| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not add strength to AC?
| 18 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not add strength to AC?Logically speaking, the physical power of a character helps in no way to avoid or absorb an attack. Adding constitution to AC, your character being physically resilient, there's a logical argument for that.
"Logically speaking" being very strong enables you to produce an equal and opposite force to incoming blows, thus negating their effectiveness, thus increasing your AC.
"Logically speaking" is a term that, when applied to the abstractions of game mechanics, usually can be parsed as "I want this to be so..."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are a lot of threads about ways to add a PC's dexterity modifier to damage. Mostly revolving around unchained rogues, agile weapon enhancement, gunslingers and mythic weapon finesse. I feel I have a handle on the how, but now that I'm running a home game I want to understand the why.
Why shouldn't I allow a) weapon finesse to add a PC's dexterity modifier to melee damage and b) ranged attacks get the dexterity modifier to damage.
My theory revolves primarily around the fighter class both in the sense that I want a ranged fighter to be as effective as a melee fighter, as well as making sure that the fighter class doesn't become obsolete by allowing rogues or rangers to out-perform in and out of combat.
Ranged fighters are already generally more effective than melee fighters because of the nature of ranged combat. Because Strength is generally not a consideration in character design, they are less MAD and can spend more attribute points on Dex and Con.
Furthermore, because they are able to attack from further away, armor class is generally less of a consideration for them -- you can't hurt what you can't even reach. Further, because they can usually stand in and attack all over the board, mobility is less of a consideration for them than for melee fighters, giving them full attacks more often and vastly increasing their DPR.
Ranged combat is already one of the most powerful styles in the game; what you proposed would make it more powerful yet. I think you're solving a non-problem.
So what am I missing? Why is not adding your dexterity to finessed weapons and ranged attacks fair and balanced? Or alternatively, why is adding your dexterity damage to finessed and ranged weapons OP?
It is OP because Dexterity is the stat that feeds AC and Reflex saves. Having a single stat for both offense and defense breaks the game.
The system is not designed to handle combat with a single stat, which is why it is so difficult to attain and why it is limited to less damaging weapons when you do manage to get it.
A rat (common) has 15 Dexterity and weapon finesse.
Adding Dex to damage would mean that a rat would be able to easily kill the average human with a couple bites.
If Dexterity was split into agility and precision (or something like that), I could agree; but as a single stat it would be way too powerful.
D&D 5e has Dex to damage, has been balanced around that, and I still don't like it. Those goblins are doing too much damage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The system is not designed to handle combat with a single stat
And yet full casters do just fine in combat with a single stat.
If you want to make everyone multiple-attribute dependent (MAD) and keep them that way, cool beans.
If you want to let some people be single-attribute dependent (SAD), then let the others do so as well.
If you want to argue that the status quo is perfect, people will disagree.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
DEX, CON, and WIS are the game's basic defensive stats. DEX gets you AC and Reflex, CON gets you HP and Fortitude, and WIS gets you Perception and Will. More than anything, this is why these three stats are rarely considered for dump-stat status.
STR, INT, and CHA, on the other hand, are mainly offensive stats. Although you want to shore up all defenses against incoming attacks, you really only need to focus on whatever stat fuels your particular attacks. The others are free to dump and free up points for your other stats.
As a result, there are various attempts to turn the defensive stats into also offensive stats. Getting damage to DEX is popular, but you can also see things like the Empyreal sorcerer or the Scarred Witch Doctor as ways to make that work.
Because, really, if you can find a way to ignore the influence of half of all the ability scores, then you'll be far more efficient in combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A Strong fighter should be able to brush aside attacks, and even the attackers. So, yes, Strength should add to AC.
The Game Science wants to compartmentalize everything for simplicity sake. So what is your preference, simplicity or sensibility?
The system is not designed to handle combat with a single statAnd yet full casters do just fine in combat with a single stat.
If you want to make everyone multiple-attribute dependent (MAD) and keep them that way, cool beans.
If you want to let some people be single-attribute dependent (SAD), then let the others do so as well.
If you want to argue that the status quo is perfect, people will disagree.
This is more an effect of engagement range than stats though. Many casters are ranged and thus don't have to focus on defensive stats (as much) as melee characters. They can instead focus on their attack stat, while using spells to stay mobile and away from enemies.
The same applies to ranged martials, they will want to stay away from the enemy as much as possible in order to capitalize on their more specialized stats.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A rat (common) has 15 Dexterity and weapon finesse.
Adding Dex to damage would mean that a rat would be able to easily kill the average human with a couple bites.
Worse still, a cat, which gets three attacks per round and would have a damage output comparable to a Fighter. A wizard with a cat familiar wouldn't have much need of a martial ally.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
DEX, CON, and WIS are the game's basic defensive stats. DEX gets you AC and Reflex, CON gets you HP and Fortitude, and WIS gets you Perception and Will. More than anything, this is why these three stats are rarely considered for dump-stat status.
STR, INT, and CHA, on the other hand, are mainly offensive stats. Although you want to shore up all defenses against incoming attacks, you really only need to focus on whatever stat fuels your particular attacks. The others are free to dump and free up points for your other stats.
As a result, there are various attempts to turn the defensive stats into also offensive stats. Getting damage to DEX is popular, but you can also see things like the Empyreal sorcerer or the Scarred Witch Doctor as ways to make that work.
Because, really, if you can find a way to ignore the influence of half of all the ability scores, then you'll be far more efficient in combat.
Paladin uses CHA for both offense and defense and it has out of combat uses too, not to mention being a casting stat
Paladin uses CHA for both offense and defense and it has out of combat uses too, not to mention being a casting stat
True, but it's not like they get that for free. They have major playstyle restrictions to keep them from being the combat gods they could be (in much the same way dex to dmg is restricted to finessable weapons).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Everyone uses DEX for ranged attacks. Wisdom fuels offensive and defensive divine magic. Intelligence fuels offensive and Defensive Arcane magick. CON fuels Kineticism. The game has progressed (or regressed if you prefer) from any state of compartmentalized purity. You want purity? Go dig up a copy of Tunnels and Trolls or Fantasy Trip. They were fun, simple, purist games.
Pathfinder Embraces complexity. That is its strength. If you want purity, then I guess that is its weakness. Preferences.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Didn't 5e just make it so Dex to hit and damage is default with all Finesse weapons? And the feat Deadly Agility exists in Path of War. As far as I know the STR-based martials in those games didn't get lined up against the wall and shot, and they don't even have STR to AC (except as usual, indirectly through heavy armor).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
True, but it's not like they get that for free. They have major playstyle restrictions to keep them from being the combat gods they could be
That was the argument back in 1979. It was bad then, and it still is. If a person is playing a paladin, in general they already wanted that playstyle, so using it isn't much of a restriction. But, more importantly, in 1e the paladin was "fighter + lots of extra goodies." In PF, it's an entirely separate class, and it's pretty well-balanced even without any playstyle restrictions. So what started off as a bad idea has become an unnecessary distraction.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To keep house cats from killing rhinos, scaling feats are nice. "At BAB +6 or greater, you can also apply your Dex modifier in place of your Str modifier for damage with melee attacks," keeps the kitties from overrunning Monster Island, and also keeps the archers from being the only viable combatants.
To keep house cats from killing rhinos, scaling feats are nice. "At BAB +6 or greater, you can also apply your Dex modifier in place of your Str modifier for damage with melee attacks," keeps the kitties from overrunning Monster Island, and also keeps the archers from being the only viable combatants.
A more "realistic" solution might be to place more severe limits on how much damage you can do to something far larger than you, at least without magic, poison, etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To keep house cats from killing rhinos, scaling feats are nice. "At BAB +6 or greater, you can also apply your Dex modifier in place of your Str modifier for damage with melee attacks," keeps the kitties from overrunning Monster Island, and also keeps the archers from being the only viable combatants.
The only problem with that idea is that it means the character deals negligible damage for up to 5 levels... It'd probably be best to limit to the character's BAB or something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tabernero
That isn't a bad idea.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A Strong fighter should be able to brush aside attacks, and even the attackers. So, yes, Strength should add to AC.
I've definitely weighed letting people add their strength mod to AC when using a shield. I should try that out in a one-shot. It feels like we should do more things to encourage Strength-oriented warriors to use shields without needing to get deep in the various shield shenanigan feat trees.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Cabbage,
I would love to hear how that goes.
Considering that dex-to-damage generally requires:
- feat
- not using anything in your other hand.
Would it be a good idea to do strength to AC via:
- feat
- got to use a shield
Is that something that seems reasonable?
Considering that dex-to-damage generally requires:
- feat
- not using anything in your other hand.Would it be a good idea to do strength to AC via:
- feat
- got to use a shieldIs that something that seems reasonable?
For it to mirror the dex to damage line it'd require nothing in the other hand, including a shield. You're dropping the other hand to drop your damage with the damage one, so it makes sense to drop your AC with the AC one.
What I'm saying is that the sword & board player gets a pure upgrade with the shield version while no playstyle gets that with the dex to damage. [no shield, no second weapon, no THW]
Why not add strength to AC?
3rd party publishers have done so: See Brutal Slayer
Its honestly probably fine. It gets a little weird if your class does not need any mental stats, but at the very least no one can dump wis and con, and you can't start with more then an 18 anyway.
Paladin uses CHA for both offense and defense and it has out of combat uses too, not to mention being a casting stat
This, of course, is the other way you can shore up a deficiency: turn an offensive stat into also a defensive stat. If you're a spellcaster, defensive spells that scale off your casting stat are good. This is why things like Sidestep Secret or Nature's Whispers are popular for oracles, as well. Suddenly, DEX is not as important anymore; just use CHA for both.
However, many times, the defensive stat still has a strong effect. You can't, for example, change things so that your HP is modified by STR or INT instead of CON. The true ultimate MAD goal would be something that keys all powers off a single stat (or perhaps two only); if CHA gives you better to hit and damage, more HP, is your casting stat, and improves all your saves and AC, then heck, I'm gonna be a suave son-of-a-gun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what am I missing?
In all honesty, youre not missing anything. It's a dumb rule that should've never made it to Pathfinder after 3e.
|
if CHA gives you better to hit and damage, more HP, is your casting stat, and improves all your saves and AC, then heck, I'm gonna be a suave son-of-a-gun.
chaotic good juju zombie oracle who worships Desna and wields star knife who was a noble scion in life. CHA to hit, damage, hit points, AC, and initiative.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really think shields should have added strength to AC. Light shields would be 50% strength to AC and Tower Shields would be 150% strength to AC. And finally we would have people using shields without it being a clumsy form of two weapon fighting.
Why not add strength to AC?Logically speaking, the physical power of a character helps in no way to avoid or absorb an attack. Adding constitution to AC, your character being physically resilient, there's a logical argument for that.
In my mind adding dexterity to damage represents your character's ability to place a shot in a baddie's weak spot, or stabbing an adversary in an unarmored location. You know, how rapiers were actually used in the renaissance era... It makes logical sense to me and to the community as there is no shortage of people asking how to add dexterity to damage.
The point was to illustrate that it would be overpowered to due so. Realism aside it is a game balance issue.
My group uses house rules that allow dex to damage with finessable weapons (but does not work against creatures immune to precision damage) and full damage with off-hand attacks. Each character also picks a fighting style at character creation and receives all feats needed to make that style functional; for dex types, that includes weapon finesse and this new dex to damage feat. Many of the players personally lean toward the dexterous rogue aesthetic, and so dex-based characters have been very popular since we adopted these rules. Here are a few reasons why, even in that environment, strength-based characters are still considered very good:
- Better weapon dice
- Better damage on attacks of opportunity
- Better at dealing with DR
- Only need to buy a single weapon
- Better standard action attacks
- Furious Focus exists for Power Attack, but no equivalent exists for Piranha Strike or Deadly Aim (do not underestimate how much of a difference this makes!)
- Heavy armor allows a much higher AC at early levels
- Strength to damage functions against all enemies
- Better accuracy compared to characters using Two-Weapon Fighting or Rapid Shot
Most of these points are damage-focused. In our group, strength-based characters are still the undisputed kings of damage. The combination of those factors results in vastly higher damage dealt in practice. Since offense is generally more powerful than defense in Pathfinder, I feel strength-based characters are still ahead. The important difference is that the players who like dexterity-based characters feel like they're contributing and aren't constrained to only a handful of classes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The only legitimate game balance issue with allowing easier access to DEX to Damage is that it lowers the value of STR in a system where the value of STR is already fairly low.
I am in favor of, and already house-rule into my campaigns an "Improved Weapon Finesse" feat, which is simply Mythic Weapon Finesse with a BAB Prerequisite to prevent characters from getting Dex to Damage earlier than Unchained Rogues do.
I am also strongly in favor of a feat which allows characters to add their STR Modifier to any Shield Bonus they already possess (including that provided by feats like Two-Weapon Defense), and/or just making that how shields work by default.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
if CHA gives you better to hit and damage, more HP, is your casting stat, and improves all your saves and AC, then heck, I'm gonna be a suave son-of-a-gun.chaotic good juju zombie oracle who worships Desna and wields star knife who was a noble scion in life. CHA to hit, damage, hit points, AC, and initiative.
Interestingly, you could pull this off with any undead. The Divine Fighting Technique feat presented in Divine Anthology does not have any alignment restrictions, meaning you could be LE and still have access to Desna's divine fighting feat, so long as you still 'worshiped' her. Combine that with your Noble Scion and Divine Protection feats. Then, you're a lore oracle (obviously not taking the wasting curse) with sidestep secret and lore keeper, and you're about as SAD as they come.
So, in other words, you're getting your CHA to INT-based skills (but not to skill points), Fort and Ref saves (you're immune to mind-effecting), and also get a 1/day use of CHA to will saves, to boot. You also add CHA to initiative and AC, gain bonus HP off of Charisma, and, for good measure, also get CHA to hit when using a starknife.
You could pull that off with a 0-point buy.
7-7-7-9-7-18 before racial modifiers.
But I digress. Just expanding on what Imbicatus said.
My theory revolves primarily around the fighter class both in the sense that I want a ranged fighter to be as effective as a melee fighter, as well as making sure that the fighter class doesn't become obsolete by allowing rogues or rangers to out-perform in and out of combat.Here's a question to consider: if Dex adds to damage, attack, initiative, Reflex, AC, Stealth/Acrobatics/Disable Device/Ride/etc...why go Strength over Dex even as a melee fighter? Get enough strength (or special gear/spells/etc) to carry what you need and then just pump Dex. 2H that Elven Curve Blade or something.
The Elven Curve Blade just allows weapon finesse. My Greatsword still gives me 1.5x strength to damage, 1.5x to power attack damage, and doesn't require either a feat or being a specific race.
Even with dex to damage, I still think a two-handed fighter or barbarian would win in damage. Pathfinder favors damage over defense 9 times of 10.
The point was to illustrate that it would be overpowered to due so. Realism aside it is a game balance issue.
You didn't do a very good job of that then, because it probably wouldn't be.
My theory revolves primarily around the fighter class both in the sense that I want a ranged fighter to be as effective as a melee fighter, as well as making sure that the fighter class doesn't become obsolete by allowing rogues or rangers to out-perform in and out of combat.Here's a question to consider: if Dex adds to damage, attack, initiative, Reflex, AC, Stealth/Acrobatics/Disable Device/Ride/etc...why go Strength over Dex even as a melee fighter? Get enough strength (or special gear/spells/etc) to carry what you need and then just pump Dex. 2H that Elven Curve Blade or something.The Elven Curve Blade just allows weapon finesse. My Greatsword still gives me 1.5x strength to damage, 1.5x to power attack damage, and doesn't require either a feat or being a specific race.
Even with dex to damage, I still think a two-handed fighter or barbarian would win in damage. Pathfinder favors damage over defense 9 times of 10.
You can two-hand an elven curve blade, and if you do so with something like the Unchained Rogues's ability which gives dex to damage it will do 1.5 strength. And if you don't dump dex strength so low that you can still pickup power attack you would get the 3 points of damage for -2 to hit.
Melee Dex to Damage
I agree that adding Dexterity to melee damage is fine and even preferable. It adds more build options, makes otherwise underpowered concepts viable, and doesn't exceed the raw power of conventional strength-based builds.
One of the biggest problems with Dex-to-damage can be solved with a relatively simple fix: make it dexterity in addition to strength rather than instead of it. At first glance this looks really overpowered, but in practice actually nerfs the most min-maxed builds so it doesn't have serious repercussions. This completely eliminates the strength dumping problem; you can still choose to dump strength, of course, but you actually get penalized for doing so.
The "housecat" problem is easily solved by making the feat only apply to manufactured weapons. Dex-to-damage is most problematic on monstrous races anyways, so eliminating it as an option for natural attacks sidesteps much of these issues. Since the intended beneficiaries of dex-to-damage (finesse-based PC's) generally don't use natural weapons there is little collateral damage to doing this.
Ranged Dex to Damage
Ranged attackers, particularly archers, are already very powerful builds unlike their melee finesse counterparts. They require no such assistance to be stronger, and in fact giving them access to something as remarkable as dexterity-to-damage could have severe balance consequences when they're already doing very well for themselves. Archery builds are doing just fine, they don't need dex-to-damage and introducing it will cause more harm than good.
The underpowered ranged weapons that actually need dex-to-damage - crossbows and firearms - already have a dex-to-damage option. These weapons are vastly inferior to bows and even with this advantage they still fall short of well-built archer builds. Giving bows the same advantage they get would be a very bad idea when they're already so far ahead of the curve. Thrown Weapons and Slings might be arguable, but definitely do not do this for bows.
Dex to damage is something that does exist for a multitude of weapons. In fact, the fighter specifically has ways to do it with almost any weapon with the right feats thanks to Advanced Weapon Training "Fighter's Finesse" and feats like Martial Versatility, or Advanced Weapon Training "Weapon Specialist."
Slashing/Fencing/Starry Grace all got a secondary feat in Villain Codex with Two-Weapon Grace which allows DEX to damage with both hands, albeit at an extremely high feat cost which is understandable considering the only reason to desire DEX to damage typically comes down to MAD problems and wanting to circumvent investing into STR in the first place.
Two-Weapon Grace is not necessarily a shoehorn to force two-weapon combat (though I imagine most people that take it want that) as it simply allows the S/F/S Grace feat to function even with the off-hand occupied.
Fighters are basically the only class that can manage this, and it's not that good when you can just use STR or laughably Warrior Spirit to just add Agile to your weapon, but still it is a purely mundane option. The details of which are in my fighter guide, which I plan to update soon. I've been under a rock playing Zelda for the last month.
One of the biggest problems with Dex-to-damage can be solved with a relatively simple fix: make it dexterity in addition to strength rather than instead of it. At first glance this looks really overpowered, but in practice actually nerfs the most min-maxed builds so it doesn't have serious repercussions. This completely eliminates the strength dumping problem; you can still choose to dump strength, of course, but you actually get penalized for doing so.
That's a nice fix. Yeah, it potentially gives mariliths +4 to damage with all their attacks, balors +7, and horned devils +8, but that's not at all unreasonable for creatures with those kind of CRs.
Since you are effectively doing house rules, the simplest things to do is to allow the Mythic Weapon Finesse feat.
Melee:
Weapon Finesse (Mythic)
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/mythic/mythic-feats/weapon-finesse-mythic/
Prerequisite(s): Weapon Finesse.
Benefit: When using Weapon Finesse, you may also use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on your damage rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty doesn’t apply to either the attack rolls or the damage rolls.
Two-Handed Melee (treat Mythic Weapon Finesse like Unchained Rogue Finesse Training):
Pathfinder RPG Pathfinder Unchained Frequently Asked Questions
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1h3
Unchained Rogue Finesse Training: When I'm replacing Strength for Dexterity, what happens with a one two-handed weapon? What about an off-hand weapon?
With a two-handed weapon, you add 1-1/2 times your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls, and with an off-hand weapon, you add half your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls. As per the ability's text, if an effect would prevent you from adding your Strength modifier on damage rolls, you don't add your Dexterity modifier. However, any other effects that would increase the multiplier to your Strength bonus on damage rolls (such as the two-handed fighter archetype's overhand chop) do not affect your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls.
Ranged:
Create a Ranged Mythic Weapon Finesse feat (or allow the Mythic Weapon Finesse to work with ranged weapons, and potentially use some other prerequisite) or allow the Agile weapon property to work on ranged weapons (perhaps with a enchantment cost of +2 instead of +1).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Always kind of thought the one aspect of 4th ed that should be adopted was this:
Fort save = highest of str or con mod
Ref save = highest of Int or Dex mod
Will save = highest of Wis or Cha mod
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Always kind of thought the one aspect of 4th ed that should be adopted was this:
Fort save = highest of str or con mod
Ref save = highest of Int or Dex mod
Will save = highest of Wis or Cha mod
There are actually quite a few good ideas buried in 4e (like Minion rules) that got thrown out because 4e was so terrible people assumed every part of it was bad.