C!early, bladed brush let's you wield the weapon one-handed.
Better, Dark Midian?
Nope, he'd rule it as you attack as an unarmed strike and deal 1D3 Lethal Damage instead of your standard unarmed Non-lethal Damage.In other words, the Gauntlet is an override to unarmed strikes made with your hand.
Gauntlets say the exact opposite though: that you can use them to do lethal damage with an unarmed strike (and that they're otherwise an unarmed attack which is apparently different).
Which means a level 10 monk wearing a +1 flaming adamantine gauntlet can punch someone and choose to either do 1d3+1d6+1 damage that pierces DR/Magic and DR/Adamantine or 1d10 damage that pierces DR/Magic, Cold Iron, Silver and Lawful.
Except maybe you can't make +1 flaming adamantine gauntlets in the first place but who knows that FAQ isn't here yet, so whatever.
C!early, bladed brush let's you wield the weapon one-handed.
No it doesn't damnit!
So we, as a monk, take our awesome fists and literally coat them in potentially magical metal...and they deal LESS damage?
Seems perfectly reasonable. I can definitely argue that with my players, and see them following that line of impeccable logic. Though if I manage to keep a straight face it just means I should have been a politician.
Dark Midian: If a post about gauntlets is off topic, so would a post complaining about gauntlet posts. This is especially true in a thread about a feat that's is so convoluted that the OP thinks it needs a ruling before it's usable. Once you read the first post and FAQ, what is there to say that hasn't been said in the OTHER threads on this feat? :P
Ravingdork & Squiggit: It's #3! It's wielded in one hand, but like a longbow, it uses two hands... Simple right? ;)
|
We have multiple developers on record saying it doesn't pre-PDT account.So we know what several developer's opinions on the subject are, that is nice, but irrelevant to my previous question.
In both the most recent printings of the Core Rulebook and Ultimate Equipment attacks with Gauntlets are explicitly defined as being unarmed strikes, and being considered an unarmed attack (CRB 146, UE 28).
Until such time as an Errata or FAQ says otherwise, the RAW supports my argument.
[Weapon description table in the Ultimate Equipment book
To summarize it:
Unarmed Attacks
Unarmed strike (and only that)
Light Melee Weapons
Brass knuckles
Gauntlet
So, for that table, neither gauntlets nor brass knuckles are Unarmed attack.
Te text of gauntlet say:
"This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack."
So it do 2 things:
- make an unarmed attack lethal
as an alternative
- you can strike with a gauntlet, using it as an unarmed attack, but then it do its specific damage (1d3 for a medium gauntlet), as you are using the gauntlet, not an unarmed attack.
So if you are wearing gauntlets, you have two options:
1 - Attack with your unarmed strike, in which case you deal normal you unarmed strike damage, but it can be lethal.
2 - Or attack with the gauntlet as a weapon, but the weapon base damage is 1d3.
Am I understanding that correctly, James? If so, then what would be the point? If you can do more than 1d3 damage with unarmed strikes, then you are already doing lethal damage (as the only ways to increase the base damage are the improved unarmed strike feat, or increasing your size). If you don't have that level of training, then you might as well attack with the gauntlet as a weapon (which would do the same damage even if you increased size).
No, there's gotta be more to it than that.
Why?
And the whole discussion about them is decidedly off topic.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alright, I think I've got it.
If you wield a glaive in one hand, you deal lethal unarmed damage.
In two hands, you can use weapon finesse, but only if you're a swashbuckler using spell combat.
That should clear everything up.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
It just dawned on me, the Bladed Brush and Gauntlet is more similar that I realized.
Both rules elements have segmented players with firm immovable interpretations that the rules text can't sway the other side.
In gauntlets case:
- If you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you get little benefit other than material DR overcoming in exchange for (your enchantment bonuses and your increased unarmed strike damage). In other words DR cut through for doing only 1d3.
- If you lack IUS, it's a cheap upgrade to lethal unarmed strike. You still provoke (because you are attacking unarmed).
- Monks with Amulet of Mighty Fists will retain their enchantment bonus as gauntlets are still unarmed attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's a reason why this feat isn't PFS legal.Because PFS tends to kneejerk ban sometimes? Especially for weird/interesting/nonstandard options?
Like Eldritch Scoundrel being barred to core rogue only. Because why should rogues ever get anything nice, right? :3
Might as well have not bothered with Unchained if they were going to do silly things like that...
Speaking of silly things. This entire discussion on gauntlets in the middle of a Bladed Brush thread is dreadfully silly. Too silly, in fact. We need something decent and military to get us all in order.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It just dawned on me, the Bladed Brush and Gauntlet is more similar that I realized.
Both rules elements have segmented players with firm immovable interpretations that the rules text can't sway the other side.
In gauntlets case:
- If you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you get little benefit other than material DR overcoming in exchange for (your enchantment bonuses and your increased unarmed strike damage). In other words DR cut through for doing only 1d3.
- If you lack IUS, it's a cheap upgrade to lethal unarmed strike. You still provoke (because you are attacking unarmed).
- Monks with Amulet of Mighty Fists will retain their enchantment bonus as gauntlets are still unarmed attacks.
Why would you still provoke?...........Oh dear god I see it gauntlets let you do lethal but lack language stating your attack is now "Armed." Why in the 9 hells do we have to hate on unarmed fighting so much.
So Bladed Brush... There are indeed lots of problems with the wording of the feat.
Given the context in which the feat was presented and it's specific mention of the Swashbuckler's Precise Strike deed. It is fairly obvious that Bladed Brush and the Devoted Muse were intended to make a Glaive-Wielding Swashbuckler a viable option. Isn't that artwork just sexy? I'd play her! I think part of the problem was that the writer attempted to Future-Proof the feat while also jumping through all of the appropriate hoops necessary to make a Glaive a legal target for all of the feats and class features necessary to make the concept viable.
The feat appears intended to allow you to apply the benefits of Slashing Grace to it (note the clause about being able to be treated as a one-handed slashing weapon). However the feat technically fails to make the glaive a legal target for Slashing Grace because it only allows you to treat the off-hand as though you were not making attacks with it, which is good enough to retain your buckler bonus or use precise strike, but Slashing Grace requires that the hand actually be unoccupied.
Bladed Brush technically doesn't allow a Magus to perform Spell Combat with a glaive for the same reason. Spell Combat requires that the hand actually be free, not merely treated as though you hadn't made attacks with it.
Back on the Topic of Dex-To-Damage, I think an Unchained Rogue can select Glaive as a target for their Finesse Training. The verbiage used for allowing the Glaive to be finessed is basically the same verbiage used in weapons which we know are legal targets for Finesse Training, such as the Elven Curved Blade.
Obviously I reject the line of thinking that states the glaive still isn't a legal target for said rogues because the weapon itself isn't naturally finesse-able. As with *ahem* certain other topics, said line of thinking strikes me as an attempt to interpret the rules to mean something other than what they literally say.
Finally, nothing in the feat actually says that the glaive stops being a two-handed weapon being used in two-hands. So you cannot hold a wand in the off-hand occupied by the glaive, nor can you wield a second weapon in that hand in order to use Two-Weapon Fighting. If your GM allows you to apply Slashing Grace or Finesse Training to it, you get 1.5 times your STR modifier, just like the Elven Curve Blade. If you use Power Attack you deal 3 extra damage per -1 to your attack rolls, just like with any other Two-Handed Weapon. Etc...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.
I really wish Paizo would write some feats that gave love to Strength. Such as a feat to apply your Str modifier to Attack Rolls with Thrown Weapons, or a Feat that allowed you to apply your Str modifier to AC instead of your Dex modifier while using a shield or weapon with the Blocking special quality. Perhaps a Trait that allowed you to apply Str to Acrobatics instead of Dex.
The Paizo Community's Dex'philia is out of hand.
Bladed Brush seems to be making a Glaive just exactly as one-handed as QuarterStaff Master makes a Quarterstaff, and given that Staff Magus archetype uses QuarterStaff Master as the only nod toward the destination of "You can still do your Magus stuff", it seems BB carries Glaive to the same place.
Can you find a place to stand from which to rule otherwise? Of course. But you have to find that place, and then go stand there. It's not a natural place to stand, and it's not where you would be, otherwise. It is false, even if it is correct.
The difference is that Quarterstaff Master (the feat), explicitly calls out that you are using the Quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon.
"you can wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon."
Whereas Bladed Brush only says you that you treat the weapon as one-handed for specific, limited purposes. It is still technically being wielded two-handed.
"you can treat [a glaive] as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon ... for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon..."
The feat appears intended to allow you to apply the benefits of Slashing Grace to it (note the clause about being able to be treated as a one-handed slashing weapon). However the feat technically fails to make the glaive a legal target for Slashing Grace because it only allows you to treat the off-hand as though you were not making attacks with it, which is good enough to retain your buckler bonus or use precise strike, but Slashing Grace requires that the hand actually be unoccupied.
I don't think it's a technical failure at all. There's no reason to use such exact wording unless specifically making the point of preventing compatibility with stuff like slashing grace and spell combat and etc. Otherwise it'd just say you have a free hand or can pretend you have a free hand.
It's exactly the right wording to enable precise strike without enabling anything else, so it seems pretty clear that that was precisely the intent.
Bladed Brush seems to be making a Glaive just exactly as one-handed as QuarterStaff Master makes a Quarterstaff
Quarterstaff master outright says you can wield the staff one handed, which is decidedly different than the text of bladed brush so I don't know why you'd assume that they're equivalent.
I consider it a technical failure because I consider being able to use Slashing Grace part of what determines whether or not the character concept is viable.
Even given all of it's foibles, I suppose the feat & prestige class would be perfectly viable for a Strength & Charisma based Swashbuckler. Assuming you only took the feat to be able to use your Deeds and recover Panache with a Glaive, and reduce it's reach as a Move Action it is still worth the slot.
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.I really wish Paizo would write some feats that gave love to Strength. Such as a feat to apply your Str modifier to Attack Rolls with Thrown Weapons, or a Feat that allowed you to apply your Str modifier to AC instead of your Dex modifier while using a shield or weapon with the Blocking special quality. Perhaps a Trait that allowed you to apply Str to Acrobatics instead of Dex.
The Paizo Community's Dex'philia is out of hand.
Rant under the cut, since I get angry about things too easily. Just like, send me a response in PM's or something;
And this same reason is why Strength builds are, fundamentally, superior to Dex builds.
GIVE IT UP FOR
POWER ATTACK!!!!
The best martial feat in the game. PERIOD. Strength feat. If you want in as a Dex user, you need 13 Strength. Reasonable for most builds but you can't simply dump Strength to get it, which I always hear is the true problem of Dex builds. That strength is 'irrelevant' so you can dump it all the way to 7 and be fine.
It's also a single feat, and not three feats to add Dex to damage, and then two more to use two-weapon fighting with it, while also investing into two-weapon fighting feats. If you want just Bladed Brush, that's only four but you still don't get x1.5 your Dex to damage, as that's not allowed even with Slashing Grace specifically. You also can't do it by 1st level with Bladed Brush (as a Fighter/Human Swashbuckler), so you either suck for a whole level or two as you do no damage with 7 strength, or you take the reasonable approach of sitting around 10-11 Strength, which seems fine to me. The feat investment to power is not actually in Dex's favour here.
This, in it's entirety, is an amount of feat investment replicated by the original Dex builds. Ranged builds. Who fundamentally are on a whole other of powerful than either Dex to Damage or Strength builds combined. They can kill from safety. They have more attacks than monks without even being a monk (unless Zen Archer, but that's a whole other mess in itself), while putting out as much if not more damage and otherwise not caring about things like DR or landscape. The only thing that stops them from being strong is a wizard, and at the end of the day that's basically the end of any martial related discussion so lets not go there.
Strength makes them stronger. Dex makes them stronger. Where's the hate for ranged builds? Okay, there is. It's Gunslingers. But frankly, Gunslingers? An entirely different argument all together. Again, let's not go there.
Also, Strength is pretty much the only functional method of utilising combat maneuvers, breaking objects and brute force related checks, resisting CMB's (CMD is both Strength and Dex, remember? Strength is already a defensive stat, and not having high Strength will basically be an autofail against any CMB's directed at you, which monsters often get to do liberally through grab and its ilk and to devastating effect), shield-bashing builds and utilising heavier armours which often closes the AC gap by miles. Frankly, heavy armour is usually going to grant a higher AC bonus than a Dex build would have since most any martial build will have SOME Dex.
While I absolutely agree that thrown weapons NEED a feat to make attack rolls using Strength, I think it foolish, if not contradictory and devastating to game balance to make Strength function as a defensive stat (outside of CMD). People give Dex builds WAY too much credit for what they do. And most methods of Dex to Damage don't grant 1.5 their bonus to damage while using a two-handed weapon. The one that does is Unchained Rogue, and god forbid one of you tell me in a response that Unchained Rogue is too strong as a result. I'll just straight not believe anything you say again. Period. I'll save the receipts! (I'm joking but seriously please don't tell me that you will lose respect points with me and those matter. in my heart.)
Strength builds with that bonus to AC is going to be so much more of a fundamental problem than you realise. The amount of damage (x1.5 Strength + Power Attack) and defensive power from pumping Strength alone would cause a much greater power discrepancy between the two stats, and it's entirely towards Strength. We'd have a much louder outcry against Strength to AC than what Dex to Damage ever had.
Okay rant over. So, how about that Bladed Brush FAQ? Sure can't wait for it.
If you want my personal opinion, I actually think magus already has a method of getting a two-handed weapon while using spell combat. It's the Mindblade archetype. So frankly, we are living in that Bladed Brush magus hellscape already. It just takes them 13 levels and some retraining to do it.
piranah strike is power attack for light weapons. So it's only rapiers and scimitars that are out of the loop.
|
If you wanna make a glaivebuckler without any problems take 3 levels of Phalanx Fighter. Now while using a buckler (which doesn't occupy a hand) you can wield the glaive in one hand AND treat it as a finessable one handed piercing weapon.
Throw a effortless lace on that baby and you can use it with piranha strike too.
Agile enchantment for dex to damage, or run a whirling dervish swashbuckler archetype for Dex to damage at swashbuckler level 4 (though some people are offended by the flavor implications of this one, I personally think a worshipper of Shelyn could easily blend Sarenrae fighting techniques)
piranah strike is power attack for light weapons. So it's only rapiers and scimitars that are out of the loop.
Power Attack is stronger by merit of the x1.5 damage with two-handed weapons. Piranah strike is also ANOTHER feat. Where are these feats going to come from exactly?
I'm mostly saying that this stuff in a vacuum might make Strength look bad in theory, but the reality is Dex builds sort of really suck for like...most of the game. Like a good 40% if it's a fighter, a good 60% for anyone else. Only swashbucklers get a pass with Inspired Blade or by playing a human, but then you're playing a swashbuckler and that's a whole mess in itself. And it's all through the beginning. The pay-off is okay but nothing compared to what Strength builds were doing for the same amount of time and will continue to do, if not better, than the Dex build.
The only class to suffer in all of this tripe is the magus. And frankly, I see this as a sign that magus needs some help.
That said, Dervish Dance continues to be the worst offender, though kept in check mostly because A) most classes wait till 3rd to get it, and fighters need to wait until 2nd, B) You can't use your scimitar until then, you must use another weapon, since weapon finesse doesn't work with scimitars at all, Dervish Dance grants you the ability to make attacks using Dex, C) you can't use Piranah Attack innately and D) you can't use a shield. It is the least feat intense option, but has some innate restrictions that I feel make it somewhat more tame in comparison. You simply can't get away with a dumped Strength, for instance.
If you wanna make a glaivebuckler without any problems take 3 levels of Phalanx Fighter. Now while using a buckler (which doesn't occupy a hand) you can wield the glaive in one hand AND treat it as a finessable one handed piercing weapon.
Throw a effortless lace on that baby and you can use it with piranha strike too.
Agile enchantment for dex to damage, or run a whirling dervish swashbuckler archetype for Dex to damage at swashbuckler level 4 (though some people are offended by the flavor implications of this one, I personally think a worshipper of Shelyn could easily blend Sarenrae fighting techniques)
That's pretty cool, though unfortunately that means you need to take Phalanx Fighter and miss out on Advanced Weapon Training and Armed Bravery :(
I think just sticking to Shield Brace is better for shielded fighting with a two-handed weapon, unfortunately.
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.I really wish Paizo would write some feats that gave love to Strength. Such as a feat to apply your Str modifier to Attack Rolls with Thrown Weapons, or a Feat that allowed you to apply your Str modifier to AC instead of your Dex modifier while using a shield or weapon with the Blocking special quality. Perhaps a Trait that allowed you to apply Str to Acrobatics instead of Dex.
The Paizo Community's Dex'philia is out of hand.Rant under the cut, since I get angry about things too easily. Just like, send me a response in PM's or something;
** spoiler omitted **...
I love DEX builds. I find them very fun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Greater Peacebond spell is the answer to discouraging Dex builds. "I have to make WHAT strength check to draw my weapons?!"
Piranah Strike is only Ok because it provides +2 to damage for -1 to hit, this is a fair trade. Power Attack allows you to apply +3! to damage for -1 to hit, this is an incredible trade.
Unfortunately, while Power Attack is quite strong I was running the numbers and Swash's can still pull off quite a bit of damage thanks to Precise Strike. It basically comes down to "how often do you crit" because ironically a Power Attacker does better than a swashbuckler only on criticals.
1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 using ABP, all stat ups placed into the damaging stat,
Human Power Attack Fighter (Greatsword 2 Handed):
1: 18 Str: 2d6+9 (Strength 6, PA 3)
4: 19 Str: 2d6+15 (Str 6, PA 6, MW +1, Weapon Spec 2)
8: 22 Str: 2d6+22 (Str 9, PA 9, MW +1, Weapon Spec 2, Fighter Training 1)
12: 25 Str: 2d6+30 (Str 11, PA 12, MW +2, Weapon Spec 4, Fighter Training 2)
16: 28 Str: 2d6+39 (Str 13, PA 15, MW +4, Weapon Spec 4, Fighter Training 3)
20: 34 Str: 2d6+49 (Str 18, PA 18, MW +5, Weapon Spec 4, Fighter Training 4)
Human Power Attack Fighter Critical Chart
1: 4d6+18
4: 4d6+30
8: 4d6+44
12: 4d6+60
16: 4d6+78
20: 4d6+147
All of which is multiplied on a crit, range 19-20 for double damage until level 8, then 17-20. At level 20 the crit which point it deals triple damage.
Human Dexbuckler w/Piranah Strike (Short Sword):
1: 18 Dex: 1d6+4 (Dex 4)
4: 19 Dex: 1d6+15 (Dex 4, PS 4, Precise Strike 4, Weapon Spec 2. +1)
8: 22 Dex: 1d6+24 (Dex 6 PS 6, Precise Strike 8, weapon spec 2, Swash Training 1, +1)
12: 25 Dex: 1d6+35 (Dex 7, PS 8, Precise Strike 12, Weapon Spec 4, Swash Training 2, +2)
16: 28 Dex: 1d6+46 (Dex 9, PS 10, Precise Strike 16, Weapon Spec 4, Swash Training 3, +4)
20: 34 Dex: 1d6+57(Dex 12, PS 12, Precise Strike 20, Weapon Spec 4, Swash Training 4, +5)
Human Dexbuckler Critical Chart
1: 2d6+8
4: 2d6+26
8: 2d6+40
12: 2d6+58
16: 2d6+76
20: 2d6+131
Only part of which is multiplied on a crit, subtract level from damage before multiplying by two, 19-20 range until level 5. Range 17-20 from 5th level onward. At level 20 the damage of the critical hit is tripled.
For those not interested in the spoiler, tldr the Fighter obviously wins at level 1 but over time only reason the Fighter wins out on damage is because the Greatsword has larger damage dice. At level 16 that damage dice is no longer enough. From then onward the Swashbuckler does more damage, though just barely on a normal hit. On any given hit the Swashbuckler can out damage the Fighter with a swift action to spend a Panache point for extra damage but that costs resources. This includes critical hits, which allows the Swashbuckler to compete even on critical hits BUT causes them to lose to multiple crits during a full attack.
The "Power attack is so good it is all STR characters need" line is sheer nonsense. The Dexterity characters end up with higher AC and higher initiative, a better Acrobatics score for dodging around foes, and a higher reflex save in exchange for a few points of damage. Only large magical strength bonuses can help a Strength character outpace a dex build as they provide a 1.5 bonus over any dexterity alternative.
Now when we are dealing with Swashbucklers and fighters this matter is trivial because martial characters suck eggs. However, when we are dealing with the Magus and other similar classes we run into problems because their magical abilities make them substantially better characters. This can result in balance problems when a munchkin gets their hands on something like a Kensai Dervish Dancer Shocking Grasp Build.
I still allow dexterity to damage in my games, however I would love to see more strength and armor focused feats. Obviously the main problem with that is making 2handed Barbarians even bigger kinds of the DPS race. However, Paizo has printed feats (whether accidentally or not) that help out the non-barbarians in us all. Bulette Rush style, Shield Brace, and other feats are wonderful additions to pathfinder. They make being a wall more effective which is much more fun, at least to me, than being a dancing dandy or a ball of rage every game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Piranah Strike is only Ok because it provides +2 to damage for -1 to hit, this is a fair trade. Power Attack allows you to apply +3! to damage for -1 to hit, this is an incredible trade.
Unfortunately, while Power Attack is quite strong I was running the numbers and Swash's can still pull off quite a bit of damage thanks to Precise Strike. It basically comes down to "how often do you crit" because ironically a Power Attacker does better than a swashbuckler only on criticals.
** spoiler omitted **...
Yeah, as I stated before, in a vacuum and in theory, a Dex build will probably have higher numbers in a lot of areas that a DM is going to appreciate more. High initiative is good, but personally I think having a massive Stealth bonus is actually the real appeal to Dex builds. Perception being such an important stat as it is, Stealth, being the direct counter to Perception, is really important. And Dex builds will naturally be super stealthly while also putting out very high damage. They're also harder to pin down with traps as well, and can actually be really good at disabling them.
As for swash's damage, it doesn't surprise me in the least. Although maybe I didn't properly highlight that myself, I wasn't claiming Swashbucklers didn't do damage at all. At least it HAS the damage advantage. Though this is clearly heavily weighted to the tail end of the character's life span, because clearly getting level to damage is purposely there to make sure the class has some decent damage to begin with (it was the design purpose behind Precise Strike for exactly this reason. Without it, the swashbuckler would be super behind, so in the end the Swashbuckler is the exception for Dex builds!).
But while we're at it, don't forget the Swashbuckler's other defences. With only Reflex as a good save and both your defensive and offensive abilities tied to immediate/swift actions, the logistical problems of Swashbuckler come to bear. If you do lots of damage one round, either via precise strike or opportune parry and riposte, you leave yourself vulnerable to a bad save. If you keep your swift actions to pull out Charmed Life, then you're not doing as much damage as you could (still more than fighter, pointedly). But I blame that on poor class design if nothing else, and hence my distaste for the class in general. AC is only one type of defense. Other classes outshine Swashbuckler heavily. And in this example, fighter with AAT and AWT will win on the defense department with Armoured Juggernaut, Armed Bravery and a multitude of other niche defensive abilities that are always active.
As for the Magus. Yes. Magus does damage.
And that's basically all I have to say on that matter. A Kensai Dervish Dance Magus is essentially a monk but does triple fold the damage on a single attack, maybe multiple if the Magus blows all their spells in one nova, but whose defensive stats other than Dex don't work double time like a monk's does (Dex, Con and Wis are all heavily important defense stats, and monks get all good saves while Umonks get good Fort and Reflexes along with evasion and other defensive goodies). In fact, you need to have Dex, Con, Int and Wis. And Int is only a defense stat for the same reasons Dex is, and is also an 'offensive' stat due to spellcasting and concentration. So you're really kept in line by ability score requriements, which is super reminiscent of the monk but with a lot of the problems alleviated largely because Magus is also a spellcaster.
Frankly this character doesn't really get strong until 3rd, and then start doing Magus stuff. Before then they did Magus stuff.
Hit things hard with Shocking Grasp.
A magus that went Strength and eventually started wearing heavier armour is probably doing similar things. Magus is kind of notorious for doing a lot of damage. So much damage that contrasting the small difference between which ability score is being added to damage is redundant because it's probably enough damage to kill just about anything if the Magus of either kind goes full nova.
I mean other than the 14 odd points, during the point buy, being assigned to multi-purpose stats instead of being stuck in strength, you're right. What is the difference between Strength and Dexterity builds? When you are dealing with Martial characters who only need to worry about their Combat stats, there is not much difference between the two. However, whenever you play as a Magus or some other class with many different stat requirements you begin to notice the point-buy buff they have bought themselves via feats. Make two Magus stat-lines and compare them, 16 strength vs 16 dex gives the dex magus a ton more points to spend in their secondary stats which boosts their overall survivability.
17, 14, 12, 16, 10, 7 (Str Magus with +2 to Str)
7, 18, 14, 16, 13, 7 (Dex Magus with +2 to Dex)
When the classes are balanced around being limited by ability score requirements, and you give them 14 points to play with, you are giving them extra HP, better fort saves, better will saves, better perception checks, better AC, better Initiative, better acrobatics/stealth checks, and better reflex saves in exchange for a handful of damage. Which doesn't matter at all for spellcasters like Magi who, like you said, have insignificant differences in their damage output between Str and Dex.
Now, I do not think dexterity builds are OP. You are usually limiting yourself to playing a human, are vulnerable to strength drain, and are limiting your selection of weapons/feats considerably. However, I do think the trade off is completely worth it and I'm frustrated with the sheer number of dervish dancing human magi.
In conclusion, I wish there was more utility offered for Strength builds through feat selection that would make them attractive for warriors without turning Barbarians into even bigger beat sticks. That is why I said I liked Shield Brace, it only works on Light Shields so it does not work with bucklers and disallows dexterity. I like Bulette Style for making your ACP good for something. I like Intimidating Prowess for securing muscled men and women as spookier than normal. I like Dreadful Carnage for working for that muscly intimidate build.
However, all of these feats do not begin to manage what Dex builds gain from selecting three (sometimes 2) simple feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unarmed hard? Because Jackie Chan is a master and most are not.
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.
Dexterity isn't the best stat. It's already been proven that a Dexterity-based character isn't much better (if at all) than a Strength-based character, since Dexterity requires more investment to actually function, and even then it's simply comparable and more restrictive than the assumed standard that is Strength.
Really, the only thing(s) that Dexterity has going for it is Initiative and Reflex Saves; even Reflex Saves is miniscule, since optimization would destroy the need for good saving throws, and Reflex Saves is damage mitigation 90% of the time; Dexterity-based characters are usually squishy, and it accounts for having lower hit dice, Constitution scores, and so on.
I'd say skills, but Dex-based skills either cap off (i.e. no more ranks/modifiers would be needed), fall off (i.e. even if you max it out as best you can, it's not good enough), or are simply assumed investments (in the case of Stealth V.S. Perception). Strength-based characters have similar circumstances.
Anything else either requires investment, is extremely limited, or is just outright inferior to being MAD about it. I made a post make a clear and concise comparison; I'll link it when I find it.
**EDIT**
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.I really wish Paizo would write some feats that gave love to Strength. Such as a feat to apply your Str modifier to Attack Rolls with Thrown Weapons, or a Feat that allowed you to apply your Str modifier to AC instead of your Dex modifier while using a shield or weapon with the Blocking special quality. Perhaps a Trait that allowed you to apply Str to Acrobatics instead of Dex.
The Paizo Community's Dex'philia is out of hand.
If 3.5 D&D's allowed those are feats in their books.
The throwing one is in Complete Adventurer.
Charisma is the best stat. It is so easy to build a sad character that has nearly everything running off of charisma in some way.
I loved Complete Adventurer, it was a great splatbook.
But no, I meant PFS-Legal Material; or at the very least Paizo Published Material I can use in a NonPFS PBP (I never get to play FtF cuz I'm the only one amongst my circle willing to GM FtF).
For games I GM it doesn't matter so much, because I have a Binder-Full of custom material I've written to supplement the huge chunk of the Core Line I own physical copies of...
Charisma is the best stat. It is so easy to build a sad character that has nearly everything running off of charisma in some way.
I think it's more accurate to say that Charisma is a pretty bad stat, but there are lots of feats and class features that empower it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Charisma is the best stat. It is so easy to build a sad character that has nearly everything running off of charisma in some way.I think it's more accurate to say that Charisma is a pretty bad stat, but there are lots of feats and class features that empower it.The stat that convinces people not to fight you somehow is the worst stat in a fight?
I would disagree
It's the worst non-invested stat.
Seriously, unless you're a specific class with specific investments, Charisma has little to no combat application (though plenty of out-of-combat application).
Compared to Strength, which everyone uses for melee attack/damage rolls and thrown damage rolls, as well as carrying capacity and Climb/Swim checks, which can be important.
Or Dexterity, which everyone uses for ranged attack rolls, initiative, Reflex Saves, and other specific skill bonuses, both in and out of combat.
Or Constitution, which everyone uses to determine hit points and Fortitude Saves (and that most everyone on these forums says "14 or GTFO" in relation to this attribute).
Or Wisdom, for Will Saves and several in-combat and out-of-combat skill bonuses.
Or Intelligence, for Skill Points and numerous in-combat and out-of-combat skill bonuses.
Charisma, for any average joe, just gives them bonuses to specific skills. That's it. Compared to all of the other stats, it's the weakest. And it's because of this factor, that there are a lot more Charisma-based classes, or X to Y Charisma options; because Charisma is the weakest non-investment stat in the game.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
yeah, the devs keeps wanting to make cha a non-auto dump stat. But all they do is make those that used cha better, and those that dump it just say oh well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Bladed Brush feat had invested in Charisma, it would have been fixed by now.
I feel like you could easily split Wisdom's portfolio between Intelligence and Charisma, getting rid of wisdom entirely, and end up with a more balanced game in general. I understand the symmetry of having 3 physical and 3 mental ability scores. but I don't think it actually benefits the system as a whole, its just a hold over from the earliest editions of D&D.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Greater Peacebond spell is the answer to discouraging Dex builds. "I have to make WHAT strength check to draw my weapons?!"
At that level, you could just as easily be casting Dominate Person.
Same will save, you don't have to hope their weapon is not already drawn before you cast, and you get so much more out of a failed save.
What problems aren't solved by liberal application of Dominate Person?
Dex-To-Damage Skeleton Champion Magi with Undrawn Scimitars...?
|
|
Dexterity isn't the best stat. It's already been proven that a Dexterity-based character isn't much better (if at all) than a Strength-based character, since Dexterity requires more investment to actually function, and even then it's simply comparable and more restrictive than the assumed standard that is Strength.
That is partially true only because the Developers limit the options fo dex based builds. If what we have seen proposed and requested by some people in the Paizo boards was implemented, dex based builds would be the best builds for a lot of classes.
As the starting argument was:
Dex? In every interview where they are asked why Dex to damage is so restricted the answer is because it's the best stat in the game. So the feats need to be very narrow and have prereqs.
I feel that your post support that statement, it don't contradict it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fairly often, the classes or builds that benefit the most or at all by Dex based build paths are generally ones that already have a large amount of problems, or are generally super restrictive to begin with.
Paizo has admitted as much when they gave Unchained Rogue the strongest, least restrictive and resource intense Dex to Damage option in the game. They are practically the only class that does Dex-based builds well, and historically every rogue utilised Dex heavily anyway. It's a very strong demonstration of where Dex to damage can be fundamental to improving the state of a class.
What problems aren't solved by liberal application of Dominate Person?
Exactly my point. Why memorize a spell for narrow corner cases when the same spell slot can be filled with a spell that has a far more general application while testing the same save.
Dex-To-Damage Skeleton Champion Magi with Undrawn Scimitars...?
You should have been playing a psychic with Will of the Dead.
Revising to an even (once-in-a-lifetime) narrower corner gets you a more specific response.
Will of the Dead doesn't let you dominate person an undead, they're still the wrong type.
If it were easy to get DEX to damage, every power-gamer from here to Lake Geneva would only play DEX builds.
D&D 5th edition successfully argues otherwise.
Finesse Weapons in 5th edition automatically get Dex to both Attack and Damage without any investment, and from my limited experience people still play Heavy-Fighters and Barbarians.
D&D 5th edition successfully argues otherwise.
Finesse Weapons in 5th edition automatically get Dex to both Attack and Damage without any investment, and from my limited experience people still play Heavy-Fighters and Barbarians.
Much the same with pathfinder games that allow 3rd party stuff. It's simply TWO feats to do it that way and there aren't any more dex builds from my perspective. Some people like dex builds, from power-gamer or total role player. Some don't. The ease of MAKING the build doesn't really change that much.
Brother Fen: If it was SO bad to make dex to damage a thing, they shouldn't have given it to the unchained rogue for free at 3rd, allowing any martial to pick it up with a 3 level dip. Anyway, any true power gamer is just going to use Cha since they can get it to AC, ref, CMD, initiative, hit, damage and mind affecting spells... If there was a way to get fort saves it would be a true super stat! ;)
D&D 5th edition successfully argues otherwise.
Finesse Weapons in 5th edition automatically get Dex to both Attack and Damage without any investment, and from my limited experience people still play Heavy-Fighters and Barbarians.Much the same with pathfinder games that allow 3rd party stuff. It's simply TWO feats to do it that way and there aren't any more dex builds from my perspective. Some people like dex builds, from power-gamer or total role player. Some don't. The ease of MAKING the build doesn't really change that much.
Brother Fen: If it was SO bad to make dex to damage a thing, they shouldn't have given it to the unchained rogue for free at 3rd, allowing any martial to pick it up with a 3 level dip. Anyway, any true power gamer is just going to use Cha since they can get it to AC, ref, CMD, initiative, hit, damage and mind affecting spells... If there was a way to get fort saves it would be a true super stat! ;)
If you're undead (lich) you use it for HP and any fort saves you need to make don't you?
If it were easy to get DEX to damage, every power-gamer from here to Lake Geneva would only play DEX builds.
There is a point to this, but I think there could be smoother implementations. It doesn't have to be this difficult, but it shouldn't be too easy either. There is a very close balance that needs to be struck and I honestly feel Paizo hasn't done it yet except for Unchained Rogue, and that's a class feature, which I feel is the right place to put this sort of thing.
D&D 5th edition successfully argues otherwise.
Finesse Weapons in 5th edition automatically get Dex to both Attack and Damage without any investment, and from my limited experience people still play Heavy-Fighters and Barbarians.
To be fair, 5e limits ability score growth, two-handed weapons do not grant x1.5 their damage, and the overall power of Dex is reduced due to how armour works (light armour is only going to get as good as 12+Dex, Mage Armour makes that 13, while Full Plate straight gives you 18 but no Dex bonus. Given how ability scores are naturally capped at 20, full plate will always be a better armour option innately but one that Dex focused character will not be able to use)
To be even fairer, 5e also has all this innately tied to weapons, ranged weapons get Dex to damage as well, and what each ability score overall does has about the same amount weight to each. Also there are Strength saving throws, so dumping strength could be bad depending on the effect in question. A Battlemaster fighter will make short work of anyone with low Strength, for example. So Strength is a defensive stat much like how Dex is in this edition.
5e is hardly an example. You basically can't optimize.
If by 'optimize' you mean 'break', then yes. It's really solidly put together and has everything very clearly defined with thorough and clear language.
But there are degrees of optimisation. I've seen an archer fighter obliterate a dragon in a single round with a crossbow, for example. And dragons are, by no means, push-overs. He just made a really, really strong fighter.
There are just no trap options. Not really. Well, certainly not anymore, since they fixed Ranger XD