless you are a magical character other than the magus) and Dexterity supposed to be its equal? If i had this feat(Improved Weapon Finesse), i would be even deadlier than the 20 strength Barbarian on our team, which is absurd. So, think would it make sense in Pathfinder, not in real life.Make your OP dex based character and I will make a basic two handed fighter that will be more powerful. 20 point buy.
Ahm, my dexterity based character has a 22 dext. score, please, and i would have 2 weapon fighting by 3rd level.
And the barbarian I was talking about, it was a half-orc. he once dealed 38 damage on a critical hit at 3RD LEVEL.
Weapon Finesse is fine. Dex to hit actually makes sense; but to do major damage should require Strength. Dumping Strength should be impossible without creating a character who's worthless in melee.
THAT'S what i was meaning but in a shorter version
He has a 22 armor class at 4th level, 3 rogue levels, 1 cleric(arson/day), and he has 2 mwk +1 daggers, both found in adventures and enchanted later on, and a mwk orc-bane hammer, also found, and a enchanted mithril shirt, also found, and he is beast at creating alchemist's fire, but hates blood, and has a +18 to stealth checks, Dodge, Weapon finesse, Bleeding attack(2 dam. every round), and sneak attack +2d6, and call fire, and burning hands, and Day's blessing, and channel energy 1d6+1, and endure elements, and Summon Monster I.
Now can your character beat that?
P.S.
his race is goblin
This is my main character as well, and I have 5219 gold pieces
BTW, i rolled his scores, if i didn't i wouldnt have a
9 strength (11-2(-2 racial))
22 dexterity (17+5(4 racial, one because of 4th level))
13 con.
8 intelligence (10-2(-2 racial))
13 wisdom,
9 charisma.
My G.M. didnt let me reroll strength. i should have a 10 in that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The day I accept that Inigo Montoya can deal damage like Conan is the day I hang up my dice bag...
The day I accept that Inigo Montoya can deal damage like Conan is the day I hang up my dice bag...
Then why haven't you hung it? A swashbuckler can do it easily.
Of course a Swashbuckler gets their level to damage on all attacks.
A Slayer going sword and board dex to damage style with a rapier deals a good deal less than a Barbarian.
I didn't know that fighters got Ant Haul as a spell. That would hurt my argument a bit as all of my dex based fighters needed to stay within a light load without losing AC. Bag of holding is nice except I still need to carry a sword, armor, and anything else I might be wearing. Those things tend to weigh me down a bit once I get hit for any strength damage.
What big picture are we talking about? Everyone dumping strength. If you read through this forum you will see plenty of evidence of that never happening. What is it exactly that I want? An OP character? Hardly. I play Dex based characters all the time and usually find myself laughed at regularly, and consistently under preforming. I'll take the less effective character if I like the flavor. If it makes sense thematically for the character to be less effective, then I wouldn't complain, but it doesn't. We have plenty of examples in real life of small guys beating the living crap out of bigger opponents due to skill and speed. That is why martial arts is so f@%~ing cool. I want to be the Bruce Lee, or the Jackie Chan of the campaigns, unfortunately I usually end up playing their retarded cousin due to poorly thought out rules.
So lets take a look at carrying capacity versus what you need...
10 Str gets you 33 lbs.Light armors that have high max dex, are about 10 lbs
Depending on what weapons you choose to use a light or 1 handed is about 6 pounds. I think two handers might be 12 or so. So...33 lbs is plenty. Not even a problem. Everything else goes in a bag of holding. No carrying capacity problems unless you just really feel a need to super dump str.
Not everyone dumps strength because at this time strength builds still do more damage. And it needs to stay that way. If dex builds deal damage on par with strength, the strength builds will disappear.
I agree dex builds should be stronger, but dealing more damage isn't what they should do. They need to reduce the feat chains to make them be more effective.
Sorry but I don't have an armor check penalty of -5, and that means that you would have a 5 attack bonus, and a 11 damage, and my G.M. did not give me all the gold, i gambled and got 9219 gp, and i had 2 mwk daggers, so i enchanted them to be +1 weapons. And we fight in a group of 4, so of course we come across big enchants.
P.S., you cant have 6 feats at 4th level.
Not everyone dumps strength because at this time strength builds still do more damage. And it needs to stay that way. If dex builds deal damage on par with strength, the strength builds will disappear.
I keep hearing people say this, but I've run about half a dozen campaigns with Dex to damage as a single feat, and have still had primarily strength based melee in every one.
I think I'll believe my actual experiences more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
P.S., you cant have 6 feats at 4th level.
A level four human fighter has six feats.
Level one, and three regular, level one, two and four fighter bonus, and a Human bonus.| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't care about that. I care about flavor for my game. Before this new book came out I had to make a scimitar wielding character if I wanted to make a viable dex based character.
THIS is why there shouldn't be any DEX-to-damage feats (or, I might argue, weapon properties). I mean, no offense meant, but boo-hoo. You already get loads of mileage out of a high DEX build in so many ways, not least of which are DEX-to-AC and DEX-to-attack bonuses and synergistic things like multiple AoOs. And you already have so many ways to increase the damage you put out.
And yet, folks come on the boards wondering why DEX-to-damage isn't a core "thing".
IMVHO there should be perks and penalties for each and every high stat and low stat for most character classes. One of the most significant penalties for low (meaning less-than-fully-optimised through-the-roof high) STR is lesser STR-to-damage.
So I would have to argue that a DEX-based character can very much be "viable" without having to make every sam-hill-jack of them into a whirling dervish clone. "Viable"!!! As if, in order to be "viable" one needed top stand on the very tip-top point of the DPR-Olympics pyramid and then step up a bit.
Sorry. Bit of rant there. Nothing personal meant by it.
But I for one am very glad that DEX-to-damage isn't a routine core "thing". YMMV.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But I for one am very glad that DEX-to-damage isn't a routine core "thing". YMMV.
It is though... Like it or not paizo has accepted Dex to damage as "core" through the use of feats and weapon enhancements. What most players are upset by is the fact pazio is pigeon holing these options to only rapiers, one-handed slashing weapons, or behind a pay wall instead of being available for iconic finesse weapons like daggers.
If paizo is willing to allow Dex to damage in their game then it should be available within the first three levels, if not level 1. It should also allow players creativity in their weapon selection. Instead of a feat limiting them to one weapon type, let them even pick one from a group of different types. Sometimes I feel like they release these weapon specific feats, that do virtually the same thing, to spread them across different books...
When the agile property came out, it made absolutely no sense for a weapon enchantment to be the determining factor of a character build. If they design a weapon enchantment specifically for letting a character build work, this is bad design in my opinion. Anything designed for a character build should be available through feats/classes NOT magic items. And the agile enchantment was there solely for a Dex build to be viable. And I say viable, because at the end of the day STR will win on damage (unless you're a swashbuckler but that's a debate for another day ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Not everyone dumps strength because at this time strength builds still do more damage. And it needs to stay that way. If dex builds deal damage on par with strength, the strength builds will disappear.I keep hearing people say this, but I've run about half a dozen campaigns with Dex to damage as a single feat, and have still had primarily strength based melee in every one.
I think I'll believe my actual experiences more.
I believe your actual experiences aren't relevant to my comment. I said if dex builds dealt as much damage as strength builds. They do not. So strength builds still exist.
Unless you start allowing dex to damage with two handed, and scaling like two handed weapons strength will continue to deal more damage.
But that's all strength gets to do. You all want dex to encroach to much on the one thing strength gets to do. I'm sorry, but no.
If in the next version of pathfinder they combined strength and dex into 1 stat then it would be fine, and we wouldn't have this argument. But until that time, every step towards dex builds dealing equal damage is a step closing to making strength irrelevant.
Precision is deadly against creatures with weak spots. So,
Deadly Precision
You may add your dexterity modifier to melee weapon damage rolls. This damage is precision damage and is not applied against creatures that are immune to critical hits, flanking, precision damage, or have no discernible anatomy. This damage is not multiplied on a critical hit.
Makes for flavorful dex builds, doesn't neuter strength builds since both would use it, incentivizes a variety of stats, and keeps strength builds better at putting down animated rocks. The problem is that every melee build would take this feat. There is no perfect solution to this issue.
If every melee build will take something then it need to be a class feature. You shouldn't need feats just to be have average competency in your chosen profession.
System feature, rather. Strength applies to all melee damage rolls, and make dex work as described above. Would make strength and dex both desirable to all builds. What I said above would work as an addition to the current system.
Power Attack and Pirahna Strike are good for the game as a meaningful option for martial characters. Martial characters need more to distinguish one round of combat from each of the next thousand. However, if everyone takes them, they too should be built into the system.
It's a Mythic feat, so...
Most real world arguments.
And honestly there should be BAB to dodge as well. A highly trained martial artist should be harder to hit than an untrained one.
I've argued for BAB to AC. Mostly because because I feel like AC not scaling contributes to the whole 'Christmas Tree' effect.
I've also argued for BAB to Initiative for the same reasons.
Somehow BAB doesn't apply to things that it probably should.
Mythic adventures are very hard to make, as you would have to have an adventure that includes you not only killing your boss, but going out and killing all of the boss's minions as well. That is why you have such OPed feats in Mythic Adventures, and also you rank up much differently in a Mythic Adventure.
I've argued for BAB to AC. Mostly because because I feel like AC not scaling contributes to the whole 'Christmas Tree' effect.
I've also argued for BAB to Initiative for the same reasons.
Somehow BAB doesn't apply to things that it probably should.
Do you not see that it is your attack bonus, not your agility, that you would be applying to those things? That's why Pazio didn't make that.
I keep hearing people say this, but I've run about half a dozen campaigns with Dex to damage as a single feat, and have still had primarily strength based melee in every one.
I think I'll believe my actual experiences more.
You know, that's the way that we are in. An ideal group would be a dexterity based character, a strength based character, and a magic based character. That's the way that we play, and we always do great. You could also have an archer, just to cover everyone, but those three are the primary characters you should have in your Pathfinder group.
When to Dex-to-Damage can already be done with Sawtooth Sabres, Rapiers, and Scimitars, why is the dagger a deal-breaker?Because optimizer would not stop there, they will start asking for crossbow to be as good as bow. Or, God forbid, Slings to not suck. Silly optimizers.
Ya I hear you, I love trap options and punishing roleplayers for making sub-optimal choices! Viva la Ivory Tower Design!
(The above is sarcasm.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, that's the way that we are in. An ideal group would be a dexterity based character, a strength based character, and a magic based character. That's the way that we play, and we always do great. You could also have an archer, just to cover everyone, but those three are the primary characters you should have in your Pathfinder group.I keep hearing people say this, but I've run about half a dozen campaigns with Dex to damage as a single feat, and have still had primarily strength based melee in every one.
I think I'll believe my actual experiences more.
You meant three casters I'm sure. Since that would be from an optimization standpoint a vastly superior group. Preferably with at least one arcane and divine amongst them.
I'm cool with Imp. Weapon Finesse as long as there is a high-strength feat to grant full movement on heavy armor and the like.
Not everyone dumps strength because at this time strength builds still do more damage. And it needs to stay that way. If dex builds deal damage on par with strength, the strength builds will disappear.I keep hearing people say this, but I've run about half a dozen campaigns with Dex to damage as a single feat, and have still had primarily strength based melee in every one.
I think I'll believe my actual experiences more.
I believe your actual experiences aren't relevant to my comment. I said if dex builds dealt as much damage as strength builds. They do not. So strength builds still exist.
Unless you start allowing dex to damage with two handed, and scaling like two handed weapons strength will continue to deal more damage.
But that's all strength gets to do. You all want dex to encroach to much on the one thing strength gets to do. I'm sorry, but no.
If in the next version of pathfinder they combined strength and dex into 1 stat then it would be fine, and we wouldn't have this argument. But until that time, every step towards dex builds dealing equal damage is a step closing to making strength irrelevant.
I allow it for two weapon fighting, which is potentially x2 rather than the x1.5 that strength allows for a 2h weapon. Somehow strength has yet to vanish from melee.
Dex builds are not necessarily TWF builds. TWF is strictly worse than 2 handed because of the inherent penalty to attack rolls and the high feat cost. However, this has nothing to do with dex other than the fact that TWF requires a high dex. However, making a dex build does not mean you must TWF.
These are two separate issues that are being conflated.
One big advantage that two handed fighters will see is AoO as we can have reach weapons, and our AoO add 1 1/2 str bonus where as dex based will not gain that benefit.
Not to mention that synergizes well with buff spells like Enlarge Person. One of the hidden costs of dex builds is that most of the best buffs for martials target strength
But that's all strength gets to do. You all want dex to encroach to much on the one thing strength gets to do. I'm sorry, but no.If in the next version of pathfinder they combined strength and dex into 1 stat then it would be fine, and we wouldn't have this argument. But until that time, every step towards dex builds dealing equal damage is a step closing to making strength irrelevant.
I'd go both ways and add something like a feat that allows one to add their Strength as a dodge bonus while wielding a shield. Then you have a similar dichotomy with Strength builds still being better at 2handers and Reach with better spell enhancement opportunities.
So I would have to argue that a DEX-based character can very much be "viable" without having to make every sam-hill-jack of them into a whirling dervish clone. "Viable"!!! As if, in order to be "viable" one needed top stand on the very tip-top point of the DPR-Olympics pyramid and then step up a bit.
The issue is that without spellcasting or extensive class features, Dex based without Damage isn't viable in most campaigns at all. You have to contribute to combat through some other means if you're only using Dex to get AC, Reflex, and Initiative. At that point you're really not a Dex-based martial.
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
Human Level 4 Fighter
Stats
Str 18, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 10, Cha 81 Power Attack, Furious Focus, Weapon Focus Glaive, 2 Combat Reflexes 3 Combat Expertise 4 Weapon Specialization
Attack +10 (MW Glaive), Damage 1d10+14
AC 21 (MW Full Plate)One big advantage that two handed fighters will see is AoO as we can have reach weapons, and our AoO add 1 1/2 str bonus where as dex based will not gain that benefit.
You can't have Combat Expertise with a 10 Int, but that feat isn't really used in your build.
Trade the Str and the Dex, so Str 14 Dex 18, replace CE with EWP(elven curve blade), and your concession of free Finesse/Imp Finesse, and we get:
Attack +10(MW Elven Curve Blade), damage 1d10+12
AC20(MW Breastplate)
So our Dex fighter loses 2 points of damage and 1 of AC, but gains 2 points of touch AC, 2 points of initiative, and a 30' movement rate instead of 20.
Honestly one could also drop Str to 13 and bump Wis to 12 to get +1 on Will saves too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dex as damage isn't core because it doesn't make sense. Adding dex to damage does not represent the "thousand cuts" approach to combat. That would be more like basing your number of attacks off dex. Theres no reason a dagger should be better at sneak attack than a great axe. A great axe should maybe be harder to sneak up on someone with, but if you can sneak up on someone with a great axe, it'll be more damaging than a dagger. If you want to simulate that feel of the rouge cutting someones throat silently from behind, then house ruling coup de graces to be easier on a sneak attack is probably what you are looking for. Also, death attack is already what you are looking for. You need str to hurt people and put them in the real world. Being very dexterous doesn't do it unless you are using weapons designed to take advantage of our anatomy and easily puncture into the squishy bits. That's why rapiers have a high crit range.