Should i allow deadly agility feat?


Advice and Rules Questions

151 to 200 of 289 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

@Kolokotroni

Agreed as long as we never get str to AC.

Also agreed that "rule of cool" supersedes realism. If I want to be a dude in full-plate doing flips n shit and stealthily sneaking around I should totally get feats for that.


I don't really believe in Str to AC. I'm not sure if it actually makes sense in any way. Con to Natural Armor I can accept.

I'd also accept Str to attacks with thrown weapons. That would be a good one.

Str to acrobatics probably. At least to jump. Hulk jumps are a thing.

On second thought, why not Str to lower armor penalties? I mean why not? If you are so strong that you can throw boulders why not be able to do cartwheels in full plate or at least run at full speed. Shouldn't you be able to get strong enough to the point where armor is like clothing to you now? The only reason to not do that is because What's left of the poor Fighter after that.


Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.


@Strength to AC: I liked the idea of a feat giving strength to shield AC which was suggested somewhere upthread. That would help make sword and board more viable.

LoneKnave wrote:

"I would allow it, if there was a feat that let STR do the things AGI does!"

"It's right here, same book and everything."
"Well that one's to strong so I won't allow either!"

Just imagine I said that, if it helps.


This thread is chaos, so I'm not going to try to quote things (sorry), but I'm gonna get involved anyways. My apologies if I get your argument wrong.

First off, setting aside whether the feat is overpowered, I don't see how it can be argued that this feat would be game-breaking. It might be unsuitable (it certainly goes against Paizo canon), or overpowered, but at the end of the day it isn't a paradigm shift, it isn't the apocalypse. 90+% of strength based characters will stay that way, Dex based characters, most of whom are already sub optimal, will close some of the gap. There are a couple of outside cases that might be weird, but I'm not even sure that's true. "Replacing a stat with another stat" is, as a rule, something to use with caution, but that doesn't mean it needs to be outright banned.

I don't think this feat is overpowered (and have allowed the equivalent in many, many games with very little changing). As most of the specific arguments have been made, but as people have reducing MAD as a feat is too powerful for some classes, let's look at it systematically.

So who benefits from this feat? It's melee specific; it doesn't work with 2h, which is the dominant damage dealing strategy. For already dex based characters, it increases damage and decreases MAD. For ship-jumpers (str to dex), it represents an insignificant change in AC, an improvement to Init and Ref, and 10ft movement speed (presumably).

I see this feat as about reducing MAD, not making str useless. Str builds will still deal the most damage, as well as being better skirmishers than TWF. The people who benefit from it the most are those who're already trying to do many different things - most light armored melee can't afford str for damage, dex for ac, con for hp, and int for skills (rogues etc) or any mental for casting. In my opinion most classes should try to run 2 primary stats, 1-2 secondary stats, and 2-3 tertiary.

For my part, I dislike TWF builds because they tend to be more boring as the most effective strategy by FAR is always "stand still and full attack", but that isn't really an arguement against making it suck less.

"It's unrealistic" is a pointless argument because we're talking about d&d, and as an aside anyone who thinks finesse isn't at least as important as power probably isn't a martial artist/fighter IRL.
Our concerns are:
Full casters who melee
2/3rds casters who melee
Str-based martial
Dex-based martial

Full casters who melee - this doesn't really worry me, for a couple of reasons. The main ones are that these classes typically function totally fine without too much dex, but are starved for feats. Melee full casters rarely get significant bonus feats, and they need to split them between improving spellcasting, melee, and utility. I can't see Battle Clerics/Oracles relying on this feat for a bonus to Ref, Init, and movement. First off, the vast majority of these are going to be using 2h, and don't have a reason to switch over - they are unlikely to invest 5 (half!) their feats in TWF on top of power attack/piranha strike when they could be just as effective or more w/ a 2h. A sword and board cleric/oracle MIGHT, because they don't lose 2h effectiveness, but this would surprise me - they already elected to reduce focus on damage, and can shore up all their weaknesses with spells. Much more likely would be to spend that feat on combat casting and imp. init, or something different.

Druids already CAN do this. AMoF +1 is CHEAP compared to TWF +1/Agile. Yet we don't see hordes of tiny cats ripping out people's hearts (outside of Order of the Stick... wait a second! Is that cat secretly a wild-shaped druid??). Mostly this is because it's still a feat (or two) to do what you can already do already - hit and deal damage, and because turning into a Lion, Allosaurus, or Behemoth Hippo is already CRAZY (not to mention boss). If your player is a power gamer, why're they investing two feats to turn into a sub-optimal form? If they aren't, why are you worried?

(Incidentally, Sorcerer getting wis or int casting already exists as archetype- and Int is for an archetype of Arcane bloodline! Crazy crazy. But more on that later)

2/3 casters is a *little* more complex, but not too much. They are still stretched thin - Investigators, Alchemists, Magi, and Inquisitors all have piles of great feats to take. Some of them have a decent amount to gain if they invest in dex and twf w/ this feat, but I don't think it becomes overpowered as they have so many other interesting things to do.

- Investigators/Alchemists may see some use of this, as they are already inclined and capable toward finesse melee - the investigator in particular has a lot to gain, as they would really love to have dex. But that said, melee Alch-types are using polymorph for their power. I've built and calculated an Agile AMoF using investigator polymorphing into a size small Charda (Monstrous Humanoid) can do some PRETTY sick damage on a full attack with natural weapons, and a melee-debuffing polymorph using agile AMoF is pretty solid. But in these cases, what we're talking about is making a character accessible from 2rd or 3rd level at the cost of two feats, instead of sucking until 7th, which isn't super fun. At the end of the day, the question is whether you want your melee alch-type to be polymorphing into a size small horrible monster with 30+ dex, or a size large horrible monster with 30+ str. Not a huge difference =P (and the Large and huge polymorphs have more features and attack options, if you read through them.

- Magi - Magi already CAN do this with two feats, using dervish dance. If anything, at least this feat can be used with ANYTHING else, and we may someday see a magus who isn't spamming shocking grasp scimitars. The problem isn't dervish dance though, it's that Magi are *BORING*. I want to like them (and incidentally, the most effective magus I've made is a Str based whip damage/controller, and more interesting than scimitar), but until the day they rewrite magus to do something other than spam blasts/pseudo-blasts, we won't see more interesting magi.

- Hunter & Warpriest - uh. Hunter's going to 2h or natural weapons for share-spell synergy. Warpriest... see cleric, I guess?

- Inquisitor... is a more complex case I think. Right now, inquisitors typically 2h str, use bows, or suck in combat. I ran a game for a TWF Dex/Wis inquisitor with access to this feat('s equivalent) - she actually elected to invest in agile weapons instead, and while she was powerful, she wasn't obscene. It was pretty cool overall. I think most inquisitors have plenty of great feat options, and won't be motivated to switch out. Maybe a sword and board inquisitor would take this, but that's an even heavier feat investment (see below).

- Bard - right now the dominant bard for effectiveness in combat is a str-based whip controller. TWF bard isn't super viable due to feat requirements, and this doesn't really make it much easier, but I actually think it makes a difference. Using this feat, I had a player build a TWF fetchling bard w/ 20 point buy, and it was also pretty cool, and not overwhelming.

Various martials/martial strategies - this is where we'd see this feat have the most impact, and the most play, as martials typically have plenty of feats (and too few other interesting things to do) to invest extensively in combat feats.

Let's get this out of the way though: even with this feat, 2h and bow are still significantly better than TWF, with fewer feats needed. The key issue is that a good, full bab/equivalent TWF can deal a LOT of damage - in an ideal scenario with conditional bonuses and a full attack. 2h can do a (lowercase) lot of damage any time of day, buffs or no, and (ironically and annoyingly) skirmish WAY better than TWF due to not relying on a full attack.

For a bit of perspective, A fairly optimized 10/12ish Slayer using TWF (str-based or dex based w/ this feat), under ideal conditions, flanking w/ sneak attack and studied target, can average about 125dpr, while a similar 2h will average ~100 under similar conditions without haste/speed, however, if the slayer has to move their dpr drops to ~50, while the 2h will get ~80-90.

TWF
Right now the only *really* viable TWF are Slayer and Ranger, because they can ignore Dex requirements and build for strength. For these, this feat might see some use... I could see a Ranger taking it, but suspect most probably wouldn't as they can get by fine w/ str and medium/heavy armor. I think you'd be more likely to see one pick up heavy armor prof for mithral full plate than go the other direction, but I could be wrong. TWF Slayers probably will take this if they have the feat space, because right now they are huge glass cannons in light armor anyways, but again many probably won't bother, as they could spend those feats on things like combat maneuvers and other bonuses.

Monks and Rogues deserve special mention as the somewhat canonical TWF, both of whom are terrible at it. They can't deal any damage, they can't hit, they have no AC, and both deserve all the help they can get. In my games, monks (if they ever come up) get a 2nd level choice: +Dex to damage with finesse weapons, monk weapons, and spears, or natural armor = con mod.

The one case where I think this feat might change things is Sword and Board TWF. There's a decent number of Fighters, Paladins, and Cavaliers w/o access to ranger combat styles who use sword and board, and have the feat-space to pick up 2-3 TWF feats, imp shield bash, shield mastery, etc, however if they want to maximize their TWF they need to invest heavily (at least 14 at chargen +1 advancement) in dex in order to be effective, but are typically focusing on strength for everything else. I could see a MAD paladin trying to invest... literally every feat they have until 15th in making this work, or a fighter's first 4-5 feats to dump str, which is kind of odd and irksome, but at least in my games, I take out the advancing dex prereq of twf at least for sword and board, so it isn't a huge issue.


Just a Guess wrote:
@Strength to AC: I liked the idea of a feat giving strength to shield AC which was suggested somewhere upthread. That would help make sword and board more viable.
LoneKnave wrote:

"I would allow it, if there was a feat that let STR do the things AGI does!"

"It's right here, same book and everything."
"Well that one's to strong so I won't allow either!"
Just imagine I said that, if it helps.

You should call it a strawman.

You'd be right, and I'd not care, because I was just making a funny. Everybody wins.


Kolokotroni wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
Just a Guess wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:

Nobody in heavy armor cares about skills.

Ok, you're THAT kind of player.

The kind of player that suggests a heavily armored knight is not the usual archetype to be flipping cartwheels or picking pockets and locks?

How scandalous.

By that same token, its rediculous to think that a tiny waify guy with a pair of butter knives can do comparable damage to someone like the mountain from game of thrones with an unreasonably large sword.

The 'this doesnt fit' comment works both ways.

The comment about strength feats is basically saying that if you are going to give 2 feats that let dex to strength's thing, then there should be feats that lets strength do dex's thing. Though honestly, I'd be satisfied with a feat that removes the armor check and speed penalties for armor and one that lets you add str to dex skills.

And no magic items dont fix this any more then the agile enhancement fixes dex to damage. Not all games have free access to various magic items, or has them at all. If feats do it for dex, they should do it for strength.

I never said it doesn't fit, just that it's not the usual archetype. I've had high Acrobatics characters in Full Plate myself. No real issues.

If you wanna take Fleet twice you can negate the move speed penalty, but the thing is negating the downsides of armor with magic items and special materials is a hell of a lot easier than Dex to damage with Paizo stuff.

Mithral + Boots of Striding and Springing. There you go. Something everyone gets at some point, plus a common, cheap boot slot item.

Versus Agile (permanently puts you behind on DR bypassing and standard +1s, especially if you're a Monk) or Slashing Grace (only really works if you're a Swashbuckler), Dervish Dance (2 feats and 3 skill ranks to work with one weapon), or Fencing Grace (2 feats to work with one weapon, and most classes need to wait until 5th level to qualify).

Not that I'm against such Feats, but saying "I MUST have them or else I won't allow the other thing...even though the other thing is much more important to the other person's character image and much harder to achieve" is kinda wrong.


The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.

I think its overpowered in a vacuum. Dex does a lot of things and even if it's not doing as much damage as Str builds dex to damage still makes dex too versatile considering everything else it contributes to. In the context of more feats existing that depend on Str so that it can do more things than just damage. I allow it and a plethora of other dex build support in my games only because I give Str builds some more versatility as well so you could reasonably dump either or at least not have to rely so heavily on both.

But its not terribly compatible in the first place. You still need 13 Str for Power Attack and even with Piranha Strike in the situation you still don't have the ability to get extra damage from two handing it. But I don't think anyone that things its overpowered are arguing that dex to damage outdamages str builds. (well except for the case of the Magus. I tried it out twice and Magus is really really good with dex to damage.)


Malwing wrote:
The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.

I think its overpowered in a vacuum. Dex does a lot of things and even if it's not doing as much damage as Str builds dex to damage still makes dex too versatile considering everything else it contributes to. In the context of more feats existing that depend on Str so that it can do more things than just damage. I allow it and a plethora of other dex build support in my games only because I give Str builds some more versatility as well so you could reasonably dump either or at least not have to rely so heavily on both.

But its not terribly compatible in the first place. You still need 13 Str for Power Attack and even with Piranha Strike in the situation you still don't have the ability to get extra damage from two handing it. But I don't think anyone that things its overpowered are arguing that dex to damage outdamages str builds. (well except for the case of the Magus. I tried it out twice and Magus is really really good with dex to damage.)

As I said before, the problem isn't that DEX does too much, it's that STR does far too little.

More bullshit filler feats, for either STR or DEX, isn't going to make this game better. STR just needs to do more, on its own, to be competitive.

There isn't a convincing mechanical argument against DEX to damage in this thread that doesn't boil down to "STR sucks, so DEX should suck too."

Your point about the Magus is just icing on the cake. Magus doesn't need DEX to damage. Their class features provide enough damage on their own and the class (generally) ends up with Heavy Armor Proficiency anyway. Yet Dervish Dance, the most functional form of Paizo approved DEX to damage sources, seems tailor made for Magi (Rogues and Bards aren't even proficient with the Scimitar out of the box!).


ChainsawSam wrote:
Malwing wrote:
The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.

I think its overpowered in a vacuum. Dex does a lot of things and even if it's not doing as much damage as Str builds dex to damage still makes dex too versatile considering everything else it contributes to. In the context of more feats existing that depend on Str so that it can do more things than just damage. I allow it and a plethora of other dex build support in my games only because I give Str builds some more versatility as well so you could reasonably dump either or at least not have to rely so heavily on both.

But its not terribly compatible in the first place. You still need 13 Str for Power Attack and even with Piranha Strike in the situation you still don't have the ability to get extra damage from two handing it. But I don't think anyone that things its overpowered are arguing that dex to damage outdamages str builds. (well except for the case of the Magus. I tried it out twice and Magus is really really good with dex to damage.)

As I said before, the problem isn't that DEX does too much, it's that STR does far too little.

More b!~*&#$$ filler feats, for either STR or DEX, isn't going to make this game better. STR just needs to do more, on its own, to be competitive.

There isn't a convincing mechanical argument against DEX to damage in this thread that doesn't boil down to "STR sucks, so DEX should suck too."

Your point about the Magus is just icing on the cake. Magus doesn't need DEX to damage. Their class features provide enough damage on their own and the class (generally) ends up with Heavy Armor Proficiency anyway. Yet Dervish Dance, the most functional form of Paizo approved DEX to damage sources, seems tailor made for Magi (Rogues and Bards aren't even proficient with the Scimitar out of the box!).

Pretty much. Hence my stance to allow dex to damage but give strength more stuff to do. I'm not adding b!~*&#$$ feats for strength but feats that allow strength to actually do stuff, and eliminating feat taxes to allow room for those feats on both sides of the pool.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
If you wanna take Fleet twice you can negate the move speed penalty, but the thing is negating the downsides of armor with magic items and special materials is a hell of a lot easier than Dex to damage with Paizo stuff.

Sadly, Fleet only applies when wearing light or no armor.


Malwing wrote:
The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.

I think its overpowered in a vacuum. Dex does a lot of things and even if it's not doing as much damage as Str builds dex to damage still makes dex too versatile considering everything else it contributes to. In the context of more feats existing that depend on Str so that it can do more things than just damage. I allow it and a plethora of other dex build support in my games only because I give Str builds some more versatility as well so you could reasonably dump either or at least not have to rely so heavily on both.

But its not terribly compatible in the first place. You still need 13 Str for Power Attack and even with Piranha Strike in the situation you still don't have the ability to get extra damage from two handing it. But I don't think anyone that things its overpowered are arguing that dex to damage outdamages str builds. (well except for the case of the Magus. I tried it out twice and Magus is really really good with dex to damage.)

I dont really even think its overpowered at all. I just dont like that it devalues strength as a viable stat. The main drawback of being dex based as a combatant is the loss of damage. If 2 feats effectively mitigate that to the point where you are an effective (meaning you do enough damage well enough to be the combat guy in a normal party of 4), then the fact that a 2handed strength build does a little more damage is irrelevant. The target is 'enough damage to do your job' everything past that is just gravy (and a function optimization, and modified by lots of difficult to isolate issues revolving individual games).

On the other hand, particularly at lower levels (where the martial characters generally shine the most), being the heavy armor guy often is a disadvantage. Until you find a way around it your lack of mobility makes a difference. I remember 1 game where the party had a stealthy witch, a rogue, and a stealthy barbarian (kinda odd but stick with me on this) and 2 paladins. The first 3 often scouted ahead with the paladins following from out of sightlines. More then half the time, the encounters were nearlly finished by the time the paladins clunked their way to catch up.

I also cant count how many times a simple dc 10-15 climb or acrobatics or swim check, which is either completely irrelevant or nearly so to a dex based character was a 20 minute (in game) stoppage for the heavy armor person as they took off their armor, attempted the check, put their armor back on.

Yes certain magic items can eventually mitigate this to a degree, but there are so many limiting factors there, including not the least of which that tons of tables play without a large degree of freedom in choosing items (go look and see how many 'low magic item' or anti magic mart threads there are...i'll wait). It just isnt the same as having a feat to sure up a primary disadvantage. Not even close.

As a result, I do think the benefits will outweight the costs to the point where we will see strength go the way of charisma. If you really want it, you can take it, but unless its specifically tied to your class/concept, you are going to mostly ignore it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Even if Dex to damage bumps up your damage enough to be "the damage guy," which it only somewhat does with 2WF it's still not enough.

Unless the Dex guy can wield a two handed weapon and get big I don't see that ever happening.

Tactically a 2 handed str fighter has more of a role in combat and that cannot be undervalued.


Quote:
If 2 feats effectively mitigate that to the point where you are an effective (meaning you do enough damage well enough to be the combat guy in a normal party of 4), then the fact that a 2handed strength build does a little more damage is irrelevant.

I agree. What is relevant, is that he does more damage and still has two more feats on top of that.

He could spend those 2 feats to get a mount and solve most of his movement problems. Or get a familiar that has its own skills. Or something. Being 2 feats behind is not to be taken lightly when you only get 10.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If you wanna take Fleet twice you can negate the move speed penalty, but the thing is negating the downsides of armor with magic items and special materials is a hell of a lot easier than Dex to damage with Paizo stuff.
Sadly, Fleet only applies when wearing light or no armor.

Wow. I knew they were terrible Feats, so I never bothered with them, but I didn't know they were THAT bad.

Liberty's Edge

Perspective from a guy playing a Dex to damage character right now:

I've got a 5th level masked avenger swashbuckler in an Iron Gods game using Fencing Grace. It's a 6-person game, so I share the front line; the other melee specialist is a dwarven drunken rager barbarian 2/alchemist 2/brawler 1.

When he's got his mutagen and rage on, we have about the same to-hit and do about the same amount of damage.

In one sense, that pretty much means the feat's doing exactly what it should - I'm on the front line, and dealing a frontliner's damage. On the other hand, my init and AC and even mobility blow his out of the water, and the only save he's actually got better than mine is Fort (we were all rather appalled a couple sessions ago when we realized his base Will save - non-raging, ignoring spells - was still a flat +0).

It might not be broken, overpowered, or even the more nebulous "too good." But it is really, really good.


Kolokotroni wrote:


I just dont like that it devalues strength as a viable stat. The main drawback of being dex based as a combatant is the loss of damage. If 2 feats effectively mitigate that to the point where you are an effective (meaning you do enough damage well enough to be the combat guy in a normal party of 4), then the fact that a 2handed strength build does a little more damage is irrelevant. The target is 'enough damage to do your job' everything past that is just gravy (and a function optimization, and modified by lots of difficult to isolate issues revolving individual games).

I think that's the point I was making. At the very least its the point I was trying to make. I think the solution is letting Str have more viable things to do. Well the solution in my games was to let Str do more things, and since this is about a third party feat I don't think that's too much to ask.


Just wanna say... You're comparing to a multiclassed Barbarian....

Also that Precise Strike, which contributes 5 of your damage each attack, is the largest "always on" class damage buff in the game. You also get weapon training.

I don't think it's the dex to damage that's giving you dem boosts, pretty sure it's your class features.


Shisumo wrote:

Perspective from a guy playing a Dex to damage character right now:

I've got a 5th level masked avenger swashbuckler in an Iron Gods game using Fencing Grace. It's a 6-person game, so I share the front line; the other melee specialist is a dwarven drunken rager barbarian 2/alchemist 2/brawler 1.

When he's got his mutagen and rage on, we have about the same to-hit and do about the same amount of damage.

In one sense, that pretty much means the feat's doing exactly what it should - I'm on the front line, and dealing a frontliner's damage. On the other hand, my init and AC and even mobility blow his out of the water, and the only save he's actually got better than mine is Fort (we were all rather appalled a couple sessions ago when we realized his base Will save - non-raging, ignoring spells - was still a flat +0).

It might not be broken, overpowered, or even the more nebulous "too good." But it is really, really good.

Admittedly, a huge part of that is his fault for multi classing three weak will classes. His BAB and saves would be better if he'd stuck to one class.

If you took a two-level dip into bard and a 1-level dip into fighter with only two levels in the class you currently have five in, you'd probably notice you were considerably less effective, too, although at least fighter/bard/swashbuckler combines strong saves on all three ends while your friend's will save progression is not in a good place. Like even a little.

Multiclassing HURTS at low levels if you don't have a very good idea what you're doing it for.


As they say... 2 levels in Monk never hurt nobody...

Liberty's Edge

Insain Dragoon wrote:

Just wanna say... You're comparing to a multiclassed Barbarian....

Also that Precise Strike, which contributes 5 of your damage each attack, is the largest "always on" class damage buff in the game. You also get weapon training.

I don't think it's the dex to damage that's giving you dem boosts, pretty sure it's your class features.

A multiclassed alchemist barbarian. With mutagen. Combined Strength 24 when they're both up. (And his crits really, really, really blow mine out of the water.)

That said, I agree about Precise Strike. It's a damn big deal. Although, as the only melee guy who could really do anything during our recent encounter with

Spoiler:
a whole mess of poltergeists and an advanced wraith
- thanks to being the only one with a magic weapon - I can also say that it's not the only thing that's keeping me going. It's keeping me competitive with the barbarian when he Power Attacks, but I'm still 1d6+9 even without it.

Liberty's Edge

My point is just simply this: when you give it to a class designed to use it, it works. Very very well. So if you're going to use it, be very certain that's the outcome you want.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Shisumo wrote:


A multiclassed alchemist barbarian. With mutagen. Combined Strength 24 when they're both up.

...Meaning he only had 16 Str (starting 14? Or does he not have a belt?) to begin with, and his saves suck REALLY bad.

Shisumo wrote:
That said, I agree about Precise Strike. It's a damn big deal. Although, as the only melee guy who could really do anything during our recent encounter with ** spoiler omitted ** - thanks to being the only one with a magic weapon - I can also say that it's not the only thing that's keeping me going. It's keeping me competitive with the barbarian when he Power Attacks, but I'm still 1d6+9 even without it.

So you're 5th level, and only one guy has a magic weapon?

So basically, you're competitive with a highly unoptimized party. Not seeing the issue.

Liberty's Edge

Rynjin wrote:

So you're 5th level, and only one guy has a magic weapon?

So basically, you're competitive with a highly unoptimized party. Not seeing the issue.

Iron Gods does weird things to your weapon buys. Adamantine weapons are expensive. (Also, it's hard to buy... well, anything, really... for pretty much all of book 2.)

And no, he doesn't have a belt. Neither do I, for that matter. (I just picked up a Charisma hat instead.) Like I said, we've had other priorities for our money.

Grand Lodge

This feat is allowed in my Kingmaker game, and I have not experienced the "horrors" that some claim.

Shadow Lodge

Shisumo wrote:

I've got a 5th level masked avenger swashbuckler in an Iron Gods game using Fencing Grace. It's a 6-person game, so I share the front line; the other melee specialist is a dwarven drunken rager barbarian 2/alchemist 2/brawler 1.

When he's got his mutagen and rage on, we have about the same to-hit and do about the same amount of damage.

In one sense, that pretty much means the feat's doing exactly what it should - I'm on the front line, and dealing a frontliner's damage. On the other hand, my init and AC and even mobility blow his out of the water, and the only save he's actually got better than mine is Fort (we were all rather appalled a couple sessions ago when we realized his base Will save - non-raging, ignoring spells - was still a flat +0).

And what does he beat you on? The alchemist level doesn't just give him a mutagen, it gives him at least 2 first level extracts (depending on Int), brew potion, a discovery, a small bomb, and poison use. How is he using these? Superior utility? Did he take Infusions to give others buffs? Has he got the Shield extract (and if he's sharing with you are you taking that into account when comparing AC)? Does he resist crits or self-heal? Did he trade poison use for trapfinding? Is he using martial flexibility for anything interesting and not directly tied to damage (like, for example, combat maneuvers)?

The fact that he's taken a second level in alchemist tells me he's intentionally sacrificing damage potential to do something interesting - after all alchemist 1 gets him all the mutagen he can drink.

The fact that he's taken a level in brawler tells me that he's using unarmed strike, which is a non-optimal for a barbarian (like the drunken rager archetype - though both are very flavourful and thematically work well together).

If I'm wrong about one or both of these he's probably not multiclassing strategically which accounts for him being generally unimpressive.

Shisumo wrote:
My point is just simply this: when you give it to a class designed to use it, it works. Very very well. So if you're going to use it, be very certain that's the outcome you want.

Yes, swashbuckler is designed to use dex to damage, so it's not really fair to compare it with someone using str to damage in a non-optimal way. From what I hear the swashbuckler is also at its best between levels 3 and 7 or so, while the drunken dwarf is probably looking at a nice boost next level thanks to brawler's flurry.


Shrug. My group plays with this feat always in effect for all characters already. 5th edition had a few things right in our opinion, and we just ported those things we liked back to our pathfinder games, which we felt overall is a better system. Dex to dex based weapons, str to str based weapons. No feat tax. Static bonuses don't get multiplied on crits, only damage dice, precision dmg dice as well. Not always balanced maybe, but we prefer it.


Yes.

Allow this feat, but there's many other options too. Instead, you could give every player Weapon Finesse for free (still requiring other feats for damage) or you could even go full 5e DND and give everyone dex to hit and damage for free with light or finesse weapons only. Neither are gamebreaking.

Honestly, casters rule this game so any method that enables more flexibility to martials in their builds should be ACTIVELY ENCOURAGED.

Liberty's Edge

Weirdo wrote:

And what does he beat you on? The alchemist level doesn't just give him a mutagen, it gives him at least 2 first level extracts (depending on Int), brew potion, a discovery, a small bomb, and poison use. How is he using these? Superior utility? Did he take Infusions to give others buffs? Has he got the Shield extract (and if he's sharing with you are you taking that into account when comparing AC)? Does he resist crits or self-heal? Did he trade poison use for trapfinding? Is he using martial flexibility for anything interesting and not directly tied to damage (like, for example, combat maneuvers)?

The fact that he's taken a second level in alchemist tells me he's intentionally sacrificing damage potential to do something interesting - after all alchemist 1 gets him all the mutagen he can drink.

The fact that he's taken a level in brawler...

He carries a dwarven longhammer and a dwarven waraxe (both adamantine). The drunken rager levels are mostly for move-action extracts and mutagens, that also happen to not provoke. In combat, he's typically enlarging and raging - the mutagen is a one-and-done at the beginning of the dungeon and usually carries him through. At max, he's got a 20 ft reach and hits things for 3d6+12 or 3d6+18 when he's Power Attacking; the brawler level was for the occasional useful combat feat (Iron Gods has a lot of exotic weapons, for instance) and IUS, so he no longer has a donut hole with the longhammer. I believe his plan is to go alchemist the rest of the way, but I'm honestly not sure. He doesn't have infusion - not sure what his discovery or his rage power are, in fact, now that I think about it.


Shisumo wrote:
He carries a dwarven longhammer and a dwarven waraxe (both adamantine). The drunken rager levels are mostly for move-action extracts and mutagens, that also happen to not provoke. In combat, he's typically enlarging and raging - the mutagen is a one-and-done at the beginning of the dungeon and usually carries him through. At max, he's got a 20 ft reach and hits things for 3d6+12 or 3d6+18 when he's Power Attacking; the brawler level was for the occasional useful combat feat (Iron Gods has a lot of exotic weapons, for instance) and IUS, so he no longer has a donut hole with the longhammer. I believe his plan is to go alchemist the rest of the way, but I'm honestly not sure. He doesn't have infusion - not sure what his discovery or his rage power are, in fact, now that I think about it.

He should have an adamantine boulder helmet instead of a dwarven waraxe. That way he has no issues with the "donut hole" and can use the helmet feats to up ac vs crits & redirect crits to the helmet (and it's adamantine hardness).

Shadow Lodge

Shisumo wrote:
At max, he's got a 20 ft reach and hits things for 3d6+12 or 3d6+18 when he's Power Attacking;

And you're still matching him for damage? You said d6+9 without precise strike, which means at most d6+19 with it (spending a panache point). Plus he should be getting a good number of extra attacks of opportunity from reach.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Here is a fun thing for Str builds...

Power Attack -> Cornugon Smash -> Hurtful (+ Intimidating Prowess, if you to be extra sure you will make that Intimidate check). Enjoy your swift0action extra attack at full BAB. Watch as dex-builds drool.

Liberty's Edge

Weirdo wrote:
Shisumo wrote:
At max, he's got a 20 ft reach and hits things for 3d6+12 or 3d6+18 when he's Power Attacking;
And you're still matching him for damage? You said d6+9 without precise strike, which means at most d6+19 with it (spending a panache point). Plus he should be getting a good number of extra attacks of opportunity from reach.

Well, first of all, that's "at max." When one of those pieces isn't there, it drops, and he can't run at 100% all the time. Second, he also doesn't have Combat Reflexes yet; I honestly don't know if he has the Dex to support it - I think he does, but can't swear to it. He's only had the brawler level for two sessions, but I can't remember him using it to get CR yet. Other than Power Attack, I don't know what feats he has. Third, my to-hit is better than his; slightly, most of the time, more when he's Power Attacking, which impacts how much damage actually lands. Fourth, in overall combat terms, I usually include the free extra attacks I get from parrying, which make up some of the difference in total DPR. That's not strictly relevant here, but in definitely matters in play. And fifth - and most importantly - I didn't say I matched him. I said "about the same" and "competitive." I'm in the ballpark, which isn't something Dex builds would ever have been able to say before Slashing/Fencing Grace showed up. On average over the whole of a session, I'd say I'm usually +1 or +2 higher in to-hit, he's +3 or +4 in damage, and the DPR works out to be close to the same, if you squint. He does have a higher ceiling that I do - but then, I don't really have a per/day limitation on my baseline stats either. (And as I noted before, his crits make mine go cry in a corner. 9d6+36 is not something CR 6-7 baddies can easily handle...)

The point is, my walking-around damage with a Str 13 character is 1d6+14 at 5th level, with occasional ventures up to the 1d6+19 range. And some of that is Dex to damage, both in literal terms (my Dex is higher than my Str, obvs) and in terms of how I was able to arrange my points and plan out my build. Broken? Not necessarily. I'm certainly not saying so. But as Insain Dragoon kinda pointed out already, swashbucklers and rogues already have class features that are designed to help offset the weaker damage potential of being Dex-focused classes. Allowing Dex to damage affects the way those features work out in play. If a GM wants to allow the option, they should be aware that this is how it goes. If that's how they want it to be, then go for it! If not, don't. Easy as that.

Liberty's Edge

As a sidebar to all that, my own preferred Dex-damage feat would look like this:

Improved Weapon Finesse
Your speed and precision matter as much as the raw power behind your strikes.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Weapon Finesse
Benefit: Whenever you make a melee attack with a weapon that can benefit from the Weapon Finesse feat and use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on the attack roll, you may add half your Dexterity modifier to the damage roll as well.
Normal: You only add your Strength modifier to melee damage rolls.

See? Can't dump Strength, but you're decidedly better off than with just Strength alone. Everybody wins. Sorta, anyway.

Shadow Lodge

Shisumo, that sounds like the two of you are about balanced to me. (Though even without combat reflexes I'd be surprised if he's not getting at least one or two AoO a fight - around the same number of ripostes you're taking - anyone you can take one AoO per round, after all. It's possible he's not using great reach tactics.)

More importantly to the OP, your build is possible without Deadly Agility, which mostly just expands your weapon options for dex builds. The extra benefit Deadly Agility has for TWF doesn't help swashbucklers much if at all because it doesn't well with Precise Strike. Rogues and monks would benefit more from Deadly Agility, but I don't think many people would mind them getting a bit of a boost.


The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.

They would likely just take pirahanna strike which is like power attack for dex. In a real fight you use strength and dex so that is how I would factor power attack still working even though in fantasy land it is one or the other so your question is perfectly valid.


wraithstrike wrote:
The Golux wrote:
Out of curiosity, for those who think this is overpowered, how would you feel if it was not compatible with Power AttacK? Since, you know, you're not getting your damage from power.
They would likely just take pirahanna strike which is like power attack for dex. In a real fight you use strength and dex so that is how I would factor power attack still working even though in fantasy land it is one or the other so your question is perfectly valid.

Yeah... As an extra bone to Str builds, I give Power Attack (and Combat Expertise) for free to all characters, but rule that PA can't be used with Weapon Finesse... This means Dex builds end up 3 feata behind Str builds...

But honestly... I've been reconsidering that lately. I think I'll just give Piranha Strike as well. Dex builds really aren't all that.

(And Slashing Grace is a big middle finger to Pathfinder players!)


I am thinking of doing the same thing, and I had a feat called improved weapon finesse that does the same thing as the deadly agility feat. Once I run another campaign it will be interesting to see how it works out.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't see why a feat that replaces the Agile enchantment would be a balance issue.

Really, that's all the feat does.


I skimmed the thread and it looks like nobody's aware of that feat coming from Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic: Pathfinder Edition that have a stance (available only at level 15 though) that changes STR mod to damage to x2 for one-handed weapons and to x3 for two-handed weapons.
And its second book that's currently in playtest have a feat that allows qualifying for TWF with STR instead of DEX. It's considered underpowered and might or might not give the benefits of TWF itself in the released book.

Grand Lodge

I really wouldn't call Path of War, "Weeaboo Fightan Magic".

That's 4E man.


Deadly Agility is fine. Do not vacillate. Really, you might as well bring in the entire Path of War while you're at it.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

I don't see why a feat that replaces the Agile enchantment would be a balance issue.

Really, that's all the feat does.

One its opens up the option way earlier then the chance of having a +2 weapon and with thé feat and any real lack of prequistes it seems like there would never be à reason to play str builds anymore. With a dex build and this feat you get better top end ac, high mobility due to lighter armour, less check pentiltes, higher inti, and better reflex saves. All becuase you use one feat to completly rewrite the rules. If the prequistes were stiffer maybe it would be more balanced


breakerofworlds wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

I don't see why a feat that replaces the Agile enchantment would be a balance issue.

Really, that's all the feat does.

One its opens up the option way earlier then the chance of having a +2 weapon and with thé feat and any real lack of prequistes it seems like there would never be à reason to play str builds anymore. With a dex build and this feat you get better top end ac, high mobility due to lighter armour, less check pentiltes, higher inti, and better reflex saves. All becuase you use one feat to completly rewrite the rules. If the prequistes were stiffer maybe it would be more balanced

People keep saying that... But even with Dervish Dance, Slashing Grace and the Agile enhancement available... (Hell! Even with Deadly Agility!) Str builds are still the norm. They are still very effective (even for Magi).

I have never seen a D&D/PF table were Str builds were obsolete.

(Also, Dex builds require 2 feats, not 1... And changing what attribute you add to your to-hit and damage rolls is not even freaking close to "completely rewritting the rules").


Dervish dance and slashing grace both require you to use the least effective combat method (one weapon, nothing in off hand). Agile drastically increases the cost of your weapon over time. There are significant downsides to using it. If deadly agility were the norm, that changes rather drastically.


Lemmy wrote:
breakerofworlds wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

I don't see why a feat that replaces the Agile enchantment would be a balance issue.

Really, that's all the feat does.

One its opens up the option way earlier then the chance of having a +2 weapon and with thé feat and any real lack of prequistes it seems like there would never be à reason to play str builds anymore. With a dex build and this feat you get better top end ac, high mobility due to lighter armour, less check pentiltes, higher inti, and better reflex saves. All becuase you use one feat to completly rewrite the rules. If the prequistes were stiffer maybe it would be more balanced

People keep saying that... But even with Dervish Dance, Slashing Grace and the Agile enhancement available... (Hell! Even with Deadly Agility!) Str builds are still the norm. They are still very effective (even for Magi).

I have never seen a D&D/PF table were Str builds were obsolete.

This.

The main difference between those build is the ''flavor'', not really the power. Sure, it makes some class less MAD, but the difference is not that important (a dex build fighter, cavalier or ranger will still need a decent amount of strengh just to carry their armor at low level). The only class who get great improvement from this kind of feat are the Rogue, the Ninja, the Monk... all class that are far from the top tier. Oh yeah, you could do some caster good in close (hue hue, look at a scarred with doctor based on Dex!)but, if those build are good at low level, they will return to ''master of pew pew'' at higher level.


Kolokotroni wrote:
Dervish dance and slashing grace both require you to use the least effective combat method (one weapon, nothing in off hand). Agile drastically increases the cost of your weapon over time. There are significant downsides to using it. If deadly agility were the norm, that changes rather drastically.

Slashing Grace doesn't really force you to duel. It merely limits you to one weapon (and that limitation is completely pointless. It doesn't reduce the character's power... Just makes the feat more annoying to use).

Deadly Agility means you spent 2 feats to still deal less damage than an Str-based character. 2 feats + the ability to add 1.5x modifier is a pretty big advantage. Add in the fact that Power Attack is better (and a more common prerequisite) than its Dex equivalent and you start to see why Dex to dmg is not all that good.


Nyaa wrote:

I skimmed the thread and it looks like nobody's aware of that feat coming from Book of Weeaboo Fightan Magic: Pathfinder Edition that have a stance (available only at level 15 though) that changes STR mod to damage to x2 for one-handed weapons and to x3 for two-handed weapons.

And its second book that's currently in playtest have a feat that allows qualifying for TWF with STR instead of DEX. It's considered underpowered and might or might not give the benefits of TWF itself in the released book.

I will have to check that out.

The str to qualify for TWF might not be bad.

edit: I completely misread what was written.

Liberty's Edge

Lemmy wrote:
Add in the fact that Power Attack is better (and a more common prerequisite) than its Dex equivalent and you start to see why Dex to dmg is not all that good.

Am I missing something that explains why Dex-to-damage and Power Attack have anything to do with one another?

Wearing armor alone means you're not really going to want to dump Strength below the PA minimum. Unless the conversation is about nothing but kensai magi, Power Attack's not especially relevant here.


Prodigious Two-Weapon Fighting [Combat]
Your great physical might allows you to wield two large weapons with ease.

Where does one find this feat.

151 to 200 of 289 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Third-Party Pathfinder RPG Products / Advice and Rules Questions / Should i allow deadly agility feat? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.