|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of people have differing opinions about wether Dex damage multiplies 1x5 times the same way Str does in the case of the unchained rogue's class ability.
As a GM, at my table in a home game I will say no It does not. I am not going to bother to quote a ruling. As a PFS GM I will also say no it will not. Unless it specifically is spelled out in a FAQ I will say no.
My reasonings are as follows, 1) the Str. score determines the amount of weight you carry and the amount of damage you do with a melee or thrown weapon (like a hand axe).
Comparably your Dexterity, with the unchained rogues class ability, determines your melee to hit and damage modifier, your to hit modifier with a ranged weapon.......and a modifier to your AC and a modifier to initiative.
I think that is more then enough for the Dex score to deal with, so no 1.5 modifier while wielded 2 handed.
There we are, that is my opinion and how I would rule at a home table or PFS table.
This is an interesting thread to read. I will enjoy reading what people have to post.
We're also talking about exotic weapons here: the aldori dueling sword, the elven branched spear, the elven curved blade, the spiked chain, and possibly the estoc (haven't read up on that one yet). So there will be a feat cost or racial ability investment (since rogues don't get all martial weapons).
Every other finessable weapon is either light (which can't be two handed) or specifically says it can't be used in two hands (rapier, scimitar in Dervish Dance feat, etc.).
Also, technically the aldori dueling sword is the only one of the five that specifically says you still get 1.5 times strength when you two hand it. Now, one would assume the others would also get 1.5 times strength, because they are specifically two-handed weapons that don't say that they don't...
I see no reason untill someone who can make an official ruling says otherwise to deny 1.5 DEX to damage on the named exotic weapons here.
The rogues ability doesn´t call it out either.It´s very similar to the change in sneak attack.
And it´s surely very far away from the OP circus some people make up here.
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Effects that modify Strength don't, as a rule, modify Dexterity unless they say they do. The RAW says you are denied Dex when you would be denied Str, but "denied" and "modified" are pretty different concepts. I believe the strictest reading of RAW with regard to Finesse Training is that you neither suffer the off-hand penalty to damage nor gain the two-hand bonus - but the entire question is in dire need of a FAQ, pronto.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of people have differing opinions about wether Dex damage multiplies 1x5 times the same way Str does in the case of the unchained rogue's class ability.
As a GM, at my table in a home game I will say no It does not. I am not going to bother to quote a ruling. As a PFS GM I will also say no it will not. Unless it specifically is spelled out in a FAQ I will say no.
My reasonings are as follows, 1) the Str. score determines the amount of weight you carry and the amount of damage you do with a melee or thrown weapon (like a hand axe).
Comparably your Dexterity, with the unchained rogues class ability, determines your melee to hit and damage modifier, your to hit modifier with a ranged weapon.......and a modifier to your AC and a modifier to initiative.
I think that is more then enough for the Dex score to deal with, so no 1.5 modifier while wielded 2 handed.
There we are, that is my opinion and how I would rule at a home table or PFS table.
This is an interesting thread to read. I will enjoy reading what people have to post.
Feel free to rule as you like in your home games, but in PFS, we don't have the freedom to rule based on what we think the rules should be.
We are certainly allowed to rule based on what we think the rule says, but we have to ground it in the actual text used in the rule, in the text of similar rules,in precedents set by FAQ, etc.
If you want to rule that an unchained rogue can't get 1.5 damage on the 5 exotic two-handed finnessable weapons, you need to find some support in the text of the rule or in some similar rule.
The way I read the text, the unchained rogue's dex is used as a direct replacement for strength in weapon damage and functions the exact same way strength normally does (x1.5 on two handed weapons, x0.5 on off hand weapons, etc.).
Now, other instances of dex to damage has some specific way of excluding 1.5x damage from two-handing a weapon, either by requiring a light weapon or requiring a free hand or something. This version has no mention of that at all. To me, that says that the unchained rogue does not suffer from the specific restrictions imposed on the other variation.
Until there's an FAQ that says otherwise or someone presents a compelling argument for the alternate reading, that's how I'll rule.
Do I think that's how the rule should be? Doesn't matter, because that's what I think the rule actually says.
The Guide to Organized Play actually gives a fair degree of latitude in cases where the rules aren't clear.
As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and
responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the
rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure
everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not
mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in
this document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com.
What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right
for your table during cases not covered in these sources.
And in my opinion the portion of dex to damage that says you do not get dex to damage any situation where you wouldn't get strength covers the off hand 1/2 strength situation and there is no explicit rule covering two handed weapons and dex. I'm perfectly comfortable ruling no 1.5 dex to damage in PFS until there's an official statement from Paizo to the contrary.
Feel free to rule as you like in your home games, but in PFS, we don't have the freedom to rule based on what we think the rules should be.We are certainly allowed to rule based on what we think the rule says, but we have to ground it in the actual text used in the rule, in the text of similar rules,in precedents set by FAQ, etc.
If you want to rule that an unchained rogue can't get 1.5 damage on the 5 exotic two-handed finnessable weapons, you need to find some support in the text of the rule or in some similar rule.
The way I read the text, the unchained rogue's dex is used as a direct replacement for strength in weapon damage and functions the exact same way strength normally does (x1.5 on two handed weapons, x0.5 on off hand weapons, etc.).
Now, other instances of dex to damage has some specific way of excluding 1.5x damage from two-handing a weapon, either by requiring a light weapon or requiring a free hand or something. This version has no mention of that at all. To me, that says that the unchained rogue does not suffer from the specific restrictions imposed on the other variation.
Until there's an FAQ that says otherwise or someone presents a compelling argument for the alternate reading, that's how I'll rule.
Do I think that's how the rule should be? Doesn't matter, because that's what I think the rule actually says.
I second this statement.
|
I honestly don't understand why people think "TWF is 1x and 0.5x, so THF is 1.5x." That was never the case for Dex-to-damage before, what makes you think it suddenly is now?
TWF has always been the superior option for Dex-to-damage because it allows you to get more than 1x Dex mod on your attacks, though it locks you into Full attacks to make use of it.
It was never previously the case for dex-to-damage before because A: The language specifically explained how it worked (Agile) or B: The option itself didn't allow the use of two-handed weapons (Dervish Dance, Slashing Grace).
In this case the language restricting THF is absent, and the class feature simply says to use your dexterity modifier instead of your strength modifier. To me it makes sense that, barring specific language restricting it the way they've added in all the other examples, to assume that the same limitations and advantages associated with strength-based melee attacks would also apply to dexterity-based melee attacks when using Finesse Training.
With that said, Paizo's track record with implementing dex-to-damage options hasn't exactly been stellar so far, who knows what the intent was in this case.
Not much about the rules are based on reality or "logic." There are all sorts of bits here and there designed simply for balance. Examples-Natural AC of monsters scaling by level, Prices of mithril/lb vs mithral as special material, magic, leveling up, anything with stats, etc.
So to be fair, nothing is game-breaking about 1.5x dex damage while THF. I am siding with those in favor of this, because of the afore mentioned and because it makes more "logical" sense with the system.
That being said I see how people are reading "Dex instead" as "Dex always." If you have +4 str and +4 dex, normally THF you get +6 damage (4x1.5) but instead you add your (+4) dex. Likwise, off-hand fighting you normally get +2 damage (4x.5) but instead you add your (+4) dex.
I think it is pretty safe to say that it was intended to mirror how strength adds to damage though based on the different method of describing how it adds dex to damage from the other similar feats/abilities.
|
|
You're forgetting that twf already gets that same PA bonus, along with additional base weapon damage and additional sneak attack damage. [I felt it prudent to point that out considering this class feature is on the Rogue.]Hopefully the intent was to allow the Elven Curveblade [and any other two-handed dex weapons] to be worth the page space.Even without 1.5x damage, the better Power Attack ratio would make them worth using, especially when combined with the curve blade's 18-20 crit range.
In my experience, TWF can't afford yet more penalties to hit, and THF allows the option of feats like Furious Focus to offset that problem even further. The situation is exacerbated for 3/4 BAB classes, and probably most extreme with the rogue, who desperately need to get their sneak attacks to land in order to get debilitating injury's effect into play.
For example, a 5th level rogue with Dex 20 and TWF attacking AC 20 from flank with paired short swords has a DPR of 23.05; using Power Attack actually drops that to 22.6 (that's without taking into account the possible effect of debilitating injury, since it makes the math a lot worse). Conversely, the same rogue using a curve blade under the same circumstances has a DPR of 15.42 normally and 16.31 with Power Attack.
You're forgetting that twf already gets that same PA bonus, along with additional base weapon damage and additional sneak attack damage. [I felt it prudent to point that out considering this class feature is on the Rogue.]Hopefully the intent was to allow the Elven Curveblade [and any other two-handed dex weapons] to be worth the page space.Even without 1.5x damage, the better Power Attack ratio would make them worth using, especially when combined with the curve blade's 18-20 crit range.
Power Attack is effectively useless to One-Handed Fighters and Two-Weapon Fighters because of how the maths work out.
Every +1 to hit equates to a +2 to damage in terms of DPR.
Therefore, Power Attack subtracting -1 to attack and adding +2 to damage means that mathematically it's a zero-sum value for DPR.
It's even worse for off-hand strikes because it's -1/+1, which equates to effectively a -.5 DPR
Two-Handed makes it worthwhile because it's -1/+3.
Barbarians CAN be Two-Weapon Fighters AND use Power Attack simply because Reckless Abandon effectively lets you go -1 AC > +2 Damage, while leaving your to-hit bonuses alone.
Practicioners of Tiger Pounce can also do the same trick, but they have to be Unarmed, which means you basically have to be a Sacred Fist, Warpriest, Monk, or Brawler for it to worthwhile.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Lots of people have differing opinions about wether Dex damage multiplies 1x5 times the same way Str does in the case of the unchained rogue's class ability.
As a GM, at my table in a home game I will say no It does not. I am not going to bother to quote a ruling. As a PFS GM I will also say no it will not. Unless it specifically is spelled out in a FAQ I will say no.
My reasonings are as follows, 1) the Str. score determines the amount of weight you carry and the amount of damage you do with a melee or thrown weapon (like a hand axe).
Comparably your Dexterity, with the unchained rogues class ability, determines your melee to hit and damage modifier, your to hit modifier with a ranged weapon.......and a modifier to your AC and a modifier to initiative.
I think that is more then enough for the Dex score to deal with, so no 1.5 modifier while wielded 2 handed.
There we are, that is my opinion and how I would rule at a home table or PFS table.
This is an interesting thread to read. I will enjoy reading what people have to post.
Then you agree that the Unchained Rogue gets full Dex bonus to off-hand attacks. The only interpretation that denies 1.5 Dex on 2-handed attacks allows 1X Dex for off-hand attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly don't understand why people think "TWF is 1x and 0.5x, so THF is 1.5x." That was never the case for Dex-to-damage before, what makes you think it suddenly is now?
TWF has always been the superior option for Dex-to-damage because it allows you to get more than 1x Dex mod on your attacks, though it locks you into Full attacks to make use of it.
Because either you are applying the modifiers to Str based damage or you are not. If you are, then you get .5, 1, and 1.5; if not then you get 1X for everything. There is no language that states the the modifiers can be applied selectively.
|
|
Yeah, nah, that's not how it works. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, you stick to how things have always worked. With how often Paizo books come out with bits missing due to word limits and such (hi ACG Cleric archetype!) it could simply be an oversight.
Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace don't let you get 1.5x Dex, therefore there is no evidence that this Rogue feature should let them do it, either. Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace don't let you get 1x Dex on offhand attacks, therefore there is no evidence that this Rogue feature should let them do that, either. Neither of these prevents the other from being true.
It's likely to get FAQ'd but I wouldn't hold my breath. Paizo is notoriously against easy-to-get-and-use Dex-to-damage, and this is almost guaranteed not to work like you want it to.
Because either you are applying the modifiers to Str based damage or you are not. If you are, then you get .5, 1, and 1.5; if not then you get 1X for everything. There is no language that states the the modifiers can be applied selectively.I honestly don't understand why people think "TWF is 1x and 0.5x, so THF is 1.5x." That was never the case for Dex-to-damage before, what makes you think it suddenly is now?
TWF has always been the superior option for Dex-to-damage because it allows you to get more than 1x Dex mod on your attacks, though it locks you into Full attacks to make use of it.
Again not covered by RAW so GM gets discretion over RAI, it's not as complicated as you make it out to be.
The Guide to Organized Play actually gives a fair degree of latitude in cases where the rules aren't clear.
And in my opinion the portion of dex to damage that says you do not get dex to damage any situation where you wouldn't get strength covers the off hand 1/2 strength situation and there is no explicit rule covering two handed weapons and dex. I'm perfectly comfortable ruling no 1.5 dex to damage in PFS until there's an official statement from Paizo to the contrary.As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and
responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the
rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure
everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not
mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in
this document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com.
What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right
for your table during cases not covered in these sources.
Oh, we absolutely do have the right to rule however you want when the rules are unclear. I'm just saying that we should make the ruling based on our interpretation of the text of the rule in question, like you did here.
Other posters were ruling based on a general "I just don't like it" attitude, which I don't think is the correct approach.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again not covered by RAW so GM gets discretion over RAI, it's not as complicated as you make it out to be.Because either you are applying the modifiers to Str based damage or you are not. If you are, then you get .5, 1, and 1.5; if not then you get 1X for everything. There is no language that states the the modifiers can be applied selectively.I honestly don't understand why people think "TWF is 1x and 0.5x, so THF is 1.5x." That was never the case for Dex-to-damage before, what makes you think it suddenly is now?
TWF has always been the superior option for Dex-to-damage because it allows you to get more than 1x Dex mod on your attacks, though it locks you into Full attacks to make use of it.
But it is covered by RAW. The power says that you get to replace Str with Dex. Other powers have limiting language, this one does not. So going by what is written you have 2 viable choices:
A) +Dex to everything, off-hand, one-handed, and 2-handed.B) regular modifiers to Str applied to Dex
Adding additional caveats and conditions is the thing that is making things more complicated. In other words, it is your position that is the complicated one.
I personally figured you get 1x to mainhand and offhand, which is a rogue buff because they're one of the few dex-to-damage sources that doesn't outright ban dual-wielding.
I'm cool with either 1.5x 2h, 1x .5x offhand, or 1x period per weapon.
|
|
Yeah, nah, that's not how it works. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, you stick to how things have always worked. With how often Paizo books come out with bits missing due to word limits and such (hi ACG Cleric archetype!) it could simply be an oversight.
Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace don't let you get 1.5x Dex, therefore there is no evidence that this Rogue feature should let them do it, either. Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace don't let you get 1x Dex on offhand attacks, therefore there is no evidence that this Rogue feature should let them do that, either. Neither of these prevents the other from being true.
It's likely to get FAQ'd but I wouldn't hold my breath. Paizo is notoriously against easy-to-get-and-use Dex-to-damage, and this is almost guaranteed not to work like you want it to.
Except that in those previous cases you mention, it spells out that it does not allow 1.5 Dex to damage in the cases you mention. In this case, there is no such language. Not only that, but the limitations with the Unchained Rogue ability limit it to one weapon and mention the replacement of Str with Dex.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, nah, that's not how it works. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, you stick to how things have always worked. With how often Paizo books come out with bits missing due to word limits and such (hi ACG Cleric archetype!) it could simply be an oversight.
Actually I disagree. In the absence of evidence to the contrary you read the rules and apply them as written. You cannot read anything Operating on the default assumption that the rules have something missing or are incorrect cannot be a sustainable argument, every single ability would be unplayable until clarified. You can only assume something is missing/incorrect if the ability is actually unplayable or does nothing. That is not the case here.
The fact is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Where Paizo has been clear about limitations on THF in the past, but include no such limitations now is telling.
The fact that agile has to specifically call out that you don't get 1.5 damage when TH is indicative that without that language you would actually get 1.5 damage.
Well, to quote the relevant chunk of text (rest is simply about when you select weapons, blah):
Whenever she makes a successful melee attack with the selected weapon, she adds her Dexterity modifier instead of her Strength modifier to the damage roll. If any effect would prevent the rogue from adding her Strength modifier to the damage roll, she does not add her Dexterity modifier.Agile weapons are unusually well balanced and responsive. A wielder with the Weapon Finesse feat can choose to apply her Dexterity modifier to damage rolls with the weapon in place of her Strength modifier. This modifier to damage is not increased for two-handed weapons, but is still reduced for off-hand weapons.Since unlike agile, where 2H weapons are called out as not working, it isn't here, one can only assume yes it works. Which isn't that bad. No worse than Dex-to-Damage in general. It takes some levels of not-bad Rogue but that's really a wash.I would not say one can "only" assume that. You are inferring based on another ability which can lead to a correct answer, but it an also just mean the author of one ability has a different way of writing than the author of another ability.
The rogue ability does not say it replaces strength in every way with regard to damage. It only says it gives dex to damage, which I think is good enough since it removes the need for double slice.
OK, "only" was a bit of an oversight in language. A minor quibble. The situation remains that the language is that when you can apply your strength modifier to damage, you get to use your dexterity modifier. All else is assumed RAI for now.
I can see the argument that you don't get 1.5 Dex because you're not just applying 1.5x your strength modifier, but insisting that the rules text operates on 1.5(Strength modifier)∉ Strength modifiers just seems clunky, odd, and well, ridiculous. Which is the assumption in that claim, unless I've missed another way to logically posit it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We are using Dex instead of Str in these cases.
We have rules for 1.5 STR to damage.Can someone show me rules for 1.5 DEX to damage, because we are no longer doing STR on our attacks and the rules on 1.5 STR to damage no longer matter.
To be slightly less hyperbolic than my previous two posts (though I still personally find the concept, rules-wise, just plain silly):
We have rules for 1.5 Str to damage, we have a case here where a segment of the rules allows the replacement of strength-to-damage with dexterity-to-damage.I would personally posit the onus is on the party insisting somewhere in the rules exists a statement that at least implies that when using x ability score to perform an action in place of y, that x ability score does not operate under the same conditions at y does.
The specific case here is that:
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon
Whenever she[the Rogue] makes a successful melee attack with the selected weapon, she adds her Dexterity modifier instead of her Strength modifier to the damage roll. If any effect would prevent the rogue from adding her Strength modifier to the damage roll, she does not add her Dexterity modifier.
Excluding quibbles over bonus =/= modifier, I fail to follow the claim at which simply replacing strength with dexterity in the first quote due to the second doesn't lend to 1.5 dex.
|
Contributor
|
Poking around for a VMC'd witch, I came across this... figured it might be relevant to the discussion in some way. :)
Just my two cents, but the rules here seem crystal clear. You use dex instead of strength. See the word strength? Use the word dexterity instead. Off hand is .5 dex, two hand is 1.5 dex. Where is the confusion again?
Yes, this has not been possible before. This is a new rule, which means new possibilities. Yes, you may think it's overpowered or unrealistic. This doesn't change the rule. The rule says A, you do A. Make any house rules you like, that's your right, but recognize that they are house rules. Play PFS? Then this is how it should be run, whether you like it or not. At least until it's ruled otherwise. Personal preference has no place in RAW discussions.
|
It's also worth mentioning there are exactly four weapons that would allow 1.5 dex damage when two handed under the new rules: The Elven Curve Blade, The Spiked Chain, The Aldori Dueling Sword, and the Elven Branched Spear.
These are all exotic weapons and require a feat, multiclass, or racial trait to acquire.
And with the possible exception of the Branched Spear, all have less damage potential than TWFing daggers for an unchained rogue.
Edit: Forgot the Estoc. It's Exotic too though.
It's also worth mentioning there are exactly four weapons that would allow 1.5 dex damage when two handed under the new rules: The Elven Curve Blade, The Spiked Chain, The Aldori Dueling Sword, and the Elven Branched Spear.
These are all exotic weapons and require a feat, multiclass, or racial trait to acquire.
And with the possible exception of the Branched Spear, all have less damage potential than TWFing daggers for an unchained rogue.
Does a whip have a line that prevents it from being used in two-hands?
|
|
Does a whip have a line that prevents it from being used in two-hands?It's also worth mentioning there are exactly four weapons that would allow 1.5 dex damage when two handed under the new rules: The Elven Curve Blade, The Spiked Chain, The Aldori Dueling Sword, and the Elven Branched Spear.
These are all exotic weapons and require a feat, multiclass, or racial trait to acquire.
And with the possible exception of the Branched Spear, all have less damage potential than TWFing daggers for an unchained rogue.
It has a line that prevents it from gaining 1.5 to STR if two-handed, same as the rapier.
It has a line that prevents it from gaining 1.5 to STR if two-handed, same as the rapier.Does a whip have a line that prevents it from being used in two-hands?It's also worth mentioning there are exactly four weapons that would allow 1.5 dex damage when two handed under the new rules: The Elven Curve Blade, The Spiked Chain, The Aldori Dueling Sword, and the Elven Branched Spear.
These are all exotic weapons and require a feat, multiclass, or racial trait to acquire.
And with the possible exception of the Branched Spear, all have less damage potential than TWFing daggers for an unchained rogue.
Ahh. Just checked the PRD, it is there. Though it is notably missing from d20pfsrd, my usual go-to source. Good call.
That's not the point. There's no specific language that ALLOWS it. The ruleset is based on allowances and exceptions.I am a bit surprised that there is no specific language disallowing it.
How about a simple plain English reading and the fact that every previous instance has required specific wording disallowing it.
When you replace strength with dexterity in a sentence, the rest of the sentence doesn't disappear or change.
Totally agree with the sentiment of Archives being more accurate (and less intrusive!). But I find d20pfsrd has a more usable search, in the end, which keeps me going back.
|
|
Sorry, but the evidence of absence is not the absence of evidence. Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace are all abilities that do the same thing as the Rogue class feature. If they have restrictions, it's highly likely that the Rogue class feature will have restrictions as well.
The precedent has been set repeatedly, so trying to claim "It doesn't say I can't!" is not any kind of solid evidence.
Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon (such as the longsword). When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a swashbuckler's or a duelist's precise strike) and you can add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to that weapon's damage. The weapon must be one appropriate for your size.
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar 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 scimitar 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.
When wielding a rapier one-handed, you can add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to that weapon's damage. The rapier must be one appropriate for your size.
All three require the selected weapon to be wielded in ONE HAND.
The moment your second hand touches the weapon, you completely lose Dex to ANYTHING about that weapon.
If you two-hand a Longsword with Slashing Grace, you get 1.5x STR, because the Dex-To-Damage completely turns off until you start holding it in one hand alone.
These are a workaround - you can't get 1.5x Dex because you can't get Dex to Damage AT ALL with these abilities because of how they work.
Finesse Training has no such restrictions on it whatsoever - you can two-hand the weapon all the live-long-day, and the Dex to Damage never turns off.
Agile does the exact same thing as Finesse Training, but because the Finesse Training ability lacks the caveat that Agile puts on the ability - no 1.5x Dex for two-handed - it should logically be the only ability that DOES add 1.5x Dex, since it's a straight-up "Replace all instances of Str with Dex".
|
|
None of those are the limitations we're talking about. None of them say, "you don't get 1.5x your Strength when using it two-handed" or even "you only get 0.5x Strength in your off-hand" (which both Fencing Grace and Slashing Grace do allow). They lock the two-handed option out via a completely different set of rules, so they provide no precedent for this discussion.
Sorry, but the evidence of absence is not the absence of evidence. Agile/Slashing Grace/Fencing Grace are all abilities that do the same thing as the Rogue class feature. If they have restrictions, it's highly likely that the Rogue class feature will have restrictions as well.
The precedent has been set repeatedly, so trying to claim "It doesn't say I can't!" is not any kind of solid evidence.
False.
Slashing Grace allows you to treat one-handed shlashing weapons as piercing weapons for class features and abilities and then adds DEX to damage.Fencing Grace does nearly the same for rapiers.
Dervish dance makes a one-handed slashing weapon into a piercing weapon and adds DEX to damage in that case.
The Unchained Rogues ability weapon training has a totally different wording than each of those and references weapons that can be used with weapon finesse.