Does anyone think there will be a way off making certain non-finesse weapons into finesse weapons in future releases.
There are several ideas that can’t currently be easily achieved :
- Overyn Martell with his spear from the dual
- Monks gracefully using a bo staff
- the old Shelyn devoted muse with their glaive
Are we likely to see pathways for any of these? How are they most likely to be balanced? Class feat? Skill feat? Archetype dedication ?
And is there any real reason why this might be avoided in the current design space? Dex is no longer the god stat it was in 1E - partially shown by removing weapon finesse as a feat in its own right ...
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see it happening for isolated concepts, such as your three examples. I imagine making them archetypes would be a good way to handle it, without it getting too out of hand.
Definitely should not be a generic feat or something like that. That would just lead to power creep.
I agree with RD, I could see it as an archetype. And it would be restricted to one weapon (maybe weapon group) and require something like a Monk stance to benefit.
Glaive and bo staff are 1d8 reach with a few things like trip.
The best reach + finesse we have right now is 1d4 with a few things like trip.
The best non-reach finesse we have right now is 1d8.
So, you should probably look at once the balance point is for increasing damage dice two steps (I don't think this is done) or adding reach (off the top of my head, Giant Instinct Barbarian). So, an appropriate balancing point is one class path (we'll call a style or style-like archetype dedication equivalent to that), one 6th level feat, and there's a drawback as bad as clumsy 1.
|
Well, you can write a lot of stuff for this system, it's pretty clear that it could be done. But what would be reasonable?
- It shouldn't create finesse weapons with damage dice higher than current finesse weapons. So for a non-reach weapon that would be a d8 (curve blade) and for a reach weapon possibly as low as a d4 (whip), but it feels as if a d6 might happen, perhaps for an advanced weapon.
- It would probably be opened up by a level 1 or 2 feat or dedication.
- It might be done with an uncommon weapon.
- If it becomes a monk weapon there'll probably be an extra price to pay, to ensure you don't just get it as a free bonus with monastic weaponry.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
14 strength is pretty bad for your attack stat though, but pretty right for a character who attacks with Dex and has a moderate Str bonus for damage.
I disagree with a lot of the nervousness in this thread though. Feats that selectively add finesse seems super reasonable to me.
Leshy have a feat that increase Reach of the weapon at the cost of die size of the weapon.
A feat that is similar for finesse looks fine, sacrifice die size for finesse trait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Leshy have a feat that increase Reach of the weapon at the cost of die size of the weapon.
A feat that is similar for finesse looks fine, sacrifice die size for finesse trait.
That could still net you a d10 weapon, though, if you reduced a great sword.
I think the big problem with handing finesse out isn't even other weapons per se. I think it is rogues. Sneak attack is balanced around using weaker weapons. And I think the investigator and swashbuckler will have similar restrictions. So you'd be better off making it into a monk stance or something that didn't stack with those damage enhancers.
Monks can already wreck with a bo staff though... And most monks already have strength and dexterity as their top two stats. I actually think giving them finesse on the bo staff might throw things out of whack.
I'd dig a spear dancer, though. I'd like more rangers to be able to use them effectively so I can do the Horizon Zero Dawn thing. I think you'd look to the Ruffian rogue for your balance point there. It can sneak attack with a spear already, but it has to use strength to do it. So you'd need to remove some things to make it work.
Leshy have a feat that increase Reach of the weapon at the cost of die size of the weapon.
A feat that is similar for finesse looks fine, sacrifice die size for finesse trait.
Two steps of die size is probably reasonable. That brings a d12 down to a d8, the maximum for finesse weapons, and it brings a d10, the max for reach, down to a d6. That's above the maximum for a reach finesse weapon currently, but keeps it at what a leshy could do (d8 finesse given reach by reducing to d6).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Spending a feat to tank a d8 weapon down to a d4 or a d10 weapon down to a d6 just to pick up one trait sounds like a really bad deal.
Trading a die size for an extra trait is generally just how weapons are balanced in general, but this would be two die sizes and having to burn a feat on it.
Looking at the OP's examples, you'd basically be burning a feat for a worse version of a dagger or whip.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finesse weapons often have very good other traits. I don't think they 'tank' damage to achieve this (unlike Reach, which does seem to do so), I think there's just a flat prohibition against Finesse weapons doing more than 1d8 (remember the Aldori Dueling Sword is d8 and one-handed).
With that in mind, I'd say a Class Feat (which is what Archetypes are, bear in mind) adding finesse to specific d8 or less weapons is fine, and wouldn't need to downgrade anything. Heck, you could pretty readily make it a single 'finesse fighter' archetype and restrict its options to such weapons. Different properties aside, it wouldn't be a lot different mechanically from getting Aldori Dueling Sword as an advanced weapon, after all.
Notably, all the examples given in the OP would work fine with that restriction.
I'd dig a spear dancer, though. I'd like more rangers to be able to use them effectively so I can do the Horizon Zero Dawn thing. I think you'd look to the Ruffian rogue for your balance point there. It can sneak attack with a spear already, but it has to use strength to do it. So you'd need to remove some things to make it work.
A Thief Rogue with the Staff Acrobat archetype using a Filcher's Fork would be a pretty effective Dex-based 'spear dancer.' (Of course, you'd have to be ok with your spear having two prongs. It can be a cool look.)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see it happening for isolated concepts, such as your three examples. I imagine making them archetypes would be a good way to handle it, without it getting too out of hand.
Definitely should not be a generic feat or something like that. That would just lead to power creep.
I agree with Ravingdork.
Specific concepts should be possible through archetypes, but don't want it generically available as a feat.
In general finesse weapons are worse than non-finesse to pay for using dex instead of strength.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Finessing non-finesse weapons is a pet peeve of mine, in terms of both simulation and game balance.
(There is no finesse with a staff, it's all about hitting hard and fast. Even the fancy-looking twirling requires more strength than dexterity.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Finessing non-finesse weapons is a pet peeve of mine, in terms of both simulation and game balance.
(There is no finesse with a staff, it's all about hitting hard and fast. Even the fancy-looking twirling requires more strength than dexterity.)
Devil's Advocate here, but how weapons were decided to be finesse weapons in the first place seems rather arbitrary.
All weapons are going to take both strength and dexterity. Dexterity as a word is defined more as fine control of something, especially with your hands. But D&D and its derivatives use it more as agility, but also as the dictionary defined meaning.
So it makes sense that dexterity would be relevant, but it really shouldn't be an either or.
Physical attributes in PF2E are more "fluid" than they were in previous DnD, and I don't think they should be interpreted rigidly.
I think your Prince Oberyn type guys "Agile" build should be interpreted as the sum of his Strength and Dexterity, as opposed to someone who is just Strength with low Dexterity (the Mountain, a bodybuilder) or just Dexterity (Arya, some acrobats).
I dont have any problem with these characters being Str 18 / Dex 14 at level one, with training and eventual focus on acrobatics, and being an "Agility" based fighter character within the context of the game.
Devil's Advocate here, but how weapons were decided to be finesse weapons in the first place seems rather arbitrary. [snip] So it makes sense that dexterity would be relevant, but it really shouldn't be an either or.
Yes, fighting requires both strength and dexterity. It's either-or in d20 for simplicity. Most melee weapons are much more reliant on strength than dexterity to deal damage. Those that favor dexterity ("finesse") are short, light, and/or flexible; ones where you have to strike at gaps in the armor and soft parts of the body. With large, heavy weapons you have less of an ability or need to do so.
Devil's Advocate here, but how weapons were decided to be finesse weapons in the first place seems rather arbitrary. [snip] So it makes sense that dexterity would be relevant, but it really shouldn't be an either or.Yes, fighting requires both strength and dexterity. It's either-or in d20 for simplicity. Most melee weapons are much more reliant on strength than dexterity to deal damage. Those that favor dexterity ("finesse") are short, light, and/or flexible; ones where you have to strike at gaps in the armor and soft parts of the body. With large, heavy weapons you have less of an ability or need to do so.
It needn't be, but it is simpler.
But yes, you're right.
The best thing to do in my opinion would be to rename dexterity to agility and just not have it associated in any capacity with attacking.
It would be for AC (dodging), reflex saves (dodging spells), and some skills.
Finessing a non-finesse weapon that makes sense to be able to be wielded with finesse with specific training makes sense to me as a feat.
Bring back something like Bladed Brush for Shelynites, for example.