Feats Should be Nice but Not Required: Weapon Finesse [Archive] - Wizards Community

Feats Should be Nice but Not Required: Weapon Finesse [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Xeviat-DM
02-13-07, 11:21 PM I have been playing D&D for a bit over 6 years now, and one design phillosophy has always struck me as paramount: If an ability is so good that everyone takes it, there is something wrong with the ability. This principal pointed out many of the issues with the Psionics Handbook, issues that were changed with the revision.

Over my 6 years playing and DMing, I have noticed an issue with Weapon Finesse: Every rogue I've ever seen takes it (just like every Druid takes Natural Spell). Even rogues specializing in ranged combat find a way to pick up Weapon Finesse. This shows me that something is wrong with it.

But I'm not here to say that Weapon Finesse is overpowered; I'm here to say that I believe Weapon Finesse may have been implimented improperly. Rather than requiring Weapon Finesse, I propose to make it a baseline ability. When wielding a light weapon, one may choose to use your Dexterity modifier or your Strength modifier to determine to hit. Weapon Finesse, instead, allows you to use your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier with one-handed weapons, as long as your off-hand is not holding a shield.

My reasoning is that light weapons are light, and thus one can wield them with coordination rather than force. The ability to apply finesse to non-light weapons requires more training. To keep this Weapon Finesse out of every rogue's hand, I think it should have a Strength requirement; if you're very weak, you won't be able to finesse a 3 pound one-handed weapon like you could a 1 point light weapon.

So, what do you think? I believe others have made this suggestion before, but I think it would improve the game in a minor way. High dex characters will be lead to light weapons, unless they want to spend a feat to use a one-handed weapon.
Mitchell
02-13-07, 11:53 PM But the rapier is a one-handed weapon that is finesseable.
What happens to it?
If it remains finesseable under your proposal, then not much changes. Finesse fighters may take the feat so that they can finesse their martial weapons, but then you have issues of finessed large longswords or battleaxes through use of monkey grip.
A better idea may be to get rid of it as a feat entirely, allow the weapons currently finesseable to be used as if the character had weapon finesse at their discretion, and be done with it. Same thing applies to power attack, too. Couldn't anyone swing really hard at the expense of accuracy?
Chimaera2000
02-14-07, 12:02 AM Hmm.... let's see.

The must-have feats that I know of are Natural Spell for the druid, Adaptive Style for the swordsage, and Weapon Finesse for the rogue. There are exceptions to this rule, but these do tend be taken in the vast majority of characters that I've seen played.

What would be the effect of building any of these into the system? Ultimately, it'd save a feat which could be used for something else. For a rogue, having Weapon Finesse being built in means that they could pick up Weapon Finesse at 1st level, meaning that they could have what I feel to be the core trio of optimized rogue feats (Weapon Finesse, Improved Initiative and Two-Weapon fighting) by 3rd level instead of sixth. If they're human, you get them all at 1st level.

Is this overpowered? Not particularly. It means that rogues and other Dex-based fighters will be effective sooner in their progression and will free up a feat for something else like Great Fortitude to bolster their weaknesses. Including the house rule that light weapons can be finessed automatically shouldn't make that much of a difference in-game one way or the other.

At the very least, though, Weapon Finesse should lose have the BAB +1 requirement. Why have that requirement when any class with BAB +1 won't be needing Weapon Finesse to begin with?!? :nonono: All it does is artificially make the rogue and other Finesse-based classes sub-par in melee until 3rd level.
Vaelan
02-14-07, 01:36 AM I don't even think Weapon Finesse is nice, let alone necessary, and middling-BAB roguish types are pretty much all I play.

If I really needed the bonus to hit, I would take Leadership and get a Bard cohort. It gives a greater bonus than Weapon Finesse is likely to and has many other benefits.
wizarddog
02-14-07, 02:08 AM What about rogues who *gasp* don't have a dexerity bonus? Weapon Finess then becomes useless to them.

wizarddog
DarkRhystar
02-14-07, 03:03 AM This shows me that something is wrong with it.

You could go the exact opposite and say that there's something wrong with the fact that every Rogue you've had has been Dexterity-based. ;)
Willie the Duck
02-15-07, 01:41 AM Building the game mechanics around the assumption of a dex based rogue is hardly mind blowing (even though my highest score for my rogues is usually int). Assuming that even ranged rogues pick up finesse is a leap.

I agree with the general principle of this proposal, but fear that it detracts from what feats exist to do. Many feats simply grant a bonus to something a character already can do (say a +1 to an action, as in weapon focus, or a +4 to an action in certain situations, such as precise shot). Others allow you to do something you wouldn't otherwise be able to do (such as natural spell, or the divine feats). Lastly, you have feats that don't allow any new action or a specific bonus, but change the mechanic of how numeric scores are determined (using charisma instead of wisdom to determine will saves, or reducing magic item production costs by 25%). This last category is where weapon finesse exists. Removing weapon finesse from this field in no small way suggests that that this type of feat shouldn't exist. They should all be either automatic or class features. I find this unacceptable.

I would instead suggest some other work-around. Either give the rogue early access to finesse (maybe make the feat prereqs bab+1 or rogue level 1), give them the feat free like a ranger gets endurance, or something similar. Either way, don't proclaim that this isn't the kind of thing a feat should cover. (I will point out that I tend to expect feats to be able to do alot of different things. I'm playing a 1st level human scout who took two home-brewed feats: one that gives him darkvision and another that lets him carry a medium load while still acting like he had a light load.)
Emeramber
02-15-07, 01:29 PM I have to admit, I'd like to see certain weapons as inherently finessable, or even automatically finessed. A rapier, for example, is so very not about how hard you can swing it around, it is about precision. Yet an ogre does just as well with it as a greatclub (for hitting, not damage.) Then again, strength as accuracy has always seemed counter-intuitive. Media has brought me up on the idea of the nimble and accurate dodging about the flailing brute.

If I were designing "3.75", I'd say most light melee weapons may use either strength or dexterity to hit, although strength is still used for damage. (I say most because I'm sure there's an exception somewhere.) There is a part of me that would like to make daggers and the like pure finesse, but that's probably going too far. I'd extend this to certain double weapons, if and only if they are being used as a light & one handed (whether 2WF or not. Just not weilding it as a 2H weapon.) The quarterstaff or lajatang, for example, should be finessable. As it is, 2WF a quarterstaff allows finesse on half of it... how odd is that? Certain weapons, such as the rapier, would automatically use finesse.

Yeah... okay, rantble (rant+ramble) over.
WinterPsionic
02-15-07, 02:08 PM What about rogues who *gasp* don't have a dexerity bonus? Weapon Finess then becomes useless to them.

wizarddog

:eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...*heart attack* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT*

.....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....*Flat line* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT*

:weep: Dead...
Vegepygmy
02-15-07, 02:45 PM Over my 6 years playing and DMing, I have noticed an issue with Weapon Finesse: Every rogue I've ever seen takes it (just like every Druid takes Natural Spell). Even rogues specializing in ranged combat find a way to pick up Weapon Finesse. This shows me that something is wrong with it.I'm just going to say that my experience differs from yours, and leave it at that.
wonlee76
02-15-07, 03:57 PM :eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...*heart attack* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT*

.....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....*Flat line* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT*

:weep: Dead...

How about a slightly more realistic situation of a rogue who's strength score is equal to his dex score making Weapon Finesse pointless. I've had a few fighter/rogue types with that type of stat distribution.
Loki5654
02-15-07, 04:02 PM I'm just going to say that my experience differs from yours, and leave it at that.
Amen.
Aggrenox
02-15-07, 04:09 PM At one point me and some of the Guys were playing around with the idea of an accuracy rating. Str+Dex/2: For melee, and Wis+Dex/2 for ranged (being that wisdom is the perception ability).
Xeviat-DM
02-15-07, 04:11 PM In fact, I don't allow feats other than weapon finesse that swap the ability modifier for something, so perhaps that's what's leading me to this. Also, I've done some work with a foil and an epee, and tried the maneuvers out with an actual rapier; a rapier is not as light as an epee or foil. Finessing an actual rapier would be difficult.

So, I'm saying that all light weapons would use Dex or Str to hit, since they're light. A rapier, and other one-handed weapons, would need weapon finesse. Giving the rapier the "finessable" trait makes it marginally more powerful than the scimitar (though one could argue the difference between piercing and slashing). But scimitar fighting styles, just like katana or even eastern longsword styles, could be seen as finessed. Why the distinction on the rapier, which isn't that much lighter than other one-handed swords?
Nezkrul
02-16-07, 09:43 AM If I really needed the bonus to hit, I would take Leadership and get a Bard cohort. It gives a greater bonus than Weapon Finesse is likely to and has many other benefits.

Leadership requires direct DM permission, and time to try to find your Bard cohort of the right level; Weapon Finesse does not.
xanadu
02-16-07, 05:52 PM I think the OP is thinking too much. Weapon Finesse is perhaps a natural fit for the rogue but there is nothing wrong with that as power attack is a natural for barbarians.

By making it free, you'll step on the toes of other classes (Swashbuckler) and make 1st and 2nd level rogues much more melee potent than they otherwise would be as you are giving them at least a +2 and probably a +3 to hit (in addition to scoring that sneak damage).

Fighting a finesse-dextrous style is *not* automatic given a light mace or such. In fact, it strikes me as counter-intiutive as the basic martial instict for fighting is take take whatever weapon and swing with as much force as one can muster.

It is something that has to be learned and requires discipline which makes sense as a feat.
Cromag
02-26-07, 10:01 AM Armors purpose id to put a big chunk of something hard in between the enemy and you, whether this is metal/leather/kevlar that is it's purpose.

Dexterity helps as you parry/dodge/weave/deflect incoming blows

BAB is skillfully avoiding the hard bits to stab the soft flesh underneath.

I always pictured Strength as punching though the armor and/or keeping a steady arm and true aim as the enemy atempts to parry

Weapon finesse is using your dexterity to specifically target weak points in the armor and to beat an opponents attempts to parry/dodge/etc through your own natural speed and precision.

It's two different fighting styles, weapon finesse requires more skill, that's why it's a feat. This is most likely why they require BAB +1.
bob_the_great
02-26-07, 12:21 PM i like it as it is. weapon finesse is useful to classes other than the rogue; the rogue just tends to get the most from it. spell penetration is much more useful to an evoker than a conjurer. power attack is more useful to a barbarian than a paladin.

making it free makes Dex, already the best ability, even better. weapon finesse represents training at placing your strikes in a way to compensate for a lack of strength behind them. making it free also makes the presumption that anyone can do it. anyone can swing a sword hard, not everyone can deftly place their strikes. weapon finesse represents this training.

rogues already come out of the box with enough combat ability. if you want to excel in combat you can spend one of your feats. their role is skill-monkey, not combatant.
Gnarl
02-26-07, 03:30 PM :eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...*heart attack* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT*

.....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....*Flat line* *CLEAR* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT* *ZOOOTTTTT*

:weep: Dead...

One of my players wants to play a fighter/rogue: full plate, ray deflection and spell sense (PH2 or Complete Mage alternate class features). She wants to focus on trapfinding and social skills. She figured she could use Improved Overrun instead of Tumble to get into flanking position. :D

I can't wait to see this thing in play.
Jaxgaret
02-26-07, 03:53 PM She figured she could use Improved Overrun instead of Tumble to get into flanking position. :D

I can't wait to see this thing in play.

That is AWESOME.
Xeviat-DM
02-26-07, 06:08 PM Show of hands: When a rogue picks up weapon finesse and doesn't intend on two-weapon fighting, how many of them pick up the rapier?

There is no reason what so ever, short of two-weapon fighting and the need to conceal a weapon, to not pick up a rapier with a finesse rogue; they're proficient in it, it has a higher threat range than a shortsword and more damage than a kukri.

The rapier is my big reason for wanting to make all Light weapons automatically finessable. A feat would still be required to finesse one-handed and two-handed weapons. Light weapons deal less damage, and a finesser deals considerably less damage than a standard Str warrior (trust me, I watched a Str 10 shortsword finessing TWFing ranger suck at everything until we rebuilt his character as a Str warrior in the 3.5 change-over).

An 18 Dex rogue with a shortsword will still deal considerably less damage than an 18 Str fighter with a greatsword. The likelyhood of the two having equal AC is high (due to the nature of many armors having their ACs and Max Dex's add up to 8), making that comparison equal. Without taking BAB into consideration, the rogue will have +4 to hit with a 1d6 19-20/x2 attack, while the fighter will have +4 to hit with a 2d6+6 19-20/x2 attack. You'd need 3d6 dice of sneak attack to equalize the damage.

So, I'll leave this out here as an option for those who wish to see Finesse Warriors have not-so-hard of a time.
kalstrand
02-26-07, 09:05 PM You are looking at the 3.0 version of Weapon Finesse. In 3.5 Weapon Finesse does apply to all light weapons as well as the rapier, whip, and spiked chain.
Crashy75
02-27-07, 01:11 AM I think the rule is reasonable.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Xeviat-DM 02-13-07, 11:21 PM	I have been playing D&D for a bit over 6 years now, and one design phillosophy has always struck me as paramount: If an ability is so good that everyone takes it, there is something wrong with the ability. This principal pointed out many of the issues with the Psionics Handbook, issues that were changed with the revision. Over my 6 years playing and DMing, I have noticed an issue with Weapon Finesse: Every rogue I've ever seen takes it (just like every Druid takes Natural Spell). Even rogues specializing in ranged combat find a way to pick up Weapon Finesse. This shows me that something is wrong with it. But I'm not here to say that Weapon Finesse is overpowered; I'm here to say that I believe Weapon Finesse may have been implimented improperly. Rather than requiring Weapon Finesse, I propose to make it a baseline ability. When wielding a light weapon, one may choose to use your Dexterity modifier or your Strength modifier to determine to hit. Weapon Finesse, instead, allows you to use your Dexterity modifier in place of your Strength modifier with one-handed weapons, as long as your off-hand is not holding a shield. My reasoning is that light weapons are light, and thus one can wield them with coordination rather than force. The ability to apply finesse to non-light weapons requires more training. To keep this Weapon Finesse out of every rogue's hand, I think it should have a Strength requirement; if you're very weak, you won't be able to finesse a 3 pound one-handed weapon like you could a 1 point light weapon. So, what do you think? I believe others have made this suggestion before, but I think it would improve the game in a minor way. High dex characters will be lead to light weapons, unless they want to spend a feat to use a one-handed weapon.
Mitchell 02-13-07, 11:53 PM	But the rapier is a one-handed weapon that is finesseable. What happens to it? If it remains finesseable under your proposal, then not much changes. Finesse fighters may take the feat so that they can finesse their martial weapons, but then you have issues of finessed large longswords or battleaxes through use of monkey grip. A better idea may be to get rid of it as a feat entirely, allow the weapons currently finesseable to be used as if the character had weapon finesse at their discretion, and be done with it. Same thing applies to power attack, too. Couldn't anyone swing really hard at the expense of accuracy?
Chimaera2000 02-14-07, 12:02 AM	Hmm.... let's see. The must-have feats that I know of are Natural Spell for the druid, Adaptive Style for the swordsage, and Weapon Finesse for the rogue. There are exceptions to this rule, but these do tend be taken in the vast majority of characters that I've seen played. What would be the effect of building any of these into the system? Ultimately, it'd save a feat which could be used for something else. For a rogue, having Weapon Finesse being built in means that they could pick up Weapon Finesse at 1st level, meaning that they could have what I feel to be the core trio of optimized rogue feats (Weapon Finesse, Improved Initiative and Two-Weapon fighting) by 3rd level instead of sixth. If they're human, you get them all at 1st level. Is this overpowered? Not particularly. It means that rogues and other Dex-based fighters will be effective sooner in their progression and will free up a feat for something else like Great Fortitude to bolster their weaknesses. Including the house rule that light weapons can be finessed automatically shouldn't make that much of a difference in-game one way or the other. At the very least, though, Weapon Finesse should lose have the BAB +1 requirement. Why have that requirement when any class with BAB +1 won't be needing Weapon Finesse to begin with?!? :nonono: All it does is artificially make the rogue and other Finesse-based classes sub-par in melee until 3rd level.
Vaelan 02-14-07, 01:36 AM	I don't even think Weapon Finesse is nice, let alone necessary, and middling-BAB roguish types are pretty much all I play. If I really needed the bonus to hit, I would take Leadership and get a Bard cohort. It gives a greater bonus than Weapon Finesse is likely to and has many other benefits.
wizarddog 02-14-07, 02:08 AM	What about rogues who gasp don't have a dexerity bonus? Weapon Finess then becomes useless to them. wizarddog
DarkRhystar 02-14-07, 03:03 AM	This shows me that something is wrong with it. You could go the exact opposite and say that there's something wrong with the fact that every Rogue you've had has been Dexterity-based. ;)
Willie the Duck 02-15-07, 01:41 AM	Building the game mechanics around the assumption of a dex based rogue is hardly mind blowing (even though my highest score for my rogues is usually int). Assuming that even ranged rogues pick up finesse is a leap. I agree with the general principle of this proposal, but fear that it detracts from what feats exist to do. Many feats simply grant a bonus to something a character already can do (say a +1 to an action, as in weapon focus, or a +4 to an action in certain situations, such as precise shot). Others allow you to do something you wouldn't otherwise be able to do (such as natural spell, or the divine feats). Lastly, you have feats that don't allow any new action or a specific bonus, but change the mechanic of how numeric scores are determined (using charisma instead of wisdom to determine will saves, or reducing magic item production costs by 25%). This last category is where weapon finesse exists. Removing weapon finesse from this field in no small way suggests that that this type of feat shouldn't exist. They should all be either automatic or class features. I find this unacceptable. I would instead suggest some other work-around. Either give the rogue early access to finesse (maybe make the feat prereqs bab+1 or rogue level 1), give them the feat free like a ranger gets endurance, or something similar. Either way, don't proclaim that this isn't the kind of thing a feat should cover. (I will point out that I tend to expect feats to be able to do alot of different things. I'm playing a 1st level human scout who took two home-brewed feats: one that gives him darkvision and another that lets him carry a medium load while still acting like he had a light load.)
Emeramber 02-15-07, 01:29 PM	I have to admit, I'd like to see certain weapons as inherently finessable, or even automatically finessed. A rapier, for example, is so very not about how hard you can swing it around, it is about precision. Yet an ogre does just as well with it as a greatclub (for hitting, not damage.) Then again, strength as accuracy has always seemed counter-intuitive. Media has brought me up on the idea of the nimble and accurate dodging about the flailing brute. If I were designing "3.75", I'd say most light melee weapons may use either strength or dexterity to hit, although strength is still used for damage. (I say most because I'm sure there's an exception somewhere.) There is a part of me that would like to make daggers and the like pure finesse, but that's probably going too far. I'd extend this to certain double weapons, if and only if they are being used as a light & one handed (whether 2WF or not. Just not weilding it as a 2H weapon.) The quarterstaff or lajatang, for example, should be finessable. As it is, 2WF a quarterstaff allows finesse on half of it... how odd is that? Certain weapons, such as the rapier, would automatically use finesse. Yeah... okay, rantble (rant+ramble) over.
WinterPsionic 02-15-07, 02:08 PM	What about rogues who gasp don't have a dexerity bonus? Weapon Finess then becomes useless to them. wizarddog :eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...heart attack CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT .....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....Flat line CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT :weep: Dead...
Vegepygmy 02-15-07, 02:45 PM	Over my 6 years playing and DMing, I have noticed an issue with Weapon Finesse: Every rogue I've ever seen takes it (just like every Druid takes Natural Spell). Even rogues specializing in ranged combat find a way to pick up Weapon Finesse. This shows me that something is wrong with it.I'm just going to say that my experience differs from yours, and leave it at that.
wonlee76 02-15-07, 03:57 PM	:eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...heart attack CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT .....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....Flat line CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT :weep: Dead... How about a slightly more realistic situation of a rogue who's strength score is equal to his dex score making Weapon Finesse pointless. I've had a few fighter/rogue types with that type of stat distribution.
Loki5654 02-15-07, 04:02 PM	I'm just going to say that my experience differs from yours, and leave it at that. Amen.
Aggrenox 02-15-07, 04:09 PM	At one point me and some of the Guys were playing around with the idea of an accuracy rating. Str+Dex/2: For melee, and Wis+Dex/2 for ranged (being that wisdom is the perception ability).
Xeviat-DM 02-15-07, 04:11 PM	In fact, I don't allow feats other than weapon finesse that swap the ability modifier for something, so perhaps that's what's leading me to this. Also, I've done some work with a foil and an epee, and tried the maneuvers out with an actual rapier; a rapier is not as light as an epee or foil. Finessing an actual rapier would be difficult. So, I'm saying that all light weapons would use Dex or Str to hit, since they're light. A rapier, and other one-handed weapons, would need weapon finesse. Giving the rapier the "finessable" trait makes it marginally more powerful than the scimitar (though one could argue the difference between piercing and slashing). But scimitar fighting styles, just like katana or even eastern longsword styles, could be seen as finessed. Why the distinction on the rapier, which isn't that much lighter than other one-handed swords?
Nezkrul 02-16-07, 09:43 AM	If I really needed the bonus to hit, I would take Leadership and get a Bard cohort. It gives a greater bonus than Weapon Finesse is likely to and has many other benefits. Leadership requires direct DM permission, and time to try to find your Bard cohort of the right level; Weapon Finesse does not.
xanadu 02-16-07, 05:52 PM	I think the OP is thinking too much. Weapon Finesse is perhaps a natural fit for the rogue but there is nothing wrong with that as power attack is a natural for barbarians. By making it free, you'll step on the toes of other classes (Swashbuckler) and make 1st and 2nd level rogues much more melee potent than they otherwise would be as you are giving them at least a +2 and probably a +3 to hit (in addition to scoring that sneak damage). Fighting a finesse-dextrous style is not automatic given a light mace or such. In fact, it strikes me as counter-intiutive as the basic martial instict for fighting is take take whatever weapon and swing with as much force as one can muster. It is something that has to be learned and requires discipline which makes sense as a feat.
Cromag 02-26-07, 10:01 AM	Armors purpose id to put a big chunk of something hard in between the enemy and you, whether this is metal/leather/kevlar that is it's purpose. Dexterity helps as you parry/dodge/weave/deflect incoming blows BAB is skillfully avoiding the hard bits to stab the soft flesh underneath. I always pictured Strength as punching though the armor and/or keeping a steady arm and true aim as the enemy atempts to parry Weapon finesse is using your dexterity to specifically target weak points in the armor and to beat an opponents attempts to parry/dodge/etc through your own natural speed and precision. It's two different fighting styles, weapon finesse requires more skill, that's why it's a feat. This is most likely why they require BAB +1.
bob_the_great 02-26-07, 12:21 PM	i like it as it is. weapon finesse is useful to classes other than the rogue; the rogue just tends to get the most from it. spell penetration is much more useful to an evoker than a conjurer. power attack is more useful to a barbarian than a paladin. making it free makes Dex, already the best ability, even better. weapon finesse represents training at placing your strikes in a way to compensate for a lack of strength behind them. making it free also makes the presumption that anyone can do it. anyone can swing a sword hard, not everyone can deftly place their strikes. weapon finesse represents this training. rogues already come out of the box with enough combat ability. if you want to excel in combat you can spend one of your feats. their role is skill-monkey, not combatant.
Gnarl 02-26-07, 03:30 PM	:eek: ...:eek: ...:eek: ...heart attack CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT .....I can't believe what I just read....someone tell me I read it wrong...a Rogue w/o a Dex bonus.....Flat line CLEAR ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT ZOOOTTTTT :weep: Dead... One of my players wants to play a fighter/rogue: full plate, ray deflection and spell sense (PH2 or Complete Mage alternate class features). She wants to focus on trapfinding and social skills. She figured she could use Improved Overrun instead of Tumble to get into flanking position. :D I can't wait to see this thing in play.
Jaxgaret 02-26-07, 03:53 PM	She figured she could use Improved Overrun instead of Tumble to get into flanking position. :D I can't wait to see this thing in play. That is AWESOME.
Xeviat-DM 02-26-07, 06:08 PM	Show of hands: When a rogue picks up weapon finesse and doesn't intend on two-weapon fighting, how many of them pick up the rapier? There is no reason what so ever, short of two-weapon fighting and the need to conceal a weapon, to not pick up a rapier with a finesse rogue; they're proficient in it, it has a higher threat range than a shortsword and more damage than a kukri. The rapier is my big reason for wanting to make all Light weapons automatically finessable. A feat would still be required to finesse one-handed and two-handed weapons. Light weapons deal less damage, and a finesser deals considerably less damage than a standard Str warrior (trust me, I watched a Str 10 shortsword finessing TWFing ranger suck at everything until we rebuilt his character as a Str warrior in the 3.5 change-over). An 18 Dex rogue with a shortsword will still deal considerably less damage than an 18 Str fighter with a greatsword. The likelyhood of the two having equal AC is high (due to the nature of many armors having their ACs and Max Dex's add up to 8), making that comparison equal. Without taking BAB into consideration, the rogue will have +4 to hit with a 1d6 19-20/x2 attack, while the fighter will have +4 to hit with a 2d6+6 19-20/x2 attack. You'd need 3d6 dice of sneak attack to equalize the damage. So, I'll leave this out here as an option for those who wish to see Finesse Warriors have not-so-hard of a time.
kalstrand 02-26-07, 09:05 PM	You are looking at the 3.0 version of Weapon Finesse. In 3.5 Weapon Finesse does apply to all light weapons as well as the rapier, whip, and spiked chain.
Crashy75 02-27-07, 01:11 AM	I think the rule is reasonable.