Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ToastedAmphibian 01-14-08, 10:44 PM	I dmed for my first time over the weekend, and things went rather smoothly. However, one of the physcially frailer characters in the party seemed to be doing quite a bit more damage to the zombies than i would have expected. It turns out he was using a feat that lets him add his DEX modifier to his damage (Its in ToB). Most things that let you add modifiers other than STR to dmage are, in my experience, percision damage. This feat said nothing about that. It was also shockingly and convienently devoide of flavor text, despite being in ToB, thus offering no insite into where this extra damage seems to be coming from. On a side/related note are the manuevers that force opponent to act a certaint way or suffer penalties. Namely the stance that requiers enemies you threaten to attack you or suffer an attack penalty. To the best of my knowledge this penalty is not typed. It seems like the ability should be mind-affecting, but no such tags are present. What is everyones (Supported) opinions about this?
nightwyrm 01-15-08, 12:09 AM	I can't comment on the lack of flavour for dex to damage, but for manuvers that force opponents to attack you, it's totally not mind effecting. It's like someone is holding a sword over your head, you can choose to ignore it and attack someone else, but your opponent is getting in your way and he gets to hit you hard.
Salla 01-15-08, 12:26 AM	Rule of Thumb: A source of damage is only 'precision damage' if it contains a bit of text saying that it does not function against creatures immune to sneak attack or critical hits. And if it doesn't say mind-affecting, it isn't. :)
Johannixx 01-15-08, 12:35 AM	I would tend to say Dex-based damage is precision damage, despite the lack of flavor text. Dex-based damage brings to mind the skill and dexterity to direct your blows to the most advantageous portion of your opponent's anatomy, i.e. precisely place hits. If that's not precision damage, I don't know what is.
Majick 01-15-08, 12:54 AM	There's a reason you need to have a Shadow Hand maneuver and stance to be able to get the feat Shadow Blade (the dex to damage one you are talking about) and that's because you are drawing on the shadow-stuff you are intimately familiar with to strike at your foes. I always imagined it (because of the SEVERAL pre-requisite feats and THEIR flavour text) that it's shadow-based damage eminating from your weapons that just so happens to reflect your keen reflexes. Saying it's precision damage basically hinders an already feat heavy combination that really doesn't do a huge amount anyway Vs. a two-handed, high strength, power-attacking combat character such as a Barbarian or Fighter - is it really such a huge deal to let a Dex based character ACTUALLY be effective without having to be a Rogue or Scout? As for the stance you mentioned, yes, there is one and i believe it's called something along the lines of the Iron Guards Glare (or something to that effect - i think it's a Devoted Spirit stance) It basically means that the enemy you are engaging takes the negatives to hit, but they become AWARE that this is the effect you are having on them (and therefore it makes them more likely to kick you butt opposed to your allies) Hope that helps
Salla 01-15-08, 01:08 AM	As for the stance you mentioned, yes, there is one and i believe it's called something along the lines of the Iron Guards Glare (or something to that effect - i think it's a Devoted Spirit stance) It basically means that the enemy you are engaging takes the negatives to hit, but they become AWARE that this is the effect you are having on them (and therefore it makes them more likely to kick you butt opposed to your allies) Hope that helps Yeah, it's Iron Guard's Glare. I tend to think of it less as a 'glare' and more of interposing. You're simply making yourself a better target by interfering with the opponent; you leave yourself open to cover your ally. :)
Johannixx 01-15-08, 01:14 AM	Oh, I have no issues with letting Dex-based, non-rogue melee characters shine. I've been using a generic "Improved Weapon Finesse" in my games for years in order to allow high-Dex characters to deal damage with their weapons, and most of the time I allow Weapon Finesse as a freebie feat to ALL characters. Either you learn to swing with muscle, or with dexterity. Choose @ 1st level. But since Dex is such a high-value stat, benefiting Ref saves, AC and attack bonuses, it only makes sense that if I allow it to be applied to damage as well, that it has some limitation or drawback where the Strength-based fighters can still shine. This means that while the agile swashbuckler may be able to place his rapier adroitly enough to target tendons, arteries and joints while dodging fireballs and enemy blows, the muscled fighter can crunch through things like skeletons, ghouls, oozes and constructs with more efficacy than the light-weapon/light-armor combatant. Both sides have benefits and drawbacks that way.
StruckingFuggle 01-15-08, 01:46 AM	But since Dex is such a high-value stat, benefiting Ref saves, AC and attack bonuses, it only makes sense that if I allow it to be applied to damage as well, that it has some limitation or drawback where the Strength-based fighters can still shine. This means that while the agile swashbuckler may be able to place his rapier adroitly enough to target tendons, arteries and joints while dodging fireballs and enemy blows, the muscled fighter can crunch through things like skeletons, ghouls, oozes and constructs with more efficacy than the light-weapon/light-armor combatant. Both sides have benefits and drawbacks that way. But only one has the massive drawback of not getting their bonus damage (which is also semi-easily increasable to 1.5x or 2x in the case of str) to a rather big chunk of enemies in the higher levels of the game. Undead, constructs, elementals, oozes, things with amorphus biology, and anything that has fortification (which isn't all that hard to get, past a certain level).
Johannixx 01-15-08, 02:21 AM	But only one has the massive drawback of not getting their bonus damage (which is also semi-easily increasable to 1.5x or 2x in the case of str) to a rather big chunk of enemies in the higher levels of the game. Undead, constructs, elementals, oozes, things with amorphus biology, and anything that has fortification (which isn't all that hard to get, past a certain level). You could say the same thing about the Rogue's sneak attack ability. And let's face it, by 15th level, Fighters in general are just meat shields for the casters.
StruckingFuggle 01-15-08, 03:03 AM	You could say the same thing about the Rogue's sneak attack ability. Could and do. :)
mplindustries 01-15-08, 06:42 AM	Shadow Blade is not precision damage because it doesn't say that its precision damage. For feats, there should be no fluff. Feats provide a mechanical benefit. It should not have to explain why it works, it just does. In fact, I'd suggest that rather than figuring out the "flavor" of the feat and ruling based on that, you should figure out the ruling, and adjust the feat's flavor to work with it. Dexterity to damage could be a lot of things. It could be hitting precisely, it could be that strange shadow explanation someone earlier gave, or hey, maybe its just swinging really fast. Dexterity determines quickness to some extent after all. Look at it this way, if I can use my Dexterity to hit with weapon finesse against an amorphous blob with no discernable weak spots in its "armor" that I can target precisely, why can't I also use Dexterity for damage? Besides that, there are actually very few "precision damage" abilities that I can think of (assuming we are using "precision damage" to mean "requires the target to be crittable"). Sneak Attack, Sudden Strike, Skirmish, Ranged Precision (Order of the Bow Initiate) and the Swashbuckler's Intelligence to damage are about all I can think of. Intelligence to damage from the Warblade, however, is not actually dependent on critability, nor should it be. I want to remind you that despite any range limits, stuff like Weapon Specialization, Ranger Favored Enemy, or the 1/2 dex to damage from Crossbow Sniper are not limited to crittable enemies. I see no reason why this instance of seemingly "precision" damage be limited when those are not. Additionally, I want to point out that the Shadow Blade feat does not actually replace your strength bonus to damage with your dex bonus, it just adds it on top. You're not just placing blows well, you're still swinging as hard as you can. As far as Iron Guard's Glare goes, or any other stance, if it doesn't say "[Mind Affecting]" then it isn't. Its not a -4 morale penalty or anything, its just nameless one. If you can't see it making sense as a literal glare, then don't weaken the stance, change its name. I don't see why someone defending their allies and interfering with their opponents attacks should be Mind Affecting, so what if it was called "Fivefold Body Guard Stance" or "Protect My Allies Really Well Stance" or something else suitably silly? Its the bonuses that matter. I mean, technically, I can make a full Power Attack with a spiked chain while still using my Dexterity to hit with Weapon Finesse. Even when using Power Throw, I'm not required to take advantage of Brutal Throw and use my strength to hit. Why does that make sense? Because "power attack" is just a name, and the feat doesn't really let me swing wildly with all my might, it just lets me trade out hit for damage behind the scenes. I can decide what visual effect that really has each time I swing. I mean, honestly, Power Attack is the closest thing to a "Called Shot to Vitals" that 3.X has.
ravenshrike 01-15-08, 11:38 AM	I would tend to say Dex-based damage is precision damage, despite the lack of flavor text. Dex-based damage brings to mind the skill and dexterity to direct your blows to the most advantageous portion of your opponent's anatomy, i.e. precisely place hits. If that's not precision damage, I don't know what is. Or, instead of making a straight but powerful blow through the zombies skin, they could be tracing a longer curved path through the zombie, thereby doing more damage to it without it being actual precision damage.
wonlee76 01-15-08, 02:30 PM	The feat has no description of it being "precision" based damage. However, you should note the restrictions the feat has. It only kicks in when in a Shadowhand stance and when wielding one of the weapons that is in the shadowhand discipline.
SolenVlos 01-15-08, 02:49 PM	If said stance turned all meele damage done to precision damage, then the bonus on top that would be precision as well.
ToastedAmphibian 01-15-08, 04:55 PM	There's a reason you need to have a Shadow Hand maneuver and stance to be able to get the feat Shadow Blade (the dex to damage one you are talking about) and that's because you are drawing on the shadow-stuff you are intimately familiar with to strike at your foes. I always imagined it (because of the SEVERAL pre-requisite feats and THEIR flavour text) that it's shadow-based damage eminating from your weapons that just so happens to reflect your keen reflexes. Saying it's precision damage basically hinders an already feat heavy combination that really doesn't do a huge amount anyway Vs. a two-handed, high strength, power-attacking combat character such as a Barbarian or Fighter - is it really such a huge deal to let a Dex based character ACTUALLY be effective without having to be a Rogue or Scout? As for the stance you mentioned, yes, there is one and i believe it's called something along the lines of the Iron Guards Glare (or something to that effect - i think it's a Devoted Spirit stance) It basically means that the enemy you are engaging takes the negatives to hit, but they become AWARE that this is the effect you are having on them (and therefore it makes them more likely to kick you butt opposed to your allies) Hope that helps Wouldnt shadow be negative energy? Aside from that... How is giving it the same limitations that all other dex/int based fighters already have somehow making it weaker than said fighters are? Rogues/Scouts/Swashbucklers all already operate on percision damage. Is it really such a big deal to let strength mean something other than carrying capacity and pinning ability?
StruckingFuggle 01-15-08, 05:33 PM	If said stance turned all meele damage done to precision damage, then the bonus on top that would be precision as well. Yeah, as long as the damage was melee damage, probably. But there's no stance like that, and it'd be a pretty ... odd... stance even if it was. Is it really such a big deal to let strength mean something other than carrying capacity and pinning ability? Alternatively, is this really taking much of anything from strength?
rjsilverthorn 01-15-08, 05:37 PM	Wouldnt shadow be negative energy? Aside from that... How is giving it the same limitations that all other dex/int based fighters already have somehow making it weaker than said fighters are? Rogues/Scouts/Swashbucklers all already operate on percision damage. Is it really such a big deal to let strength mean something other than carrying capacity and pinning ability? The feat already has enough limitations as it is, it requires yoou to be in a shadow hand stance and its only useable with five weapons and unarmed strikes. Three of those weapons also require exotic weapon proficiency and they all deal 1d6 or less. Those are fairly tough restrictions already, I don't think it needs precision damage limits as well.
Silverthumb 01-15-08, 05:39 PM	Alternatively, is this really taking much of anything from strength? What else does Strength have? Jump, but there's a feat that can give that to Dex. Climb? Whoopee.
StruckingFuggle 01-15-08, 05:45 PM	What else does Strength have? Jump, but there's a feat that can give that to Dex. Climb? Whoopee. You're ignoring, missing, or deliberately disingenuously dis-including (try saying that three times fast! It's fun!) several advantages strength-to-damage has that dex-to-damage doesn't. First: You can get 1.5 and even 2x str to damage. I don't know of anything to do that with Dex. Second, the bigger one: 1-1.5x Str is automatic. You get it for no investment. On the other hand, dex to damage usually requires some combination of multiple feats and often class levels or even more feats. And then you need another feat to reduce the sudden MAD that's created by having one stat for to-hit and one for damage. There may be other advantages that I'm missing at the moment.
Silverthumb 01-15-08, 07:10 PM	First: You can get 1.5 and even 2x str to damage. I don't know of anything to do that with Dex. Second, the bigger one: 1-1.5x Str is automatic. You get it for no investment. On the other hand, dex to damage usually requires some combination of multiple feats and often class levels or even more feats. And then you need another feat to reduce the sudden MAD that's created by having one stat for to-hit and one for damage. Yes, but how many things can you do with Dex compared to how many things you can do with Str? That's all I'm saying.
Cartigan 01-15-08, 07:15 PM	Wouldnt shadow be negative energy? Aside from that... How is giving it the same limitations that all other dex/int based fighters already have somehow making it weaker than said fighters are? Rogues/Scouts/Swashbucklers all already operate on percision damage. Because ToB is the replacement for all melee in D&D - you can't bring it down to pay with previous iterations, that voids its point. Everything in it is absurdly powerful compared to anything that came before it. Honestly, I wouldn't play with it in a 3.5 game.
Rahvan 01-15-08, 07:26 PM	Agile Athlete gives you both Jump AND Climb.... not one of both, but that is besides the point here. ---------------------- The feat in question does not appear to say anything about the damage being added being precision damage, nor does it saying anything about removing the strength from damage, so both dexterity and strength are being added to the damage roll as an unnamed bonus. You could houserule that it is precision damage, but that would be nerfing the person who is currently using the feat in your game, and therefore it would only be fair to allow him to reselect the feat if you do so. You could of course just leave the RAW as they are and move on, which would mean that you will have to learn to deal with the fact that this 'frailer' character will have an actual chance against what you throw at the party. I will assume that the character in question has at least 1 level of Swordsage with 14 Str and 18 Dex by the way, which would allow him to take a maneuver, and the stance, at first level. Which would give him a maximum of +8 to damage, not counting Power attack, but since you refer to him as frailer the maximum he will be able to is something like: 2D4+7 (average:12). Please note that all weapons are either light weapons, or exotic, which makes wielding them less then advantageous when some fighter is trying to disarm them. The damage a fighter can give, using the same two ability scores divided differently, is 2D6+6 (Average:13), which on average is 1 higher, and the fighter does not have to waste a feat, a maneuver, and a stance to obtain this damage. As an added bonus, as many before me stated, that character must be in a Shadow Hand stance, which means that he has to pass away much more powerful stances in favor of keeping his damage up to acceptable levels. So all in all, the feat is nice, but not all that great, so my question now is: Would it be game-breaking to allow your player to keep this feat? And on the second part, as long as no type is given for the penalty, then all are affected equally by it, so that shouldn't be so hard to understand
CmdrCorsiken 01-15-08, 09:06 PM	This info from the FAQ may help clarify the concept of precision-based damage. It is referencing the Manyshot feat in response to a question about what type of extra damage applies to the 2nd and subsequent arrows, but the clarification on precision damage is useful. Comparing the language of sneak attack with the language of various other special abilities that increase damage, two abilities stand out as being extremely similar: skirmish and sudden strike (appearing in the scout and ninja classes, respectively, from Complete Adventurer). All three abilities require the attacker to strike a “vital spot.” More importantly, they rely on some level of precise visual perception of the target: both sneak attack and sudden strike don’t apply if the target has concealment, and skirmish says that you “must be able to see the target well enough to pick out a vital spot.” Whenever extrapolating in this manner, it’s best to err on the side of being conservative. When in doubt, the answer should be “no, this doesn’t count as precision-based damage.” If the feat that grants the Dex modif. to dmg mentions 'vital spot' then it would be considered precision-based dmg, otherwise, not. Hope this helps....
Silverthumb 01-16-08, 09:21 AM	Agile Athlete gives you both Jump AND Climb.... Freaking crap, really? There ya go, I guess. Yeesh.
Selgard 01-16-08, 09:42 AM	If you rule that the feat, which doesn't say otherwise, is precision damage, then please take note that you need also do the same for weapon finesse. Using your dexterity to attack rather than your strength is the epitome of knowing where to hit, and doing so precisely and exactly rather than just smashing through it as with strength. If you rule that dex to damage is automatically "precision" and thus crit immune's are immune to it, then you need also do so for weapon finesse.
Cartigan 01-16-08, 09:58 AM	If you rule that the feat, which doesn't say otherwise, is precision damage, then please take note that you need also do the same for weapon finesse. Weapon Finesse doesn't add to damage, Shadow Blade does.
Selgard 01-16-08, 10:12 AM	Yes, I know. But if damage due to dex is precision, isn't also the ability to hit them? If not- what Is the ability to hit with dexterity as opposed to brute strength? Mind you- I don't Think it should be nerfed as "precision damage".. But if you are going to logic your way into blocking the damage, that same logic applies to the attack roll.
smeagol_lied 01-16-08, 02:12 PM	Yes, I know. But if damage due to dex is precision, isn't also the ability to hit them? If not- what Is the ability to hit with dexterity as opposed to brute strength? Mind you- I don't Think it should be nerfed as "precision damage".. But if you are going to logic your way into blocking the damage, that same logic applies to the attack roll. Attack rolls can't be nerfed by being precision damage.
Selgard 01-16-08, 02:26 PM	They can't? wow. now that's a broad statement. the same DM adjudication that nerfs one feat, can easily nerf another.
Cartigan 01-16-08, 02:45 PM	Yes, I know. But if damage due to dex is precision, isn't also the ability to hit them? No because capability to hit is not the capability to damage - see archery. the same DM adjudication that nerfs one feat, can easily nerf another. Not if the feats do two different things :rolleyes:
Selgard 01-16-08, 03:00 PM	My point was to make an analogy. Apparently I failed- and so i shall try again. Both of the feats affecting dexterity instead of strength use the same "fluff" related logic to obtain their goal. That "fluff" is such: Instead of using brute strength to strike and damage the foe, they are instead using more precise shots- thus requiring dexterity instead of strength. Neither feat speaks of "precision" damage, in the "rules" sense of the word that we've presently come to know. (that is- damage which is blocked by crit immune foes, undead, and the like). Assuming the above is true- and no one so far has said otherwise, unless I missed a post- then the same logic that would draw one to conclude that dex to damage is "precision" based in a rules sense, would also lead one to conclude that dex to attack is "precision" based. The DM is certainly free to adjudicate one without the other- it just leaves logic sitting on its head. Myself, I vote for neither of them being "precision". Given the hoops one has to jump through to get dex-to-damage, it doesn't seem overly powerful. In my opinion. You are all, of course, free to do in your own campaigns what you wish.
Cartigan 01-16-08, 03:51 PM	Your new analogy is the same as your last analogy, but now with more words! Weapon Finesse does not apply your Dex to damage, therefore it doesn't use "precision damage," and therefore you can't nerf the damage that it doesn't do. If you want "fluff," Weapon Finesse - you are dexterous, you are fast and can put a light weapon where it hurts as opposed to using your brute strength to control the weapon. But even if you put it there, that doesn't mean it is going to do damage (eg, bonus damage). Your nerf to Shadow Blade is "if it requires Dex to hit, it is precision damage and therefore doesn't work against creatures immune to crit." Gee thanks for narrowing archery down, it really was too broad and powerful :rollyes:
mplindustries 01-16-08, 10:59 PM	Your new analogy is the same as your last analogy, but now with more words! Weapon Finesse does not apply your Dex to damage, therefore it doesn't use "precision damage," and therefore you can't nerf the damage that it doesn't do. If you want "fluff," Weapon Finesse - you are dexterous, you are fast and can put a light weapon where it hurts as opposed to using your brute strength to control the weapon. But even if you put it there, that doesn't mean it is going to do damage (eg, bonus damage). Your nerf to Shadow Blade is "if it requires Dex to hit, it is precision damage and therefore doesn't work against creatures immune to crit." Gee thanks for narrowing archery down, it really was too broad and powerful :rollyes: I think this was exactly his point. If getting Dexterity to hit represents "placing a weapon where it hurts" as you described, and the creature has no particular place that hurts, why should you still get Dex to your attack rolls? For example, think of an ooze. Where is the chink in an ooze's natural armor that you can aim for? The answer is: feats don't let you do anything in game. Feats let you do something out of the game. If a feat doesn't mention limitation X, then guess what--its not subject to limitation X. That doesn't mean the feat is wrong because fluff suggests otherwise, that means your in game justification for an out of game bonus is wrong. As I said before, don't rewrite the mechanics, rewrite the fluff. As for archery, first, the stats used for something are irrelevant to what is actually going on. If I describe my Rapier attack as severing a nearby rope and having a chandelier fall on my opponent, the game itself doesn't care as long as that attack does 1d6+str piercing damage. Second, dexterity to hit actually makes a lot of sense as far as "hitting" comes into play, but since D&D Armor Class has very little to do with actually connecting with a blow, and more with hitting hard enough to do damage through armor, archery is a required abstraction. Imagine how cumbersome it'd be if there were rules for a bow's pull weight applying against your opponents armor and natural armor bonuses while your dexterity applied only against dodge, dex, and distance modifiers. I bet they went with dexterity in the end to simplify things and because "its always been done that way." Plus, having dexterity to damage for a ranged character allows for a big return with no feat investment, given that ranged weapons are generally a whole lot safer than melee.
ToastedAmphibian 01-16-08, 11:01 PM	The feat in question does not appear to say anything about the damage being added being precision damage, nor does it saying anything about removing the strength from damage, so both dexterity and strength are being added to the damage roll as an unnamed bonus. You could houserule that it is precision damage, but that would be nerfing the person who is currently using the feat in your game, and therefore it would only be fair to allow him to reselect the feat if you do so. Naturally, but i doubt he would do so. Being percision damage hasnt done much to stop people from going after insightfull strike, afterall. I think that most builds that want it would still want it, percision damage or not. You could of course just leave the RAW as they are and move on, which would mean that you will have to learn to deal with the fact that this 'frailer' character will have an actual chance against what you throw at the party. He a human swordsage working towards "Shadow Sun Ninja" so im not really worried about him "Not having a chance" (Im much more worried for the poor rogue in the group actually... Hes playing wiht a swordsage, warblade, and crusader. The paladin dosnt really have much hope, but thats ALSO beside the point) I didnt realize that the "frailer" characters in DnD were the less capable ones... I will assume that the character in question has at least 1 level of Swordsage with 14 Str and 18 Dex by the way, which would allow him to take a maneuver, and the stance, at first level. Which would give him a maximum of +8 to damage, not counting Power attack, but since you refer to him as frailer the maximum he will be able to is something like: 2D4+7 (average:12). Please note that all weapons are either light weapons, or exotic, which makes wielding them less then advantageous when some fighter is trying to disarm them. Dex based fighters almost ALWAYS go with light weapons. What does that have to do with anything? I guess the feat only working on the weapons that the people who would like to use it already use is a bit of a draw back. What does exotic have to do with avoiding disarm attempts? The damage a fighter can give, using the same two ability scores divided differently, is 2D6+6 (Average:13), which on average is 1 higher, and the fighter does not have to waste a feat, a maneuver, and a stance to obtain this damage. He also has a lower dex, and thus lower iniative, lower touch ac, fewer feat options, lower reflex save, ect. Also where are you pulling these numbers from? 2+4=8? Wtf are you talking about mate. As an added bonus, as many before me stated, that character must be in a Shadow Hand stance, which means that he has to pass away much more powerful stances in favor of keeping his damage up to acceptable levels. He has to stay in a shadowhand stance to deal the extra damage. I prefer to think of it an extra damage bonus to all shadowhand stances. Also, i hadnt noticed the shadowhand stances to be all that inferior to the other schools, especially for a high dex character. So all in all, the feat is nice, but not all that great, so my question now is: Would it be game-breaking to allow your player to keep this feat? Probably not Would it be all that game breaking to completly do away with the notion of percision damage? Probablly not Does percision damage exist anyways? Yes, i think it does. Most abilites should have something they arnt effective aginst. The designers seemed to think it added spice to the game. Why should the swordsage get unavoidable dex based damage whereas the scouts and rogues of the world shouldnt. Who has more flexibility in dealing with situations where percision damage isnt applicable? And on the second part, as long as no type is given for the penalty, then all are affected equally by it, so that shouldn't be so hard to understand Perhapes im mistaken, but i dont belive i said "Is this mind affecting" so much as "Shouldnt this be mind affecting" I dont have the book with me, so i cant look it up. However i dont belive it is tagged as such. However i dont belive ANYTHING ins ToB IS tagged as such. It seems like the designers where just taking the shortcut around creature types and immunites by just not giving anything any situational type tags even if they seemed to warrant one. (With teh exception of thoes poor desert wind manuevers) Im surprised at teh number of responses this topic recieved, and im rather enjoying your responses. My inner munchkin is just screaming to find ways to abuse this, so it kinda makes me happy that most of you dont agree with my initial impression. Everyone is intitled to there opinion, but if you post a bunch of things that dont exactly make sense, and then turn around and insinuate that im stupid, im likley to get a bit cranky.
Cartigan 01-16-08, 11:14 PM	I think this was exactly his point. If getting Dexterity to hit represents "placing a weapon where it hurts" as you described, and the creature has no particular place that hurts, why should you still get Dex to your attack rolls? For example, think of an ooze. Where is the chink in an ooze's natural armor that you can aim for? It's hard to describe the difference between dexterity and strength, so I obviously failed. How about like this: Fencing vs Kendo. The sword styles and combat styles are different. You are able to finesse small weapons and rapiers because you can strike quickly and directly. You can't dexterously wield a longsword or greatsword, you have to swing them around, they arn't really designed to be used in the same way. And again, your argument gimps archers. As for archery, first, the stats used for something are irrelevant to what is actually going on. If I describe my Rapier attack as severing a nearby rope and having a chandelier fall on my opponent, the game itself doesn't care as long as that attack does 1d6+str piercing damage. Second, dexterity to hit actually makes a lot of sense as far as "hitting" comes into play, but since D&D Armor Class has very little to do with actually connecting with a blow, and more with hitting hard enough to do damage through armor, archery is a required abstraction. Imagine how cumbersome it'd be if there were rules for a bow's pull weight applying against your opponents armor and natural armor bonuses while your dexterity applied only against dodge, dex, and distance modifiers. I bet they went with dexterity in the end to simplify things and because "its always been done that way." You need strength to use a compound bow (and then you get that Str to damage). If there were English Longbows, you probably would for them too. So your "strength required to use the bow" is already defined. Dexterity is basically an aiming ability. The higher your dexterity, the better you can aim at the opponent, and it works like that for Weapon Finesse. You aim the weapon at the opponent and strike, but you need Str to hurt it. Of course this is an abstract aim - with non-finessable weapons, you don't "take aim" to strike, you just strike. Plus, having dexterity to damage for a ranged character allows for a big return with no feat investment, given that ranged weapons are generally a whole lot safer than melee. Crossbow Sniper is the only official feat that adds Dex damage to ranged weaponry, and that is obviously solely for crossbows.
Neutronium_Dragon 01-16-08, 11:38 PM	The Dex bonus to damage from the stance is not precision damage. It doesn't say it is, so it isn't. As others have pointed out, a strength based character gets to apply his modifier all the time, at a multiplier, without having to spend any feats and without being forced to use a particular stance and weapon. It's balanced as-is. Iron Guard's Glare is just a fancy name - it's not the force of your gaze which has any effect (otherwise it wouldn't work if you or they were blinded), it's simply a matter of actively interfering with any attack they make against your allies.
mplindustries 01-17-08, 01:43 AM	It's hard to describe the difference between dexterity and strength, so I obviously failed. How about like this: Fencing vs Kendo. The sword styles and combat styles are different. You are able to finesse small weapons and rapiers because you can strike quickly and directly. You can't dexterously wield a longsword or greatsword, you have to swing them around, they arn't really designed to be used in the same way. And again, your argument gimps archers. You need strength to use a compound bow (and then you get that Str to damage). If there were English Longbows, you probably would for them too. So your "strength required to use the bow" is already defined. Dexterity is basically an aiming ability. The higher your dexterity, the better you can aim at the opponent, and it works like that for Weapon Finesse. You aim the weapon at the opponent and strike, but you need Str to hurt it. Of course this is an abstract aim - with non-finessable weapons, you don't "take aim" to strike, you just strike. Crossbow Sniper is the only official feat that adds Dex damage to ranged weaponry, and that is obviously solely for crossbows. I'm not sure if you actually read and understood anything I said. It looks more like "Oh no, he said I was wrong! Attack!" My argument does not gimp archers because my argument was that you shouldn't gimp anything at all. If anything, mentioning bows strengthens the argument that adding dexterity to stuff doesn't automatically make it precision damage. And again, if dexterity to hit is about quickness and placement, where do you swing to get through an ooze's natural armor? There is nothing to aim at. If it is just speed of swing or some other factor along those lines, then why should dexterity to damage not follow the same principles? (Just as a reminder, I'm against arbitrarily making Shadow Blade precision damage, if you couldn't figure that out. I don't want to nerf weapon finesse as well, I am just arguing that if you nerf one, you have to nerf both) I am totally shocked that you can make the argument you're making and not see how Weapon Finesse and adding Dexterity to damage have a very similar "flavor." Are you making a distinction between Strength to hit and Strength to damage? Doesn't strength to hit represent hitting really hard so someone's armor has no effect? And doesn't Strength to damage represent hitting really hard so it hurts more when it does hit through the armor? As for bows, I really don't know what to say other than try and reread what I actually said. I'm right there with you. Archery doesn't need to be explained, if anything, it supports the decision to keep Shadow Blade "non-precision" damage. Did you really read what I said about getting Dexterity to damage on ranged attacks? It was a hypothetical explaining the reasoning behind getting dexterity to hit and strength to damage on ranged attacks. It wasn't something I thought actually happened or should happen. I think it'd be unbalancing. For Fencing vs. Kendo, I'd actually argue that the fighting styles are not terribly different if you abstracted them into an RPG fighting system. I don't think anyone with a kendo stick just swings really hard. Placement and technique is just as important to them as it is in Fencing. The sports are surprisingly similar, despite the weapons involved. So yes, one more time, I am against nerfing Shadow Blade. I am against using "fluff" as any kind of mechanical measuring stick. I am, however, in favor of consistency, and I don't understand how someone could say that Strength to hit and damage work through the same principle, but dexterity to hit and damage somehow don't.
Cartigan 01-17-08, 09:42 AM	And again, if dexterity to hit is about quickness and placement, where do you swing to get through an ooze's natural armor? There is nothing to aim at. You aim at the creature. I don't want to nerf weapon finesse as well, I am just arguing that if you nerf one, you have to nerf both You can argue it all you want, it is still wrong. To attack and to damage are two entirely separate concepts in D&D. It's like applying a nerf to rage to smite as well, they are two entirely different things so it doesn't make sense. You can't apply a nerf to damage to Weapon Finesse because it has nothing to do with damage, just the attack. I am totally shocked that you can make the argument you're making and not see how Weapon Finesse and adding Dexterity to damage have a very similar "flavor." Because attack and damage are two different concepts and mechanics in D&D. You may be fast, but that quickness does not help you do damage with Weapon Finesse. As for bows, I really don't know what to say other than try and reread what I actually said. I'm right there with you. Archery doesn't need to be explained, if anything, it supports the decision to keep Shadow Blade "non-precision" damage. No it doesn't. It just discounts your absurd argument that Dex to damage is the same as Dex to hit. Ranged weapons don't get Dex to damage at all by themselves, just like finessed weapons. Did you really read what I said about getting Dexterity to damage on ranged attacks? It was a hypothetical explaining the reasoning behind getting dexterity to hit and strength to damage on ranged attacks. It wasn't something I thought actually happened or should happen. I think it'd be unbalancing. It would be unbalancing if you didn't need other stats, which you do. Allowing Dex to damage with ranged weapons wouldn't change anything. For Fencing vs. Kendo, I'd actually argue that the fighting styles are not terribly different if you abstracted them into an RPG fighting system. I don't think anyone with a kendo stick just swings really hard. Placement and technique is just as important to them as it is in Fencing. The sports are surprisingly similar, despite the weapons involved. The styles, and weapons represented, are still different. I am, however, in favor of consistency, and I don't understand how someone could say that Strength to hit and damage work through the same principle, but dexterity to hit and damage somehow don't. Because Dex to damage is not a standard mechanic. It's added to crossbow damage without the qualifier because crossbows are weaker than bows in use so there needed to be a balancing mechanic, but its flavor text mentions how it helps you place more precise shots.
ToastedAmphibian 01-17-08, 04:55 PM	Strength to hit is not all about "Hitting through the armor" A high dex character can NOT swing a weapon faster than a high STR character, it DOSENT work that way. DEXTERITY DOES NOT EQUAL SPEED. The high strength low dex character is moving his weapon much more quickly, thats why he is doing more damage, and better at hitting. The high DEX character is simply MORE PRECISE with his attacks. On a side note, why are you talking about oozes? How do you stab "Oooze" at all, or bludgen it for that matter. How does hitting it harder help at all? Why does HITTING IT help at all. If you can come up with reasons as to why NORMAL atacks are effective at all, other than for playability, then we can have a starting point to compare the effects of alternative methods and there implications.
mplindustries 01-18-08, 04:14 AM	Before I bother with repeating myself again, let me get this straight... Do we actually disagree on the issue at hand? Do you (either of you apparently now) actually think Shadow Blade damage "was intended to be" precision damage that doesn't work against non-crittable enemies? If you agree that Shadow Blade should not be nerfed, then lets just stop this now. If you do think it should be nerfed, stop talking about weapon finesse, which was just a parallel argument made by a third party. How about, instead, you make an argument to defend your standpoint on Shadow Blade, rather than being obstinate and unable/unwilling to follow the logical extrapolations and implications of arguments that are anything but completely literal. As to this new guy talking about the ooze, seriously, reread what I've been saying the last few posts. There isn't any way of attacking an ooze that "makes sense." I never pretended it did. The absurdity of using dexterity to hit an ooze was exactly what I was trying to show. All along the point was that fluff and crunch need to be kept separate because crunch is just numbers on a page. You should never use what happens in game to justify a rules change. If anything, you should instead change what happens in game. I just don't understand how someone could see a statement that was intended to be absurd in order to help a point, and then respond with "No, thats absurd!"
Cartigan 01-18-08, 02:37 PM	If you do think it should be nerfed, stop talking about weapon finesse, which was just a parallel argument made by a third party. How about, instead, you make an argument to defend your standpoint on Shadow Blade, rather than being obstinate and unable/unwilling to follow the logical extrapolations and implications of arguments that are anything but completely literal. Can you make a point without contradicting yourself? You can say attack == damage as much as you want, but they arn't the same thing. As to this new guy talking about the ooze, seriously, reread what I've been saying the last few posts. There isn't any way of attacking an ooze that "makes sense." I never pretended it did. The absurdity of using dexterity to hit an ooze was exactly what I was trying to show. With that last sentence, you ignored everything you said before it. It is absurd to hit an Ooz at all. With Str or Dex.
runestar 01-18-08, 08:12 PM	Thankfully, dnd is not a game where "uncommon" interpretations of what "common sense" ought to entail has a place. You determine how the ability works first based solely on existing dnd rules, then rationalize it to the best of your capabilities. You don't first decide how an ability ought to work based on your own notions/belief, then attempt to interpret said ability as such.:) My take is that if an ability does not explicitly say something (and is not contradicted by another set of rules), then don't assume that it does something. It is that straightforward. Shadow blade says nothing about the damage bonus being treated as precision or whatever. So it shouldn't.:) Why? That is for you to explain. :)
Guybrush 01-19-08, 08:21 AM	I don't want to interfere with the discussion that's currently going on, but I have a question about the Shadow Blade feat. The feat description in table 2.1 (ToB 30) mentions that you can use your Dex modifier instead of your Str modifier on damage rolls with Shadow Hand weapons. The more detailed feat description on page 32 doesn't say anything about replacing one modifier for the other. It just says: "you can add your Dexterity modifier as a bonus on melee damage..." So which piece of text trumps the other? The text in the table or the actual feat description? Please continu your discussion after trying to answer my question. :)
smeagol_lied 01-19-08, 08:45 AM	I don't want to interfere with the discussion that's currently going on, but I have a question about the Shadow Blade feat. The feat description in table 2.1 (ToB 30) mentions that you can use your Dex modifier instead of your Str modifier on damage rolls with Shadow Hand weapons. The more detailed feat description on page 32 doesn't say anything about replacing one modifier for the other. It just says: "you can add your Dexterity modifier as a bonus on melee damage..." So which piece of text trumps the other? The text in the table or the actual feat description? Please continu your discussion after trying to answer my question. :) Feat descriptions > feat descriptions in tables. Ergo, you add both your DEX and your STR mod to damage.
ToastedAmphibian 01-21-08, 07:44 PM	I don't want to interfere with the discussion that's currently going on, but I have a question about the Shadow Blade feat. The feat description in table 2.1 (ToB 30) mentions that you can use your Dex modifier instead of your Str modifier on damage rolls with Shadow Hand weapons. The more detailed feat description on page 32 doesn't say anything about replacing one modifier for the other. It just says: "you can add your Dexterity modifier as a bonus on melee damage..." So which piece of text trumps the other? The text in the table or the actual feat description? Please continu your discussion after trying to answer my question. :) Ya, that table is poorly edited. I belive another entry in it makes refrence to a "ShadowSun" strike. Unless they meant all strikes executed by a particular sub-species of Ninja, i have no clue what they where thinking. All hail Threepwood As to this new guy talking about the ooze, Wait i'm the new guy? seriously, reread what I've been saying the last few posts. There isn't any way of attacking an ooze that "makes sense." I never pretended it did. The absurdity of using dexterity to hit an ooze was exactly what I was trying to show. I think this was exactly his point. If getting Dexterity to hit represents "placing a weapon where it hurts" as you described, and the creature has no particular place that hurts, why should you still get Dex to your attack rolls? For example, think of an ooze. Where is the chink in an ooze's natural armor that you can aim for? Wait, you found a quote of me sayin "placing a weapon where it hurts"? What does "hurts" have to do with damage? The latter has a tendency to cause the first, but that dosnt make them the same. I couldnt find any ooze with an AC higher than 5. Swinging hard and swinging carefully would provide about the same chances to hit it. an average human first level commoner hits its 3/4 of the time, i dont see how this is relivant. Ooozes dont have natural armor besides. Who was speaking of armor? I thought this thread (I should know) was about damage. Strength to hit is not all about "Hitting through the armor" A high dex character can NOT swing a weapon faster than a high STR character, it DOSENT work that way. DEXTERITY DOES NOT EQUAL SPEED. The high strength low dex character is moving his weapon much more quickly, thats why he is doing more damage, and better at hitting. The high DEX character is simply MORE PRECISE with his attacks. On a side note, why are you talking about oozes? How do you stab "Oooze" at all, or bludgen it for that matter. How does hitting it harder help at all? Why does HITTING IT help at all. If you can come up with reasons as to why NORMAL atacks are effective at all, other than for playability, then we can have a starting point to compare the effects of alternative methods and there implications. So basically your arguing that oozes should be immune to physical damage? I suppose their is some merit for such a position but that is getting really really far off topic, and really deserves its on post, probably in a diffrent section of the forum....
Optimator 01-21-08, 08:14 PM	I would tend to say Dex-based damage is precision damage, despite the lack of flavor text. Dex-based damage brings to mind the skill and dexterity to direct your blows to the most advantageous portion of your opponent's anatomy, i.e. precisely place hits. If that's not precision damage, I don't know what is. This is what I would assume at first, but it isn't RAW.
Optimator 01-21-08, 08:36 PM	Keep in mind, Strength = Speed. Strength to the Attack modifier also represents swinging faster in order to hit a target trying to get out of the way of the blow, not just the brute-force, plow-through-the-armor image that seems so prevalent these days. Anyway, after reading more of this thread, I wholly agree with mplindustries about the "nerf one, nerf the other" bit. It's simple to understand.
ravenshrike 01-22-08, 12:26 PM	It's sorta like this, the guy with high STR hits the ooze so hard that additional chunks get ripped off when he withdraws his blade along with some hydrostatic shock. The guy with strictly weapon finesse pokes it carefully, but doesn't have nearly as much strength behind his blow. The guy with shadow blade? He's dexterous and skilled enough to carve ****ing animal shapes out of the ooze before withdrawing his blade.
ToastedAmphibian 01-22-08, 04:33 PM	Enough with the oozes! Just give a troll a ring of acid resistance and have him eat them!
Legdiwena 01-22-08, 04:44 PM	All hail Threepwood Fear Guybrush Threepwood!! My name is feared in every dirty corner of this island! So you got that job as janitor, after all.
Mad_Jack 01-23-08, 09:49 PM	Now, I'm officially just talking off the top of my head here, so take it for whatever you feel it's worth... Precision damage is usually expressed in dice worth of damage... If you define precision damage as "hitting a vital spot", then having variable damage would seem to indicate that the damage came about due to *how well* you hit that vital spot. Given that Shadow Blade is only effective in certain stances and with certain weapons, and the fact that if you use it as a replacement for weapon finesse to fulfill feat requirements that the benefits of those later feats only apply to Shadow Hand weapons, it would seem that the extra damage granted by this feat is more a function of training - i.e., holding the weapon more effectively, etc - than a function of hitting the opponent in a certain spot. As an example, if I had the same physical strength score as, say, Sonny Chiba, I would expect that he would do more damage slicing someone across the arm than I would if I took the same kung fu sword and struck them in the same place... Thus, in my opinion, although you could definitely conclude that adding Dex to damage is a function of precision, I think it's more precision of execution than precision of aim. I don't believe it falls under the game definition of "precision damage". "Precision" damage, to me, is generally scale-able... When precision damage is gained as a class feature, you continue to get more and more bonus damage although the prerequisite conditions for getting the extra damage don't usually change. The only way to increase the damage gained from Shadow Blade is to increase your Dexterity score. But, like I said, it's just a thought.
ToastedAmphibian 01-24-08, 06:15 PM	Precision damage is usually expressed in dice worth of damage See the swashbuckler insightfull strike ability
StruckingFuggle 01-24-08, 07:09 PM	... See the definition of usually.
Daeva 01-25-08, 03:18 AM	think of it as spinning/twirling your weapon in a manner that creates more momentum, problem solved.