|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the central concept of aikido is "use their strength against them", I don't really see how that translates into "dex to damage".
I mean, if someone isn't actually making strikes against an aikidoka then there isn't that much strength to use against them. Or if the person making strikes at you isn't doing much of a brute strength approach with lots of force that you can twist, it can also get harder; how for example would you use aikido against a fencer using a rapier to keep distance?
My point isn't that aikido couldn't be a style in Pathfinder; but rather that "dex to damage" isn't how it should be implemented.
I think you're probably more looking at first raising your AC, then a Reaction that triggers when an enemy (critically) fails to hit you. Or perhaps something like a Reaction that triggers only when your opponent makes a Strength-to-hit based Strike.
And it still won't do as much damage as other styles that sacrifice a lot to do more damage. Because game balance. We may not know for sure which martial arts are the best in the real world, but in the game, the goal is that they all have their pros and cons. You can't have other styles' pros as well unless you're taking some cons too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The flowing monk (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo-monk-a rchetypes/flowing-monk/) was an attempt to implement aikido in PF1, and it was actually pretty interesting. Not quite powerful, but interesting.
As for the main topic, I really think it's working as intended. Dex fighters start a bit weaker, and end up a bit stronger. I can see that the gap at low level is annoying, but like others said it's a player's decision to ignore STR altogether.
STR is a weak stat in itself, since it affects no saving throws, only one skill (albeit a useful one) and the weight you can carry. PF2 is pretty generous with stat boosts, giving you 4 stats to raise every level when other systems (3.5, PF1, 4e, 5e...) weren't as lenient.
The consensus for min-maxers is to raise always the same stats, i.e:
- CON (because Fort and HP)
- WIS (because Perception/Init and Will)
- STR or DEX (either attack stat, or defensive stat)
- Main stat if different (INT for Wizards, CHA for bards...).
That's... really, really boring.
You're a bard ? CON WIS DEX CHA (or CON WIS STR CHA if for some reason you're in heavy armor).
You're a wizard ? CON WIS DEX INT
You're a Champion ? CON WIS STR CHA
You're a bomber ? CON WIS DEX CHA
You're a cleric ? CON WIS DEX/STR CHA
I mean, unless you're roleplaying a brainiac, nobody will invest in INT if it's not your main stat. And nobody will invest in STR if they get by with DEX.
So, yeah, that's the thing. You CAN build a dex fighter with a reasonable STR. You CAN also invest in STR later to get more damage. Sure, it'll be a lower percentage of your damage but it's still there. Just skip CON or WIS once in a while.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As much as I hate realism arguments there are no martial arts I know of where you don't also work on your body mass.
You don't bulk up to an extreme but strength is important for all of them.
Something like a 12-16 strength actually sounds exactly right.
Disregarding realism, early damage for dex characters maybe should be improved however. It does hurt to hit like a wet noodle particularly when a fighter is present in the group who hits better and harder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd actually go as far as to say putting points in strength on your build is optimal. Not mandatory, but optimal.Yes.
Thing is, though, that a difference of having, say, 14 Strength and 18 Strength is much greater in PF2 than in any comparable D&D system, since, I dunno, AD&D.
Only if you use it to attack or want to use Athletics in combat. For a finesse character using Dex to attack and not caring about Athletics? It's relevant for damage (especially at low levels), but little else.
It's still probably optimal to increase on most finesse builds, but not required by any means.
I feel like this is worth circling back to. How often do you see characters who want to be agile frontline fighters but be bad at tripping, disarming, jumping, climbing, and swimming? Or who can't benefit from the additional carrying capacity for a longbow? (If you have good dex. you should absolutely leverage it at range whenever appropriate.)
That character exists, but seems limited to like... Wizened old sensais, primarily. But even the tangent about Tai Chi is about grappling, which is strength based. And dex 10 monks aren't a thing with the exception of mountain style, which has limited damage and a fair share of downsides. The majority of monks are gonna want 18 in either strength or dex and at least moderate investment in the other.
The damage value of strength might get lower as you level up, but it also covers a decent amount of other stuff too.
Also... We have 3 classes whose whole damage enhancing schtick works primarily with finesse weapons. Yeah, trying to make one of the full plate classes into finesse paths is rough, but you can also multiclass into champion or fighter if that's the case, in much the same way that you should start as a fighter and multiclass into wizard if you want to be swinging a sword more often than casting a spell.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like this is worth circling back to. How often do you see characters who want to be agile frontline fighters but be bad at tripping, disarming, jumping, climbing, and swimming? Or who can't benefit from the additional carrying capacity for a longbow? (If you have good dex. you should absolutely leverage it at range whenever appropriate.)
I mean, most traditional Rogue concepts don't care about the combat maneuvers, and being Trained or better in Athletics is usually enough for jumping and climbing even with low Str. In combat, they shank people in the kidneys, not try to trip them.
Civilized duelists of the 'nobleman with a rapier' variety are also very much not concerned with Str in and of itself. Disarming, the one maneuver they're thematically tied to, is pretty terrible anyway, so they suffer very little from low Str thematically.
There are several other concepts that also don't require high Str, and I think the rules support most of them pretty well.
That character exists, but seems limited to like... Wizened old sensais, primarily. But even the tangent about Tai Chi is about grappling, which is strength based. And dex 10 monks aren't a thing with the exception of mountain style, which has limited damage and a fair share of downsides. The majority of monks are gonna want 18 in either strength or dex and at least moderate investment in the other.
This is true. But the low Str, high Dex Monk is still viable, if not ideal.
The damage value of strength might get lower as you level up, but it also covers a decent amount of other stuff too.
Sure. It's a decent stat. Foregoing it remains generally viable for some varieties of finesse warrior.
Also... We have 3 classes whose whole damage enhancing schtick works primarily with finesse weapons. Yeah, trying to make one of the full plate classes into finesse paths is rough, but you can also multiclass into champion or fighter if that's the case, in much the same way that you should start as a fighter and multiclass into wizard if you want to be swinging a sword more often than casting a spell.
This is very true. The Classes who are devoted to it can ignore Str and focus on Dex easily enough, though.
I feel like this is worth circling back to. How often do you see characters who want to be agile frontline fighters but be bad at tripping, disarming, jumping, climbing, and swimming? Or who can't benefit from the additional carrying capacity for a longbow? (If you have good dex. you should absolutely leverage it at range whenever appropriate.)I mean, most traditional Rogue concepts don't care about the combat maneuvers, and being Trained or better in Athletics is usually enough for jumping and climbing even with low Str. In combat, they shank people in the kidneys, not try to trip them.
Civilized duelists of the 'nobleman with a rapier' variety are also very much not concerned with Str in and of itself. Disarming, the one maneuver they're thematically tied to, is pretty terrible anyway, so they suffer very little from low Str thematically.
There are several other concepts that also don't require high Str, and I think the rules support most of them pretty well.
That character exists, but seems limited to like... Wizened old sensais, primarily. But even the tangent about Tai Chi is about grappling, which is strength based. And dex 10 monks aren't a thing with the exception of mountain style, which has limited damage and a fair share of downsides. The majority of monks are gonna want 18 in either strength or dex and at least moderate investment in the other.This is true. But the low Str, high Dex Monk is still viable, if not ideal.
The damage value of strength might get lower as you level up, but it also covers a decent amount of other stuff too.Sure. It's a decent stat. Foregoing it remains generally viable for some varieties of finesse warrior.
Also... We have 3 classes whose whole damage enhancing schtick works primarily with finesse weapons. Yeah, trying to make one of the full plate classes into finesse paths is rough, but you can also multiclass...
To be clear, I am not disagreeing with you. The point I was trying to make (maybe badly) was that investing in strength isn't just wasting boosts, even when you get to high levels, which seems to be the thesis of the thread.
I agree that characters who don't want t invest in strength can do so just fine, they just need to use one of the classes actually meant to do it.
One thing I think leads to inflexibility is the inability to change the ability boost the class grants you.
Wild Order Druids should be able to take dex or strength instead of Wisdom imo for functionality. If the intent is for the character to be a shifter primarily and backup spell caster the mandatory wisdom boost capping them at 16 str or dex is annoying.
Also would make gishing easier from a spellcaster chassis.
If the intent is for the character to be a shifter primarily and backup spell caster the mandatory wisdom boost capping them at 16 str or dex is annoying. .
lso would make gishing easier from a spellcaster chassis
I don't think druids are intended to be shifters primary, not when the animal barbarian is right there. I think casters being behind on physical ability scores is probably intended. They can't catch up until martials get expert at 5th level, at which point martials are even further ahead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The wild order druid being capped at 16 for non-wis stats at chargen also establishes space for the Shifter class if/when that becomes a thing.
The class didn't exactly go over great in PF1 for a variety of reasons, but "I am primarily a wild-shaping melee combatant" is not something that needs full spellcasting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's the inflexibility though. The druid is built to enable shapeshifting every single encounter. It has a bevy of feats dedicated to it.
I don't see how the class is not a shapeshifter if you want it to be first and foremost.
Particularly when we are going to have to wait at least 1.5 years to maybe get the shifter.
Barbarian animal form and druid animal form is a pretty different flavour as well.
And that whole thing was just one example of the inflexibility of Class Ability boosts. For classes that within their core features work off other ability stats (cleric font, gymnast swash) should enable those as class boosts imo.
That's what the rogue does, you can pick freely between everything but con as a rogue.
I kind of get what you're going for here and I think there are some legitimate points about leaving dexterity based melee in a slightly awkward spot, but there is an option between 18 Str/10 Dex and 10 Str/18 Dex.
I think generally the game wants and encourages you to not dump one third of the physical stat array if you want to mix it up in melee.
I agree with this.
Can't a 16 Str 16 Dex at level 1 work just fine?| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I kind of get what you're going for here and I think there are some legitimate points about leaving dexterity based melee in a slightly awkward spot, but there is an option between 18 Str/10 Dex and 10 Str/18 Dex.
I think generally the game wants and encourages you to not dump one third of the physical stat array if you want to mix it up in melee.
I agree with this.
Can't a 16 Str 16 Dex at level 1 work just fine?
Accuracy matters, so 18/14 would be better but yeah,that allows for a painless start.
I just don't see why adding some strength to a dex build is such a big problem in this system. I mean, going above 18 in a stat after 10th level is just kinda pointless in a lot of ways, IMHO.
I'm playing a Human Wizard, Criminal background. At 13th level I have Str 10, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 20, Wis 16, Cha 10. At 15th, I'm planning to raise Int, Con, Wisdom & Charisma. I'll see absolutely no benefit from the 1st two unless I raise them *again* at 20th.
So at 20th, what would I raise? Con and Int are already must-dos because of my L15 choice. Dex or Wisdom? No point! Who needs a 19 at the end of your career? So that leaves Cha (ending at 14) and... strength. A 12 strength on a Wizard. Bizarre.
I just don't see why adding some strength to a dex build is such a big problem in this system. I mean, going above 18 in a stat after 10th level is just kinda pointless in a lot of ways, IMHO.
I'm playing a Human Wizard, Criminal background. At 13th level I have Str 10, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 20, Wis 16, Cha 10. At 15th, I'm planning to raise Int, Con, Wisdom & Charisma. I'll see absolutely no benefit from the 1st two unless I raise them *again* at 20th.
So at 20th, what would I raise? Con and Int are already must-dos because of my L15 choice. Dex or Wisdom? No point! Who needs a 19 at the end of your career? So that leaves Cha (ending at 14) and... strength. A 12 strength on a Wizard. Bizarre.
Maybe, but then your wizard will win most of the arm-wrestling contests at the academy while drinking the rest under the table.
I just don't see why adding some strength to a dex build is such a big problem in this system. I mean, going above 18 in a stat after 10th level is just kinda pointless in a lot of ways, IMHO.
I'm playing a Human Wizard, Criminal background. At 13th level I have Str 10, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 20, Wis 16, Cha 10. At 15th, I'm planning to raise Int, Con, Wisdom & Charisma. I'll see absolutely no benefit from the 1st two unless I raise them *again* at 20th.
So at 20th, what would I raise? Con and Int are already must-dos because of my L15 choice. Dex or Wisdom? No point! Who needs a 19 at the end of your career? So that leaves Cha (ending at 14) and... strength. A 12 strength on a Wizard. Bizarre.
Yeah if its not your to-hit stat, its a very practical thing to raise as a secondary, I think whats really happening is that people have trained themselves to consider the dex warrior the opposite of the strength warrior. When we raise strength, we think of that as making the character a beefcake or some such.
Also on another note, as a novice Aikido practitioner, itd probably be something like Wisdom-- but not to damage, probably to disarms, trips, and feints and such.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean STR based melee characters can completely ignore dex and that’s the difference.
And being a lot less effective because you only have a 12 in STR and being basically unaffected while having a 12 in DEX is a testament to why it’s not really the same.
Going 12 STR on a dex build makes you 30% less effective at athletics checks, -3 to damage, and much more limited on weapon options (both for finesse weapons which deal less damage and with total weapons on your person due to bulk) just to keep your to hit on weapons in range (which does affect you long term as striking is better for higher damage die weapons)
If there were actual downsides to low DEX sure, but as has been pointed out reflex is pretty much the only portion that applies globally and bulwark has alleviation for that exact issue.
You could have made these exact same arguments for DEX in PF1:
“Honestly every Fighter has a pretty high dexterity, it only makes sense”
“I think when we see a big hulking brute we don’t imagine them as dexterous but when they move to avoid attacks even in armor it only makes sense”
And so on.
I’m all for saying wanting STR even as a dex based is a good thing, but when it’s heavily lopsided to allow DEX to be dumped while STR must be pumped is where it’s kinda unfair.
STR based builds can already generally afford CON when DEX based classes can’t due to needed STR and that alone is actually a huge advantage (most dex users can’t afford STR and CON) so the save for reflex is almost a buy back if you want any damage at all.
Maybe, but then your wizard will win most of the arm-wrestling contests at the academy while drinking the rest under the table.I just don't see why adding some strength to a dex build is such a big problem in this system. I mean, going above 18 in a stat after 10th level is just kinda pointless in a lot of ways, IMHO.
I'm playing a Human Wizard, Criminal background. At 13th level I have Str 10, Dex 18, Con 18, Int 20, Wis 16, Cha 10. At 15th, I'm planning to raise Int, Con, Wisdom & Charisma. I'll see absolutely no benefit from the 1st two unless I raise them *again* at 20th.
So at 20th, what would I raise? Con and Int are already must-dos because of my L15 choice. Dex or Wisdom? No point! Who needs a 19 at the end of your career? So that leaves Cha (ending at 14) and... strength. A 12 strength on a Wizard. Bizarre.
Yeah, but we are talking about a 20th level wizard here. They probably didn't get that high without adventuring a little and getting some exercise. And even then, the stat boosts have a lot less to do with those performances than proficiency. Even with 10 strength and con they have +24 fortitude stark naked and will have +22 if they became trained in Athletics, which is actually hard to avoid on an intelligence based class.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Completely ignoring dex, however, makes you hopeless at:
-Reflex Saves (short of one specific heavy armor and only saves to avoid damage, without a 10th level feat from a specific archetype)
- Acrobatics
- Stealth
- Thievery
So while you might have a good armor class (indeed heavy armor users get the best AC) they are awful at avoiding damage in other ways, including avoiding fights. Plus it's not like heavy armor is easily accessible to every class, so most people are going to want *some* dex.
So "completely ignoring dex" is an even higher cost, IMO, than "completely ignoring str".
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Only one of those four things is particularly meaningful in a general sense, though. By definition, a high strength, low dex character probably isn't interested in stealth, thievery or acrobatics to begin with, so losing out on those isn't a real loss any more than having a worse Deception check through a lower Cha doesn't really bother someone who was never going to be the party face to begin with either.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If only one of those four things is particularly meaningful, then how meaningful are the downsides to ignoring strength, which costs you:
- Carrying capacity
- Athletics
- 1-5 extra points of damage.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
If only one of those four things is particularly meaningful, then how meaningful are the downsides to ignoring strength, which costs you:
- Carrying capacity
- Athletics
- 1-5 extra points of damage.
And lower weapon damage dice and trait options.
And athletics is obviously a much stronger skill than the others listed.
And as I already pointed out, if you need DEX you either need STR for damage and then have to sacrifice CON or WIS or deal with the consequences of low STR for being marginally more effective at one save.
Where as a STR based can afford CON and WIS they don’t need to grab high DEX. Or charisma if they go that route.
So really you’re not even better at saves, you’re maybe slightly better at reflex and more than likely worse at fortitude or will if we’re being honest I’d rather have the higher fortitude/will saves since reflex applies most often to damage spells which CON also helps alleviate due to HP
You can afford STR sure, but the STR person can afford the other save stats and your choices are now damage or one of those other stats
So what did you really gain going DEX? The ability to use certain skills better than others and that’s about it pragmatically.
It’s not just a matter of them affecting statistics, it’s how easy it is to complement those statistics and overcome the negatives. Dex has a lot less going for them when alleviating the downsides of choosing to be dexterous.
Heavy armor can also be disadvantageous in that the don time can make all the difference during a nighttime ambush, and/or a visit from a hired pro thief nabbing your precious +3 plate armor just to spite you...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hard to say if the bulk's a significant factor. Plate armour is four bulk, so all of that Strength bonus you get with the 18 is going to just lugging the stuff around. Explorer's clothing is Light, and other Dexterity-biased armour tends to be one or two bulk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One important thing about heavy armor, is that tripping a heavy armor user is a piece of cake. They don't have Dexterity and many DMs don't apply Bulwark to trip as it only does negligeable damage on a critical success. Even minions trip them easily. For example, a level 8 monster trips a level 10 Paladin on 2-7+ on the die. It is even possible to trip on secondary attacks.
Every monster with a little bit of intelligence and coordination should trip heavy armor users. And that is a major issue for low Dexterity character.
One important thing about heavy armor, is that tripping a heavy armor user is a piece of cake. They don't have Dexterity and many DMs don't apply Bulwark to trip as it only does negligeable damage on a critical success.
Mighty Bulwark helps with this.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
One important thing about heavy armor, is that tripping a heavy armor user is a piece of cake. They don't have Dexterity and many DMs don't apply Bulwark to trip as it only does negligeable damage on a critical success.Mighty Bulwark helps with this.
Yes, clearly, but it's a level 10 feat from an archetype. I don't expect every strength-based martial to take it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah as a fighter, taking Sentinel is a pretty bitter pill to swallow. Most of the feats are redundant because of your class features. And level 10 feats are quite precious. I mean, we're talking Agile Grace, Combat Reflexes, Disruptive Stance, Improved Knowndown.
After getting tripped five rounds in a row as a fullplate fighter, I'm seriously rethinking whether it was worth ignoring dexterity.
It also really limits you on ranged attacks and that's not a trivial sacrifice. Thrown retruning weapons are quite good for a fighter with middling Dex and full Str.
Also, with low Dex you get to be the one party members that pulls the plug on the rest of the party's plans to stealth past an obstacle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, clearly, but it's a level 10 feat from an archetype. I don't expect every strength-based martial to take it.One important thing about heavy armor, is that tripping a heavy armor user is a piece of cake. They don't have Dexterity and many DMs don't apply Bulwark to trip as it only does negligeable damage on a critical success.Mighty Bulwark helps with this.
I'd expect "every strength-based martial" that has a Dm that thinks "Every monster with a little bit of intelligence and coordination should trip" them to take it... :P
There is also Reflexive Shield that works with Mighty Bulwark.
I'd expect "every strength-based martial" that has a Dm that thinks "Every monster with a little bit of intelligence and coordination should trip" them to take it... :PYes, clearly, but it's a level 10 feat from an archetype. I don't expect every strength-based martial to take it.One important thing about heavy armor, is that tripping a heavy armor user is a piece of cake. They don't have Dexterity and many DMs don't apply Bulwark to trip as it only does negligeable damage on a critical success.Mighty Bulwark helps with this.
Fair point. Anyway, it's a level 10 feat, so a pretty expensive cost for ignoring Dexterity.
Yeah as a fighter, taking Sentinel is a pretty bitter pill to swallow. Most of the feats are redundant because of your class features. And level 10 feats are quite precious. I mean, we're talking Agile Grace, Combat Reflexes, Disruptive Stance, Improved Knowndown.
After getting tripped five rounds in a row as a fullplate fighter, I'm seriously rethinking whether it was worth ignoring dexterity.
It also really limits you on ranged attacks and that's not a trivial sacrifice. Thrown retruning weapons are quite good for a fighter with middling Dex and full Str.
Also, with low Dex you get to be the one party members that pulls the plug on the rest of the party's plans to stealth past an obstacle.
I completely agree. If you go Strength with heavy armor, you have the highest melee efficiency but a strong lack of versatility. If you go Strength + Dexterity or Dexterity + Strength, you have both efficiency and versatility. If you go Dexterity, you have versatility but you'll be behind in terms of efficiency. Seems like a sweet spot.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I completely agree. If you go Strength with heavy armor, you have the highest melee efficiency but a strong lack of versatility. If you go Strength + Dexterity or Dexterity + Strength, you have both efficiency and versatility. If you go Dexterity, you have versatility but you'll be behind in terms of efficiency. Seems like a sweet spot.
You also generally have higher hitpoints, armor specialization, higher fortitude or will, and much better Athletics.
Armor specialization alone adds a layer of defense that light armor users don't even get, which to me with Bulkwark more than covers the "lower reflex save" (and again lower Reflex Save mostly applies to AoE damage spells, which you have additional CON to help alleviate).
Honestly, if it weren't for the Athletics nerf recently for no Finesse I'd probably call it the sweet spot as well.
I'm mostly just annoyed that being able to Trip someone is now only a STR person activity basically, because you've put a DC that is always going to be Hard for your level against an ability score that you literally will always be at least 10% behind on (and 10% is if you made STR your secondary max).
Then to keep up with Athletics you now have to advance STR at every single ability score increase just to remain in reach of 10% worse.
And as for Bulk not being a factor, we have to remember that the person who maxed STR is still going to max STR and the Bulk of the armor remains stagnant, so your Bulk should increase proportionally to allow more weapon choices.
Whereas the DEX user pretty much has to elevate STR to follow suit.
The investment costs for a DEX user vs STR user is vastly favoring STR.
I mean heck, if you even want to be good at CHA (looking at you Swashbuckler) then you pretty much HAVE to drop CON/WIS/STR to a 10, which means all the "incentives" you actually had for going DEX are gone.
Meanwhile captain STR can go STR 18 CON 14 DEX 12 CHA 14/10 WIS 14/10 INT 10 so they either have all their saves covered or opened up Demoralize/Feint as options in combat as well as maxed Trip/Shove/Grapple/Disarm if they took athletics.
It was close before, the maneuvers being out of reach is what really hurts it.
Swashbuckler at least has the luxury of accessing Tumble Through debuffs with Class Feats, but a DEX Fighter is just straight-up worse than a STR Fighter in pretty much every way.
Heck, it's still better to use STR with a Rapier/Snagging Strike on Fighter than it is to go DEX, which to me, is honestly kinda ridiculous.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You also generally have higher hitpoints, armor specialization, higher fortitude or will, and much better Athletics.
Armor Specialization is unique to Fighters and Champions. So it's not a factor at all for the vast majority of characters.
Additionally, Armor Specialization works fine with medium armor, which you can manage with very minimal Str by the time Armor Specialization kicks in (Str 14 by 10th level is casually doable).
You seem to be equating going Dex over Str with wearing light armor, but the rules don't actually support that as a requirement very well. If playing, say, a Dex-based Fighter, you should be wearing Medium or maybe even Heavy Armor, with your investment in Dex being an investment in Dex Skills, Reflex Saves, and other assorted things, not the nonexistent AC advantage, and having the Dex to wear light armor in no way obligates you to do so...so you wear Medium, with no penalty due to Str, and get the Specialization effect.
And while a Dex/Str build will have disadvantages on Fort and Will Saves and HP vs. a focused Str build, a focused Dex build really won't. Or not very much anyway. It's worth noting but hardly an exclusive advantage of the Str build.
All of which is to say, your argument is pretty valid for Champions, but not even really for all Fighters, never mind all the other Classes.
Only one of those four things is particularly meaningful in a general sense, though. By definition, a high strength, low dex character probably isn't interested in stealth, thievery or acrobatics to begin with, so losing out on those isn't a real loss any more than having a worse Deception check through a lower Cha doesn't really bother someone who was never going to be the party face to begin with either.
This is something I hadn't completely thought of until now, but it is true as well. If you're a melee character, going high Str mainly gives you disadvantages on side roles that you might not even want to fill (ranged attacks, Rogue-ish skills, etc.), while going high Dex actually makes you worse at your main things: both damage and combat maneuvers, which are the two big advantages of having a melee striker in the party.
If your party has a non-Divine spellcaster, a Dex character actually focusing on archery, or any other character capable of dealing with fliers and enemies in weird positions, you don't need to be good at that. Unless your GM is throwing encounters where every enemy is a flying archer just to f%$@ with you. Meanwhile, being a class that's focused on damage like a Fighter and doing bad damage is a significant detriment to your party, pretty much always. Same thing with having lower survivability if you decide to focus on Str to try to make up for the bad damage.
The only situation I can see where being a Dex melee martial is a better choice over Str is if your party has no one with good ranged capabilities, no one that's good at Stealth/Thievery, and already has other people that can do the damage for you. In which case 1: How likely is that? Probably only if the other people already chose to go with Str martials and you were left. And 2: Why not play a Rogue at this point? Or a Fighter/Ranger/Investigator that's actually focused on ranged combat?
You seem to be equating going Dex over Str with wearing light armor, but the rules don't actually support that as a requirement very well. If playing, say, a Dex-based Fighter, you should be wearing Medium or maybe even Heavy Armor, with your investment in Dex being an investment in Dex Skills, Reflex Saves, and other assorted things, not the nonexistent AC advantage, and having the Dex to wear light armor in no way obligates you to do so...so you wear Medium, with no penalty due to Str, and get the Specialization effect.
The benefits of having a good DEX in Medium armor are minimal. In Heavy Armor, they're basically non-existant.
I'm not equating the two, I'm pointing out the commonalities for build patterns with those that choose DEX.
Can you go mid-DEX with Medium armor? Sure and it might be passable. It's still a higher investment cost than just going flat STR.
It's not a matter of how powerful they are compared to each other, it's what the STR user had to spend to get what they wanted to be good at while the DEX user had to spend much more just to remain comparable.
And the fact that spending more effectively nets you less is a big issue. Not to mention, there is not paywall you can even climb with respect to being effective at Maneuvers as a Dexterous character.
To be clear, I am saying those that are saying "yeah just get some STR, what's the big deal" are missing that in 3.5/PF1 people said the same thing about DEX for STR based users.
Now in this edition, the shoe is on the other foot since DEX was nerfed across the board and STR was buffed across the board.
I stand by what I said, if you're using a Rapier + Snagging Strike as a Fighter (an ICONIC playstyle of a DEX person) you are literally more effective going Heavy Armor, maxing STR, and just using your free-hand for maneuvers than a full DEX user trying to make the same style work.
And the fact that the DEX user comes up short on the DEX playstyle is not okay for me.
Tumble Behind is about the only compensation for DEX users when it comes to combat versatility, and that costs a Class Feat, still provokes, and isn't even an option for several Classes that could opt for DEX.
DEX users are in a box that's much tinier than a STR based character.
It inherently limits the concepts compatible with DEX because of what you have to spend in other areas just to be effective.
Meanwhile, STR is free to explore just about any character concept (including DEX ones to some extent as you've pointed out) and still be good at all things combat.
Basically being a "DEX" user is your character concept, but a STR user could be Intimidating, a Martial, super Perceptive/Fearless, etc.
When one person has to spend nearly all of their spendable resources just to be comparable to another that spent maybe half their spendable resources, sure, neither one is going to be "better" than one another at the thing, but person B gets to spend their other half on versatility, flavor, etc. without a thought.
It's not that DEX vs. STR means one is inherently worse/weaker, it's the former that gets hamstrung on the choices for the rest of their concept character if they want to be comparable to the latter.
I am curious where does someone get that having a 16 STR vs 18 STR is 10% less effective for athletics? With quick math that doesn't seem correct at all.
14 Str at level 5+ is always at a -1 compared to an 18 at a start
16 Str vs 18 Str is just as effective for "roughly" 50% of the game.
So at most that is a 5% extra hit and 5% extra crit chance. Trip/Shove imo barely matter for crits but I guess if you are using Disarm/Grapple then the 5% extra crit chance would be helpful.
All I can say is PF2 imo is by far the best game for being able to have versatile stats compared to 5e/PF1, admittingly there are probably other systems I don't know about that are just as good.
A player can easily start with an 18 14 14 14 (12 human) and be one behind a player that started with 18 in a stat while having 4 good stats.
The system seems pretty good to me since as a DEX character and pretty much every character you have quite a bit of choices. PF1/5e I never felt like stats were very interesting since you just went main stat>dex>con basically.
In 2e I would say characters can easily focus on 4 stats and even encouraged to do so.
If you want to use athletics just start with at least 14 STR or just want to hit things.
If you want to use other skills you can dump STR and feel bad for levels 1-3 and after that it isn't as important.
IMO both DEX/STR characters have pros and cons which feels good. It feels so much worse when one is 100% better than the other.
I am curious where does someone get that having a 16 STR vs 18 STR is 10% less effective for athletics? With quick math that doesn't seem correct at all.
14 Str at level 5+ is always at a -1 compared to an 18 at a start
16 Str vs 18 Str is just as effective for "roughly" 50% of the game.So at most that is a 5% extra hit and 5% extra crit chance. Trip/Shove imo barely matter for crits but I guess if you are using Disarm/Grapple then the 5% extra crit chance would be helpful.
10% effective is because of Critical Success/Success. This is why people refer to +1 as "10%" pretty universally for PF2 math.
And while a Strike has no consequences on a Failure/Critical Failure, a Maneuver has pretty severe consequences.
A player can easily start with an 18 14 14 14 (12 human) and be one behind a player that started with 18 in a stat while having 4 good stats.
In order to pull that off as a non-human you're pulling an 8 somewhere then.
And a STR user can put the 10/12 in DEX with little to no downsides, meaning they got a "free" 14 somewhere to pursue other aspects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The flowing monk (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo-monk-a rchetypes/flowing-monk/) was an attempt to implement aikido in PF1, and it was actually pretty interesting. Not quite powerful, but interesting.
As for the main topic, I really think it's working as intended. Dex fighters start a bit weaker, and end up a bit stronger. I can see that the gap at low level is annoying, but like others said it's a player's decision to ignore STR altogether.
STR is a weak stat in itself, since it affects no saving throws, only one skill (albeit a useful one) and the weight you can carry. PF2 is pretty generous with stat boosts, giving you 4 stats to raise every level when other systems (3.5, PF1, 4e, 5e...) weren't as lenient.
The consensus for min-maxers is to raise always the same stats, i.e:
- CON (because Fort and HP)
- WIS (because Perception/Init and Will)
- STR or DEX (either attack stat, or defensive stat)
- Main stat if different (INT for Wizards, CHA for bards...).That's... really, really boring.
You're a bard ? CON WIS DEX CHA (or CON WIS STR CHA if for some reason you're in heavy armor).
You're a wizard ? CON WIS DEX INT
You're a Champion ? CON WIS STR CHA
You're a bomber ? CON WIS DEX CHA
You're a cleric ? CON WIS DEX/STR CHAI mean, unless you're roleplaying a brainiac, nobody will invest in INT if it's not your main stat. And nobody will invest in STR if they get by with DEX.
So, yeah, that's the thing. You CAN build a dex fighter with a reasonable STR. You CAN also invest in STR later to get more damage. Sure, it'll be a lower percentage of your damage but it's still there. Just skip CON or WIS once in a while.
I am curious about why you feel that this is really boring? Have you played other systems that are better in this regard, PF1/5e were pretty much buff your main stat and that is it.
In general I feel PF2 lets players pick 4 stats they want to focus on. Then at level 10/15 you are free to stop investing on stats that get to 18 if you wish.
I also don't agree with your stat spreads at all because it 100% depends on the characters.
Pretty much every stat "can" be important for every class, let's look at bomber also did you mean INT over CHA?...
STR - If you plan to be in melee athletics skills could be helpful, super easy to just take a 14 and be good at athletics.
DEX - Of course this is the most important stat for a bomber
CON - Depending on the group this stat might not even be that important.
WIS - If you want to focus on Medicine/Recall knowledge Wisdom is great.
INT - If you want to focus on recall knowledge it is good, there are also some skill feats you can base builds around.
CHA - This stat can be important for Demoralize/Bon Mot/Innate spellcasting.
This is the only system I have played where all stats can be used effectively for every class in combat super easily. If you make the most basic builds ever then of course they will feel boring.
I do think that the general stat distribution follows what Blue_frog wrote but I don't think that's bad.
It's good if you can tell players that they can't do anything wrong if they raise their stats in this manner, for the given reasons.
But also 2e allows enough deviations from that paradigm by not being too punishing if you're going a little off script and by being quite generous with ability boost.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
People who spend a lot of time in stabbing range should generally want to be both strong and dexterous. It's just that right up front you pick four stats to focus on, and generally those are the three save granting stats (including dex) and whatever your main stat is.
So the "put points in strength" hurts because it means you're giving up being smarter or more charismatic, but considering that this is the edition where high level play works pretty well, and a lot of stats aren't going to be increased past 18, it might make more sense to start your archer with 14 str and 14 wis/con instead of 12 and 16.
The one dex-based class that is in the biggest bind stat-wise is the Swashbuckler, since they want Dex, Con/Wis, and Charisma. But a huge number of their class mechanics are about extra damage.
|
There is a lot of good talking points on this subject. I have a Champion that is melee centric and a Fighter that is primarily an archer.
I find both enjoyable and workable, and as previously mentioned, the ability to focus on 4 abilities balances out. My Champion started with a dex of 10 and is now 12. Instead of Dex, I am focussed on Char and Wis.
The Fighter I focussed on dex and str. My primary focus is the ability to hit targets at range as many times as possible.
Understanding the capabilities of each character is key. 2E is very balanced. Perfect, of course not. No game ever will be.
My Fighter is designed to lay down suppressive fire, buy the tanks time to get up close and clobber, keep the heat off the casters and shoot down anything that takes to the sky. Them darn dragons hate to stay grounded out in the open. Maneuverability and getting to positions of advantage is my goal. Picking off NPCs and monsters that wish to use cover and concealment. If things get messy and personal, I can certainly do that up close and personal as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, my issues are with DEX Melee combatants.
I actually think ranged combatants are fine because the weapons used at range generally have good traits and incentives (if not just simply the protection of range).
So in order for a DEX melee to derive their full value, they have to be using a Ranged weapon of some kind at least some of the time.
Which brings me back once again to how DEX Melee users took such a hit with the Finesse + Maneuver clarification/change, because most of the value that was placed on Melee Finesse weapons hinged on that being possible.
A STR person using a Rapier and a DEX person using a Rapier, both with 18s in their respective stats, the former is better at using the Rapier (because they can use STR for Disarm trait and more damage) objectively. It's not even really debatable, both have + X to hit (same value), both deal same damage die, both take advantage of deadly, etc.
So why is a STR character using a Rapier better at the Rapier than a DEX user using the same Rapier when they both have their respective stats maxed?
It just feels wrong.
I thought the finesse maneuver clarification ended up being up to DMs to decide.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the finesse maneuver clarification ended up being up to DMs to decide.
There is a clause that says GMs can change any skill check to be whatever they want, but I think that's meant to be applied to "When you're in a synchronized swimming contest, you can use CHA instead of STR to Athletics".
The errata was made to explicitly disallow Finesse + Maneuvers (among other Maneuver things like True Strike and Inspire Courage).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I guess the question is "why would a Str martial use a rapier?" Generally finesse is one of the most expensive weapon traits in terms of power budget, and it does nothing for you if you're not using it. Disarm is already pretty weak, but the 9-ring sword just works better in terms of mechanics for the Str Martial than the Rapier (it doesn't have deadly d8, but it's already a d8 weapon). If you don't care about disarm, the pick is another good 1h option since fatal is better than deadly.
Most of the rapiers I see are because "well, I need to use a finesse weapon, and this does the most damage". For me the biggest problem with dex-martials is the lack of weapon variety (a *lot* of them are either gated behind rarity or have a d4 weapon die.)
Like if I want to be a dex-martial with reach, my only option is to use a whip. Bring back stuff like bladed brush and spear dancing style, please.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I guess the question is "why would a Str martial use a rapier?" Generally finesse is one of the most expensive weapon traits in terms of power budget, and it does nothing for you if you're not using it. Disarm is already pretty weak, but the 9-ring sword just works better in terms of mechanics for the Str Martial than the Rapier (it doesn't have deadly d8, but it's already a d8 weapon). If you don't care about disarm, the pick is another good 1h option since fatal is better than deadly.
Most of the rapiers I see are because "well, I need to use a finesse weapon, and this does the most damage". For me the biggest problem with dex-martials is the lack of weapon variety (a *lot* of them are either gated behind rarity or have a d4 weapon die.)
Like if I want to be a dex-martial with reach, my only option is to use a whip. Bring back stuff like bladed brush and spear dancing style, please.
Yeah I agree on the power budget, and when the powerbudget (at least I THOUGHT it did) included the maneuvers, it made sense that it was so high.
Now what's the incentive?
And even if the STR user probably wouldn't be using a Rapier doesn't make it any less mind-boggling that they are in fact better at using the Rapier than the DEX user on one of the most iconic DEX user weapons.
Fezzik should have picked up a Rapier and dueled Wesley, he would have apparently been better at it than Inigo!
|
|
To clarify, my issues are with DEX Melee combatants.
I actually think ranged combatants are fine because the weapons used at range generally have good traits and incentives (if not just simply the protection of range).
So in order for a DEX melee to derive their full value, they have to be using a Ranged weapon of some kind at least some of the time.
As the player of an Animal Instinct Barbarian, I can assure you that any and every combatant has to be using a Ranged weapon some of the time to be fully efficient.
And as a player of a STR and CON Paladin who did not raise DEX, I can assure you that when you want to use a Ranged weapon, having DEX 10 really sucks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify, my issues are with DEX Melee combatants.
I actually think ranged combatants are fine because the weapons used at range generally have good traits and incentives (if not just simply the protection of range).
So in order for a DEX melee to derive their full value, they have to be using a Ranged weapon of some kind at least some of the time.
As the player of an Animal Instinct Barbarian, I can assure you that any and every combatant has to be using a Ranged weapon some of the time to be fully efficient.
And as a player of a STR and CON Paladin who did not raise DEX, I can assure you that when you want to use a Ranged weapon, having DEX 10 really sucks.
To be honest, I have not had the same experience. In one of my parties, the Barbarian has been pretty consistently able to get into melee and they have a ranged supporting character.
What I've seen in my parties, is generally, the ones that wield melee weapons reliably are in melee whenever they can be and they leave the ranged work to the Casters or the Bow users who spec'd that way (Flurry Ranger in one of the parties for instance).
And to be honest, if it's on the GM to deny melee attackers melee attacks in order for DEX melee characters to "buy back value", that's not really fair.
We could just as easily say "Will/Fort saves with 10 WIS/CON suck" for the DEX users in this case
That and you can't be wielding multiple weapons at once (at least generally), so you're either in melee or you're trying to be in range because the swapping of weapons is actually pretty costly.
It's not a 0 sum game, but "Sometimes Barbarians have to make ranged attacks" doesn't really make me feel any better when "The Barbarian always is a better Rapier wielder than the Swashbuckler/Rogue/DEX Fighter"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in the camp that thinks dumping dex on a strength build is probably as bad as dumping strength on a dex build. In the latter case you lose a some damage, carry weight, and the ability to use maneuvers you may or may not have actually been interested in.
But in the former, your reflex saves are terrible so you'll take more damage in a lot of situations, you use heavy armor which will decrease your speed by 5 feet (even with your strength investment), you can't use ranged or thrown weapons, and stealth, which is a very important skill for as many people in the party to have as possible, is also dumped.
The seeming lack of penalty for dumping dex on a strength build is because the reasons its bad are baked into the stat itself.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For my 10 dex barbarian I took a cantrip from my ancestry to get electric arc. Seemed like a better option than dex since I already wanted to be scary.
Unfortunately there's no real options from ancestry (short of the "some ancestral weapons are good finesse weapons") that goes the other way.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But in the former, your reflex saves are terrible
You can buy Canny Acumen with a General. You can't buy anything to make up the loss on maneuvers, or damage.
And Bulwark/Mighty Bulwark.
you'll take more damage in a lot of situations
Which you have more CON than the DEX user to be able to withstand. Oh, and likely better Will/Fort saves due to not having to buy DEX.
you use heavy armor which will decrease your speed by 5 feet (even with your strength investment)
Once again, overcame with Ancestry Feats/General Feats and a drop of 5ft only translates to an issue when you actually need that additional 5ft. And considering all the Heavy armor users get Specialization benefits...
you can't use ranged or thrown weapons
You can absolutely use them, and in some cases you actually deal more damage (if traits allow).
But that only matters if you're attempting to use ranged weapons. We could just as easily make that argument for the Wizard, but the Wizard is more than likely casting spells and not using a Ranged weapon.
So saying its some huge hit for the Barbarian, who is going to be in melee any time they aren't being deliberately put in a box by the GM, is a stretch.
If forcing melee combatants to use ranged weapons all the time as a GM is a "gotcha" then I'm not sure what to say. Players should be allowed to fight how they want most of the time.
I can't imagine forcing my Barbarian to use a Ranged weapon every combat, and I don't think there are a lot of scenarios where they would choose to use a Ranged weapon outside me forcing them with circumstances.
So the value comes down to how often a GM forces a circumstance where a player can't use their preferred style of combat (and their melee class feats).
It's not really an argument. Using a ranged weapon is generally a choice the player makes, not one a GM forces.
stealth, which is a very important skill for as many people in the party to have as possible, is also dumped.
That assumes that everyone else in the party is good at stealth and Mr. STR is the one outlier.
As if the all the persons had the INT/Skills to afford Stealth (which is far more important in this scenario of "needing" stealth than the actual score).
The seeming lack of penalty for dumping dex on a strength build is because the reasons its bad are baked into the stat itself.
The reason it seems like there's lacking penalties is because all of the penalties apply to things that someone isn't going to be doing anyways.
If you tell someone that you will punish them if they step on a nail, sure it's a punishment, but how often were they going to be stepping on a nail? Probably as infrequently as humanly possible.
For my 10 dex barbarian I took a cantrip from my ancestry to get electric arc. Seemed like a better option than dex since I already wanted to be scary.
Unfortunately there's no real options from ancestry (short of the "some ancestral weapons are good finesse weapons") that goes the other way.
This.
There's no avenues to cover your penalties from DEX and STR has literal bounties of options for covering their losses.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But in the former, your reflex saves are terrible
You can buy Canny Acumen with a General. You can't buy anything to make up the loss on maneuvers, damage, or bulk.
And Bulwark/Might Bulwark.
you'll take more damage in a lot of situationsWhich you have more CON than the DEX user to be able to withstand. Oh, and likely better Will/Fort saves due to not having to buy DEX.
you use heavy armor which will decrease your speed by 5 feet (even with your strength investment)Once again, overcame with Ancestry Feats/General Feats and a drop of 5ft only translates to an issue when you actually need that additional 5ft. And considering all the Heavy armor users get Specialization benefits...
you can't use ranged or thrown weaponsYou can absolutely use them, and in some cases you actually deal more damage (if traits allow).
But that only matters if you're attempting to use ranged weapons. We could just as easily make that argument for the Wizard, but the Wizard is more than likely casting spells and not using a Ranged weapon.
So saying its some huge hit for the Barbarian, who is going to be in melee any time they aren't being deliberately put in a box by the GM.
stealth, which is a very important skill for as many people in the party to have as possible, is also dumped.That assumes that everyone else in the party is good at stealth and Mr. STR is the one outlier.
As if the person who went full STR even had the INT/Skills to afford Stealth (which is fair more important in this scenario of "needing" stealth than the actual score).
The seeming lack of penalty for dumping dex on a strength build is because the reasons its bad are baked into the stat itself.The reason it seems like there's lacking penalties is because all of the penalties apply to things that someone isn't going to be doing anyways.
If you tell someone that you will punish them if they step on...
I mean, specific builds that overcome your weaknesses are specific builds that overcome your weaknesses, you can spend such resources to increase your damage, gain access to utility casting, and other things as well you're missing out on if you're committed to optimizing a strength build to not suffer from a lack of dexterity, there's always an opportunity cost. Ancestry feats like Spirit Strikes add damage directly-- and canny acumen in the end, is only a +2 for a fighter and only at higher level, which is less than the +4 you should get for the dex investment up to 18, you could even have taken both to actually be good at reflex, they stack after all.
If you're trying to use ranged stuff with a strength-centric build, you're at a massive penalty, to-hit is a bigger loss per point than damage.
Your Dex build could raise Dex/Str/Con/Wis, and hit all of the important saves, just like your STR build could do Str/Dex/Con/Wis for the same benefit (basically, be good at all saves.)
I will also say, as a GM, I don't plan my encounters with the assumption that players can get into optimal range of their targets on their first turn-- maps are arbitrarily large (often whatever i can find that fits the theme, or whatever size makes sense in-universe) and depending on exactly what happens its very possible to start at high ranges.
I tend to run battlemaps that are 30x30, or something on the scale, my melee's aren't being intentionally penalized, but a ranged option is very useful.