So, me and my buddy were talking about a character he made, and he mentioned having a +7 bonus to damage from his dexterity modifier for a two handing a finesse weapon. I'm under the impression that the 1.5X rule only applies to strength, not dexterity.
So, can you get 1.5X your dexterity modifier for two-handing a finesse weapon?
You get 1.5x your Dexterity modifier in any situation where you are using your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier, if the situation would otherwise permit 1.5x Strength.
While the FAQ released was in reference to the Unchained Rogue, Paizo has stated that the reason they aim for similar language in a lot of text is to simplify knowledge that if one thing works one way, things worded the exact same also work that way.
Only if you are an unchained rogue with finesse training. Any other form of dex to damage doesn't allow 1.5 dex.
^ This is the only way to obtain 1.5x Dex on two-handed, finesseable weapons. So that there isn't any rules confusion, here is the FAQ that clarifies this: Link
Only if you are an unchained rogue with finesse training. Any other form of dex to damage doesn't allow 1.5 dex.^ This is the only way to obtain 1.5x Dex on two-handed, finesseable weapons.
Mythic Weapon Finesse would like to say otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mythic Weapon Finesse would like to say otherwise.Only if you are an unchained rogue with finesse training. Any other form of dex to damage doesn't allow 1.5 dex.^ This is the only way to obtain 1.5x Dex on two-handed, finesseable weapons.
And mythic is a very optional ruleset, one that many tables are reluctant to use.
Picking your class and feats, and maybe having magical items crafted... those are more reliable as far as table variation goes.
I am merely countering Unchained Rogues having the only such instance of DEX to damage that cooperates with two-handed finesse weapons. I know full well that Mythic is very rare, but when it comes to the rules forum, we must be aware of even remote instances.
I am merely countering Unchained Rogues having the only such instance of DEX to damage that cooperates with two-handed finesse weapons. I know full well that Mythic is very rare, but when it comes to the rules forum, we must be aware of even remote instances.
In the rules forum we tend to not to refer to corner cases, such as optional rulesets.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would imagine we also don't say something is the only thing that exists when it is not.
I would imagine we also don't say something is the only thing that exists when it is not.
It happens when we are not counting corner cases. That should evident, but obviously...
If we are going to go "but mythic.." every time we get a chance there are lot of things we can do, that the community counts as "can't". Should "..but mythic" be the new standard?
I agree Rysky that unchained is an alternate system, but just like the called shot optional rules, mythic rules are very niche. And if you ask can you shoot someone in the face, people are more likely to say "no" than they are to say "yes if you use the called shot" rules.
Maybe for questions that have dozens of niche cases, it's not worth mentioning every one, but in this situation, where there are two, I think it warranted it.
... but words of power!
Answers are main systems/PFS legal systems. Things that aren't main or PFS are the corner cases that wraithstrike is talking about.
Yeah, just because people use Unchained more than Mythic doesn't not make Unchained an alternate system.
If you want to run a new Summoner in PFS today, Unchained is your ONLY option.
I feel like really mentioning mythic should be mentioned as the exception not the rule. just saying.