Rage bonus, Agile weapons, and referencing weapon traits by usage VS existence

[Quandary]

OK, I noticed discussion about MC Barbarian Rage with Animal Instinct whose Anathema is about only using unarmed weapons like Fist.
But adjacent to that - which has it's own thread, if you felt inclined to discuss that :-) - there is issue of how Rage damage bonus works:
Normally it adds +2 damage, but only half (or +1) to Agile weapons, of which Fist is an example.
Now Monk has some UAS which aren't Agile, but most characters don't have access to those, so Rage does less damage with UAS(Fists).

EDIT: This doesn't make sense to me, Fists (and other Agile weapons like Orc Knuckle Daggers, throwing Hatchets etc) are fully Barbarian flavorful. It's not like Agile has ANY possible relevance on non-MAP attacks like 1st attack, it isn't even truly "activated" for those. For 2nd/3rd MAP attacks the trade-off of damage for better attack bonus makes plenty of sense, but why penalize damage if you may only be making one non-MAP attack in entire round? This when Finesse weapons for example don't suffer any penalty. Seems simple enough to predicate reduced damage on Agile's reduced MAP actually applying, instead of referencing what Trait the weapon "has".

[Nyerkh]

It feels more like agile weapons aren't brutish enough for the barbarian to get as much out of them.
I'm not shocked by the idea, they're all lighter, deft weapons when the rage is by design geared for raw power.

I could definitely see an instinct built around a more agile style of combat - or a bruiser brawler type, for unarmed (although the Animal kind of already does that, mechanically) . It's a specific enough approach to training and fighting that it would be justified.
That's just not the baseline, possibly because that kind of melee is the purview of other classes.

[Bandw2]

you know i was just thinking about this.

I would say per RAW obviously not, but maybe i'd allow you to ignore agile and finesse etc for unarmed strikes, but then those attacks are definitely one or the other per attack.

so you couldn't use rage with max damage and ignore it but also say use the MC rogue sneak attack or something.

[Quandary]

@Nyerkh:
They're not lighter though, there's plenty of analogs with identical stats but lacking Agile, which is why UAS(Fist) is prime issue for it.
Look at Club vs Lt Hammer, same weight same damage the difference is Agile which is about MAP.
Orc Knuckle Dagger is Agile, Hatchet is Agile, when throwing weapons are iconically Barbarian... As are Fists IMHO.
Finesse can equally be called "lighter, deft" but doesn't impact Rage damage bonus.

The mechanical logic of reduced dmg is agile hits/crits more on 2nd/3rd which is fine,
but that has nothing to do with 1st attacks that don't suffer MAP, so why reduce damage bonus for that attack?

[Quandary]

Bandw2 wrote:

I would say per RAW obviously not, but maybe i'd allow you to ignore agile and finesse etc for unarmed strikes, but then those attacks are definitely one or the other per attack.

Yeah, really I don't see solid value in allowing to optionally ignore it for MAP attacks,

sure some scenario that could be optimal to "suffer" normal MAP, but I don't really care there, it's too micromanage-y.

But I don't see any reason to consider Agile as relevant for non-MAP attacks, it just isn't "activated" at all.
If reduced Rage damage simply keys off of Agile (lesser) MAP penalty then it only applies to those 2nd/3rd attacks, and not 1st attacks (or AoO etc):

"this additional damage is halved when applying reduced multiple attack penalty of Agile weapon or unarmed attack"

[breithauptclan]

I'm looking at club and light hammer. I am seeing a lot more differences than just the agile trait.

Bulk is different. Weapon group is different. Throw distance is different. Martial/simple category is different.

--------

Anyway, I can also see houseruling it that you can choose ignoring the agile trait on unarmed attack (fist) - but only as a character creation option. Not something that you can change as it suits the circumstances. Pick one option and stick with it.

[Quandary]

Sorry, I think I was looking at wrong lines when comparing multiple things...
I still don't understand why RAW can't reference "when applying reduced MAP of Agile".
I mean, if the RAW was written that way, would anybody thing that is out of line?
I'm just not even sure this was specifically intended, as opposed to perhaps easy, obvious way to reference Agile...?
I mean, even without any active choice of applying Agile or not (which I see no need for),
it doesn't seem like ability is plausibly "activated" by the system itself for 1st/non-MAP attacks, so why act like it is?

[Arachnofiend]

I suspect the restriction on agile weapons is more about math than flavor - Barbarians are based around the idea of doing a lot of damage with relatively inaccurate attacks (compare to the many accuracy boosters that Fighters and Rangers get) so it's possible that Barbarian/Fighters TWF'ing with agile weapons were shown to just be way too far ahead of the pack. Considering the fact that the non-agile variant of that build is already top tier in raw dpr that seems likely to me.

[Edge93]

It would be ridiculous if it DIDN'T apply on first attacks. Your weapon isn't constructed differently on the first attack than it is on the others. That would be like saying if there was an ability that didn't work on weapons with the Shove trait then it should only not work on attacks where you're using your weapon to shove.

[Quandary]

I'm not sure I understand the balance concern re: Agile/Non-Agile 2WF... Using Agile weapon for 1st non-MAP attack would de facto always have less damage dice/benefits than non-Agile weapon which can also be combined with Agile Weapon for subsequent MAP attacks, while benefitting from full Rage bonus to 1st non-MAP attack with non-Agile weapon? The accuracy/damage balance is relevant when Agile actually applies it's benefit.

Conversely the approach of making Agile usage fully optional (un-necessary IMHO) would only enable... non-Agile MAP with still low Agile weapon damage dice, so if anything it is still weaker than alternatives. So I don't see how lesser damage bonus on 1st/non-MAP attack is critical to Agile Weapon balance considering their already low damage die? The best rationale I see is really "simplicity" to have more static damage bonus not distinguishing 1st vs MAP, and that's maybe valid too, but nothing to do with these concerns.

Agile doesn't affect the weapon itself on 1st/non-MAP attack, so it seems more about MAP-specific ergonomic usage i.e. more agile-y moving into angle for follow up attack that may be more accurate but less able to exert full Rage damage. That doesn't appply when making 1st attack, which is not "recovering" momentum/angle/etc after earlier attack. Traits like Sweep and Backswing are similar (and basically have same mechanical effect re: accuracy, if constrained by target), they are about ergonomics for MAP that has no impact or relevance on 1st/non-MAP attack, it would be equally silly to discriminate against them on 1st/non-MAP attack because they aren't being used on it.