Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TheCheshireCat 09-07-07, 03:09 PM	I've been mulling this around in the empty space between my ears for a few hours now. How horrible would it be if I got rid of this feat, and granted it's effects for free on finessable weapons? I mean, it only makes sense to me that if you're proficient in a finessable weapon, you learned how to use it the way it benefits you most. My 8 str 16 dex rogue isn't going to learn how to smash a dagger through my enemies' armor as much as slip it in through the plates. And this goes doubly for, lets say, an exotic weapon that he might take a feat for. If he went through the time and effort to learn, lets say, how to fight with a Kukri, wouldn't he have learned it in the way that he would actually benefit from it? I can see the conversation now. Master: Ah, you finally learned how to use the graceful kukri to punch through the breastplate. It only took four days and the time it took to weaken the iron enough for you to get through. Student: Shouldn't I have learned how to slip it in through the seams? Master: NO! Do not question your master! No proficiency for you! Student: :bigeyes: Now, I'm away from my books at the moment, but I figure there's more than a few feat chains this might affect, which might take some working around, but does this seem terribly unreasonable to anyone?
Knightblde 09-07-07, 03:21 PM	Personally I think it is a worthless feat. In most games you can apply your ability scores where you would like. While Dex is nice for some AC and skills, I don't think it is all that great. In most games I play, I will swing more times than I will be swung upon. It costs half as much to add to my AC then it does to my attack. If I have more than one weapon, that price again doubles. For instance: 16 dex and 12 str = +1 to hit and damage +3 to AC It costs 37,000gp in magic armor and weapons to get a two weapon attacker to get +4 to hit and damage and +4 to AC. 12 dex and 16 str = +3 to hit and damage +1 to AC It costs 13,000gp in armor and weapons to get a two weapon attacker to get +4 to hit and damage and +4 to AC. or even, amazingly 12 dex and 16 str = +3 to hit and damage +1 to AC It costs 9,100gp in armor and weapons to get a two weapon attacker to get +4 to hit +3 to damage and +4 to AC So unless you REALLY want to be good at some skills, or you are worried about the max AC the game will allow, then I would never choose dex over strength and therfor never have a reason to take Weapon Finesse, unless of course it is a required pre-req for something I really wanted. Happy Gaming!
Nephlite 09-07-07, 03:27 PM	I've been mulling this around in the empty space between my ears for a few hours now. How horrible would it be if I got rid of this feat, and granted it's effects for free on finessable weapons? I mean, it only makes sense to me that if you're proficient in a finessable weapon, you learned how to use it the way it benefits you most. My 8 str 16 dex rogue isn't going to learn how to smash a dagger through my enemies' armor as much as slip it in through the plates. And this goes doubly for, lets say, an exotic weapon that he might take a feat for. If he went through the time and effort to learn, lets say, how to fight with a Kukri, wouldn't he have learned it in the way that he would actually benefit from it? I can see the conversation now. Master: Ah, you finally learned how to use the graceful kukri to punch through the breastplate. It only took four days and the time it took to weaken the iron enough for you to get through. Student: Shouldn't I have learned how to slip it in through the seams? Master: NO! Do not question your master! No proficiency for you! Student: :bigeyes: Now, I'm away from my books at the moment, but I figure there's more than a few feat chains this might affect, which might take some working around, but does this seem terribly unreasonable to anyone? Kukri are martial not exotic. Unless you are still 3.0?
TheCheshireCat 09-07-07, 03:29 PM	Er... actually, that's just my bad. Like I said, I'm away from my books, so I tried to choose a weapon that sounded exotic. Semtantics aside, the problem still works, just fit some finessable exotic weapon in there.
Rymosrac 09-07-07, 03:40 PM	As both a player and a national-level fencer, I completely agree with this. There is no rational way to wield a rapier or similar finessable weapon that involves arm strength more than coordination and precision. I grant weapon finesse for free in my games. But then, I also use the weapon group proficiency system in unearthed arcana.
RobbyPants 09-07-07, 04:40 PM	Well, the rogue in the party will certainly love you for doing this, espescially at levels 1 and 2. I don't think that it will kill your game. The monk may have become slightly less MAD. You will see a small shift in balance, but I don't think it's enough to ruin everything. I guess you'll have to find a decent substitute ability for the swashbuckler now... Although it looks like the post-errata cat just got back Weapon Finesse. Commoners beware! :hides:
TheRealOrion 09-07-07, 05:00 PM	Makes perfect sense to me, actually. I might institute this at my own future games.
TrustTymora 09-07-07, 06:13 PM	I wonder if it would make sense to use DEX bonus for attack and then strength damage bonus would be based on 'type' of weapon (1.5 / 1.0 / .5) for two-handed / normal / finesse type weapons. TT
Spikes01k 09-07-07, 06:27 PM	Well, the rogue in the party will certainly love you for doing this, espescially at levels 1 and 2. I don't think that it will kill your game. The monk may have become slightly less MAD. You will see a small shift in balance, but I don't think it's enough to ruin everything. I guess you'll have to find a decent substitute ability for the swashbuckler now... Although it looks like the post-errata cat just got back Weapon Finesse. Commoners beware! :hides: Actually the cat now has weapon finesse. As for the swashbuckler, just give a bonus fighter feat at level 4, 5, or 6. I think that would make the class a little better.
StevenO 09-07-07, 08:24 PM	I dislike the idea as it makes the DEX ability that much more powerful. I'd say CON is the most important ability because it governs hp, Fort Saves, and if it drop to zero you're dead but Dexterity is already the most useful ability it terms of what it does. What DEX normally does: Improves your initiative, improves your AC, improves your reflex save, improves your ranged attacks, and finally governs a large number of useful skills along with serving as gatekeeper for a number of feats. In a fight STR may determine how well and hard you land your melee blows and how much you can carry to the fight but after that everything else about combat favors DEX. Giving DEX free reign in the melee attack department as well (ok, weapons are limited but still) is just assigning too much importance to that one stat. If you would take away making a Finesse pay for their attack bonus what is going to be next, give them a damage bonus because the are so fast they can hit where it hurts most?
TheRealOrion 09-07-07, 08:34 PM	Given that finesse is about four weapons, I don't think it's that unbalancing, but you do make a good point. DEX already does a LOT of stuff.
Defraeter 09-07-07, 08:51 PM	Given that finesse is about four weapons, I don't think it's that unbalancing, but you do make a good point. DEX already does a LOT of stuff. Light weapon is not one weapon but a class of weapons... like dagger, short sword, Kama, etc...
StevenO 09-07-07, 09:30 PM	Given that finesse is about four weapons, I don't think it's that unbalancing, but you do make a good point. DEX already does a LOT of stuff. Only four weapons are used with finesse? Lets see: 1. Unarmed Attacks/Touch attacks. 2. ALL light weapons including Light Shields 3. Rapier 4. Spiked Chain I guess you could say only four weapon but then if you start expanding you start getting other weapons like Elven Thinblades and such.
StruckingFuggle 09-07-07, 09:36 PM	At first I thought you were gonna say, based on the title, that you wanted to remove WF from the game entirely. Which would have made me a sad Pandragon. :( I like this idea, yes I do. Yes, it's a small power boost, by giving Dex fighters a few new tricks by letting them have a feat free, but ... gasp! I don't see it as being game-breaking in the least. It lets some people hit better or have an extra trick, but... oh well. I think I'm going to use this in my games from now on. Good idea!
Eikre 09-07-07, 10:18 PM	As both a player and a national-level fencer, I completely agree with this. There is no rational way to wield a rapier or similar finessable weapon that involves arm strength more than coordination and precision. Of course there's a rational way. As a bloody awful modern fencer, but a damned decent historical swordsman, I can offer up the vouch. A rapier is long and unwieldy for the purpose, but it's much heavier than a foil and it's got a nip enough to cut flesh if you make a swing with it. Let me repeat that it's heavy, though; only two or three pounds, but I just can't imagine it as the same weapon as your dry foil. An epee might convince me of your point because they compare so well to smallswords, but testimonials of streetfighting and some more notable Scots have given that a kick back towards STR. Either way, there's enough mass in a Rapier that your ability to lift it counts for something (Let me note here that I actually took a substantial bit of time to type up and delete a dozen caring, though needlessly hostile, paragraphs, without really going anywhere approaching my point. So I got rid of them. Maybe I'll use them later.) And there are people that can win against more graceful people with less refined tactics. As the difference in STR widens, so too does the ability to push people around. I know these people, and there should be one in every little posse of aspiring swordsman receiving instruction from whatever creditable chapter of the hobby they can; they watch the instructor, pick up a few things, and then go to wage their newbie skills against a shorter bloke and end up doing so much that the more calculating man thinks is wrong, and he wins anyway. Because he's knocking the blade around and being intimidating, which he probably shouldn't, and trying to stiff-wrist when he doesn't have superior leverage or angle, which he shouldn't, and placing himself in bad positions but recovering more quickly than the other bloke because he can whip his sword all the hell around and his opponent is sorta getting tired after the half-hour of drills. And he can do this, because he's stronger, and his opponent hasn't taken Weapon Finesse yet. When the acquisition of the feat happens, of course, then the other man has a higher AC and but he can hit just as often. (Christ, and now I'm finding myself looking up McBane and watching YouTube videos trying to cull reasons for you. I'm scratching for creditable anecdotes, but I truthfully tried not to paid attention.) Look, STR has it's place, and tap-reflexes require training. The Devil has been advocated. It'd be my pleasure to carry out a debate, though.
TheCheshireCat 09-07-07, 10:59 PM	What I'm drawing from your argument is that dexterity and strength can be balanced in terms of fencing, but the stronger you are compared to the other person, the more you pull away in terms of winning actual fights (not just touching). I think it's still simulated in that having a high STR gives you more damage per swing than the high DEX, thereby giving them an edge in a match. Would I be incorrect in asserting this?
StevenO 09-08-07, 12:17 AM	More damage may end a fight sooner but it has to connect first. High Str vs High Dex ideally has the increased hits from STR reduced by the increased AC from DEX. A problem does start to devolope when you make both offense and defense key off the same ability as not only are you becoming harder to hit with each DEX modifier you'd also be hitting more often. A problem with making Weapon Finesse free to all is that it starts off rogues as the combat kings. Most likely a fighter will be balancing the three physical scores to some degree while a rogue would only worry about one or two. Then they then meet in combat the figher will not have an easy time hitting the rogue because of its dex while the rogue, using its DEX mod. for attacks, would probably be attacking with the same or perhaps better final attack modifier.
Eikre 09-08-07, 12:29 AM	When it comes to most thrusting weapons, a touch is a kill. A sharpened end made of steel requires little pressure to wound or kill, and it's by that pressure rating that modern fencing establishments determine legitimate touches, anyway. For the record? I think your system is absolutely fine. You can already get as much with a minimal gold investment and a inconsequential sacrifice to damage with the Feycraft property, so it's like giving Eschew Materials to a sorcerer. It's an advantage, but nothing is breaking, and nothing seems to be obsoleted besides that which has been removed. But I'm going to continue to defend my chosen side, and I'd like to assert that the stronger man will always retain his strength as an advantage, in real life and in the game; it may become nearly inconsequential, but it'll always be a benefit. So the difference between the RAW and your system is that Weapon Finesse is an ability that's given freely to all combatants, even though it's a skill that I attest might be specifically attained.
BM15 09-08-07, 01:21 AM	Personally, I like the idea; it does make sense that one would learn to use a weapon in the most advantageous way for them to begin with. I would say that, if you are proficient with the weapon, you can finesse it (providing the weapon is a finesse weapon). I like it as much as giving the Sorcerer Eschew Materials are level one (but only for spontanous arcane spells; if he takes levels of Wizard, he needs a pouch for those spells). It has some flavor and doesn't break the game.
Ranger REG 09-08-07, 02:18 AM	I've been mulling this around in the empty space between my ears for a few hours now. How horrible would it be if I got rid of this feat, and granted it's effects for free on finessable weapons? Now, I'm away from my books at the moment, but I figure there's more than a few feat chains this might affect, which might take some working around, but does this seem terribly unreasonable to anyone? If you do that, then you make Strength less important and Dexterity the most important ability score since it has the most applications in game-play. It would get even worse if this applies to 4e which may use the level-based damage bonus found in the Saga Edition rules.
StruckingFuggle 09-08-07, 03:36 AM	If you do that, then you make Strength less important and Dexterity the most important ability score since it has the most applications in game-play. For certain characters ... and is that really all that bad?
RobbyPants 09-08-07, 09:09 AM	Actually the cat now has weapon finesse. Last I read, it was removed from the cat in the MM errata because the cat didn't meet the prereqs of +1 BAB. This happened to several monsters and animals in the book. I think cats got Stealthy in compensation. Granted, I don't feel it's an unreasonable bonus feat to grant the cat, as the monster doesn't need to meet the prereqs of bonus feats (marked with a B in the feat entry)
Rymosrac 09-08-07, 11:46 AM	Advocation of devils and the like. I fence Epee, foils are silly little toys for small children. And you are correct, strength far from useless to a fencer. I too witness on a continual basis people who use strength to control the weapon of a smaller guy who isn't quick enough to avoid them. This kind of thing is the main reason that use of DEX shouldn't be forced with finessable weapons, STR should still be a viable option with those weapons for characters who would benefit from it more. Perhaps the ability to properly use DEX instead of STR should require the dedication and training associated with a feat. I'll admit it took quite a while before I could perform many of the more dexterous parries, counters, feints and footwork. You know, I could see a case for granting power attack for free, similar to this. I mean, how much training does it take to make wild, powerful swings with a large piece of metal? Perhaps instead of simply granting weapon finesse for free, players could be offered a free choice between power attack and weapon finesse at character creation.
StevenO 09-08-07, 02:38 PM	If you do that, then you make Strength less important and Dexterity the most important ability score since it has the most applications in game-play. It would get even worse if this applies to 4e which may use the level-based damage bonus found in the Saga Edition rules. For certain characters ... and is that really all that bad? Giving everyone free weapon Finesse makes Str less important and Dex more important for EVERY character that doesn't already rely on a high STR score. Now instead of having to balance STR and DEX to maintain a chance at hitting in combat because I don't have space for the feat I can just dump my STR score and boost my DEX. You may not hit as hard but you'll hit as often and with that higher dex comes all the other advantages that DEX offers over STR. By RAW, the only real advantage STR has over DEX is that it typically governs melee combat which is fairly prevalent in D&D; shifting STR's attack over to DEX (even if optional) weakens STR while increasing the already powerful DEX. When it comes to most thrusting weapons, a touch is a kill. A sharpened end made of steel requires little pressure to wound or kill, and it's by that pressure rating that modern fencing establishments determine legitimate touches, anyway. For the record? I think your system is absolutely fine. You can already get as much with a minimal gold investment and a inconsequential sacrifice to damage with the Feycraft property, so it's like giving Eschew Materials to a sorcerer. It's an advantage, but nothing is breaking, and nothing seems to be obsoleted besides that which has been removed. But I'm going to continue to defend my chosen side, and I'd like to assert that the stronger man will always retain his strength as an advantage, in real life and in the game; it may become nearly inconsequential, but it'll always be a benefit. So the difference between the RAW and your system is that Weapon Finesse is an ability that's given freely to all combatants, even though it's a skill that I attest might be specifically attained. Even with a thrusting weapon a touch does NOT equal a kill. A good point may make it easier but you still have to get through any armor and still hit something vital. Equating thrusting weapons with Weapon Finesse doesn't help either because there a number of non-thrusting weapons that are subject to use with weapon finesse. What is the gp equivalent for weapon finesse and where would I find it? If it is a weapon property then it only applies to a single weapon which makes a direct comparison iffy at best. Eschew Materials effectively replaces a 5gp item (PHB pg128) so I don't think comparing it Weapon Finesse is at all valid. The only thing Eschew Materials does is to effectively prevent a spellcaster from getting "disarmed" of his component pouch which rarely happens in most campains. On the other hand I imagine every rogue would take advantage of free weapon finesse in just about every combat they ever partake in.
StruckingFuggle 09-08-07, 02:43 PM	Giving everyone free weapon Finesse makes Str less important and Dex more important for EVERY character that doesn't already rely on a high STR score. Now instead of having to balance STR and DEX to maintain a chance at hitting in combat because I don't have space for the feat I can just dump my STR score and boost my DEX. You may not hit as hard but you'll hit as often and with that higher dex comes all the other advantages that DEX offers over STR. By RAW, the only real advantage STR has over DEX is that it typically governs melee combat which is fairly prevalent in D&D; shifting STR's attack over to DEX (even if optional) weakens STR while increasing the already powerful DEX. Maybe strength needs some other uses. Or skills. Besides. It's still a fair component of damage for most people who's attacks actually matter, and a fair chunk of the people who rely on high-dex attacks already take Finesse and de-emphasize str, so I don't see it making much of a change on the "distribution of statistics" front.
Arminel 09-08-07, 06:00 PM	Adding to Eikre's post, there's always more than one way to skin a cat. If you've never seen it, try and find a demonstration of a German-style rapier. If that isn't STR-based, I don't know what is.
StevenO 09-08-07, 08:30 PM	Maybe strength needs some other uses. Or skills. Besides. It's still a fair component of damage for most people who's attacks actually matter, and a fair chunk of the people who rely on high-dex attacks already take Finesse and de-emphasize str, so I don't see it making much of a change on the "distribution of statistics" front. Exactly. "People who rely on high-dex attacks already take Finesse" means that the ability is worth the feat so why give it to them for free? What free weapon finesse means is that people who normally don't rely on high-dex for attacks can now suddenly afford it because they no longer need to pay for a feat to make their DEX useful in combat. I could certainly see some clerics dumping STR for DEX when that high DEX will get them more benefits and still let their attacks hit. It may not shift the point distribution for classes that normally dump STR but many of them wouldn't take Finesse but now suddenly gain a nice attack bonus from the DEX they take for other reasons. Honestly, the only class type that wouldn't gain much (any) benefit from Free Finesse are the current high STR tanks. However they'd see an influx of competition as Rogues now hit as well or better than they do and possibly for more damage per hit while possibly questionable tounch attacks by casters now become sure things. As for STR in DnD it is one of the most important sats but only for some limited reasons. Without STR you have a harder time carrying around all the things it seems like the typical adventuring party carries around although different styles of gameplay make this unimportant. Then there is melee combat which is a big part of DnD. Removing part of STR's benefit over to DEX basically kills half the reason to having a good STR score to begin with. Maybe STR needs more skills and other things based on it but even then its importance will probably never compare to DEX in overall use.
StruckingFuggle 09-08-07, 09:52 PM	However they'd see an influx of competition as Rogues now hit as well or better than they do and possibly for more damage per hit while possibly questionable tounch attacks by casters now become sure things. Rogues: What would they be spending the extra feat on that gives them the possibility to hit as well or better than high-str fighters, that also lets them "possibly do more damage per hit", too? Wizards: Easy enough, make it for melee weapons only (bam, no touch attacks), and maybe only if you have a class with mid or high bab. Remember, you can't just say "it makes them stronger", you need to show some examples for how it actually will.
TheCheshireCat 09-08-07, 09:56 PM	I'm confused as to why you think they'll outdamage on a per-hit basis. STR is still what gives you the extra damage, even with weapon finesse. Is there something I'm missing?
navar100 09-08-07, 11:42 PM	Rogues: What would they be spending the extra feat on that gives them the possibility to hit as well or better than high-str fighters, that also lets them "possibly do more damage per hit", too? Wizards: Easy enough, make it for melee weapons only (bam, no touch attacks), and maybe only if you have a class with mid or high bab. Remember, you can't just say "it makes them stronger", you need to show some examples for how it actually will. I'm confused as to why you think they'll outdamage on a per-hit basis. STR is still what gives you the extra damage, even with weapon finesse. Is there something I'm missing? I'm guessing easier to hit with sneak attack.
Crusher217 09-09-07, 12:07 AM	More damage may end a fight sooner but it has to connect first. High Str vs High Dex ideally has the increased hits from STR reduced by the increased AC from DEX. A problem does start to devolope when you make both offense and defense key off the same ability as not only are you becoming harder to hit with each DEX modifier you'd also be hitting more often. I hope they adress this whole subject by introducing an armor, not dex included, is DR in 4E.
StruckingFuggle 09-09-07, 01:00 AM	I'm guessing easier to hit with sneak attack. Most rogues who focus on SA already have Finesse. Making it automatic just gives them another feat to their build. As I said: for most people who'll be effected by free finesse in a significant way, they already take Finesse. So giving them it for free is less likely to raise their attack bonus, and more likely to be functionally the same as just giving them a free feat. I hope they adress this whole subject by introducing an armor, not dex included, is DR in 4E. Oh man, I hope not. Armor becomes useless against things with huge damage output. Which would you rather have? Be hit by something that hits for 50 damage 25% less of the time, or be hit by the same thing for 42 damage more often? (assuming a tradeoff there, +4 armor bonus or DR 8/-)
Shadowhowler 09-09-07, 03:26 AM	Yes... I am in favor of getting rid of Weapon finesse as a feat. Until a year ago... I was still playing D&D 2.5, my group having avoided switching to 3.0/3.5 for the 7 or so years it was out. We already used a house rule that effectivly gave Weapon Finesse on the approprate weapons for free, as well as an ability almost exactly like power attack for free. Power attack really bothers me. I have to burn a FEAT just to swing REALLY friggin hard? Lame. Weapon Finesse as a feat annoys me equaly.
StevenO 09-09-07, 02:03 PM	Rogues: What would they be spending the extra feat on that gives them the possibility to hit as well or better than high-str fighters, that also lets them "possibly do more damage per hit", too? Wizards: Easy enough, make it for melee weapons only (bam, no touch attacks), and maybe only if you have a class with mid or high bab. Remember, you can't just say "it makes them stronger", you need to show some examples for how it actually will. In short, a halfling rogue at level one. When wielding a weapon with free finesse they can now take TWF to gain a second attack such that they now have two attacks at the same bonus they'd only have had a single attack with before. The difference may even be much larger because I this is just looking at the -1 they'd normally take from STR on a single attack and then converting that into a +1 for DEX from finesse and then apply thhe -2 for TWF. Most rogues who focus on SA already have Finesse. Making it automatic just gives them another feat to their build. As I said: for most people who'll be effected by free finesse in a significant way, they already take Finesse. So giving them it for free is less likely to raise their attack bonus, and more likely to be functionally the same as just giving them a free feat. So just because most rogue already take Finesse it should be fine to give it to everyone for free because it effectively gives the rogue another feat? Sure it helps some other classes provided you don't confuse the issue by not allowing finesse to work on touch attacks but it doesn't do anything for a character with STR > DEX. If this is the reason why bother giving everyone free Weapon Finesse and instead just give every character another bonus feat? We should probably move this extra feat to 2nd level so you can get the BAB to qualify for finesse and then that would give characters a feat at each of their first three levels. I'm confused as to why you think they'll outdamage on a per-hit basis. STR is still what gives you the extra damage, even with weapon finesse. Is there something I'm missing? Free weapon finesse will not change damage output on a per hit basis. What it does is change the hit rate for various characters. By moving the attack bonus to DEX for the affected characters you increase the chance of them dealing that damage to begin with. Power Attack may increase damage on a per-hit basis but for attacks where moderate rolls are needed it may actually DECREASE the average damage per attack because your hitting less to hit harder. Similiarly anything that increases your chance to hit will increase your average damage output even if it doesn't change how much you do per hit. With STR vs DEX to attack with it is even a little more complicated. If you accept that a better chance to hit improves average damage then you can already see why finesse is good for characters with DEX > STR. That problem is compounded because a better DEX usually means better AC thus fewer hits landing which then lowers your opponents average damage. I'm not going to show the math but there is definitely a point where each +1 to hit is far more valuable than a +1 to damage and that is especially true when that +1 to hit is also tied to your AC, reflex save, and initiative modifier.
StruckingFuggle 09-09-07, 02:58 PM	In short, a halfling rogue at level one. When wielding a weapon with free finesse they can now take TWF to gain a second attack such that they now have two attacks at the same bonus they'd only have had a single attack with before. The difference may even be much larger because I this is just looking at the -1 they'd normally take from STR on a single attack and then converting that into a +1 for DEX from finesse and then apply thhe -2 for TWF. You should have done the comparison with a human, because a human rogue can do that at level 1 already (as could a strongheart halfling, or a halfling with a Flaw...). Really, I'm not impressed. So just because most rogue already take Finesse it should be fine to give it to everyone for free because it effectively gives the rogue another feat? No, not at all. You're confusing my arguments for "how it probably won't be broken" with my argument for "why I'm going to do it". Sure it helps some other classes provided you don't confuse the issue by not allowing finesse to work on touch attacks Yeah, that was a bad idea. Hah. I'm more for "only give it if your first class level is in 3/4 or full bab". but it doesn't do anything for a character with STR > DEX. Why should it? If this is the reason why bother giving everyone free Weapon Finesse and instead just give every character another bonus feat? We should probably move this extra feat to 2nd level so you can get the BAB to qualify for finesse and then that would give characters a feat at each of their first three levels. The point is specifically to make finesse warriors more viable, not provide everyone, regardless of class, with another feat - giving everyone another feat is a lot more powerful than giving them Finesse. Especially for everyone else who has no use for it. That's why. Free weapon finesse will not change damage output on a per hit basis. What it does is change the hit rate for various characters. By moving the attack bonus to DEX for the affected characters you increase the chance of them dealing that damage to begin with. Really, this is all I can say on that: OH NO! My standpoint here is that it shouldn't take a whole feat for finesse warriors to be as good at hitting people as strength-based warriors. With STR vs DEX to attack with it is even a little more complicated. If you accept that a better chance to hit improves average damage then you can already see why finesse is good for characters with DEX > STR. Of course it is. Is anyone debating that? That problem is compounded because a better DEX usually means better AC thus fewer hits landing which then lowers your opponents average damage. That depends on the max dex bonus of your armor. Keep in mind, most armors of various categories have X+Y = a flat number, where X is armor bonus and Y is max dex - a higher dex doesn't at all really mean a higher AC, because to take advantage of it you need to wear lighter armor. What it does mean is higher initiative, higher touch AC, lower flat-footed AC, and a better reflex save. I'm not going to show the math but there is definitely a point where each +1 to hit is far more valuable than a +1 to damage and that is especially true when that +1 to hit is also tied to your AC, reflex save, and initiative modifier. Tied to your Touch AC, and loosely, indirectly tied to your General AC.
StevenO 09-09-07, 11:11 PM	You should have done the comparison with a human, because a human rogue can do that at level 1 already (as could a strongheart halfling, or a halfling with a Flaw...). Really, I'm not impressed. I give an example and it isn't good enough:( Just to be clear Weapon Finesse/Two Weapon Fighting is NOT an option for a starting rogue under the RAW. Don't forget Weapon Finesse has that little +1 BAB prereq that many who do take the feat complain about. but it doesn't do anything for a character with STR > DEX. Why should it? So why should weapon finesse be a free option for everyone even if it doesn't do them any good? The point is specifically to make finesse warriors more viable, not provide everyone, regardless of class, with another feat - giving everyone another feat is a lot more powerful than giving them Finesse. Especially for everyone else who has no use for it. That's why. So instead of making any character more viable by giving them all a free feat you'd just give every character a free feat wether or not they can take advantage of it. Yes, free feats for all would be powerful but no more so than giving a certain free feat to all with each class being able to use it to different degrees. Really, this is all I can say on that: OH NO! My standpoint here is that it shouldn't take a whole feat for finesse warriors to be as good at hitting people as strength-based warriors. And why shouldn't it take a whole feat? If you're giving away free feats because "I'm not as good as him" at whatever why should it be limited to finesse warriors. That depends on the max dex bonus of your armor. Keep in mind, most armors of various categories have X+Y = a flat number, where X is armor bonus and Y is max dex - a higher dex doesn't at all really mean a higher AC, because to take advantage of it you need to wear lighter armor. What it does mean is higher initiative, higher touch AC, lower flat-footed AC, and a better reflex save. It is true that (armor + Max Dex) is pretty much +8 AC but unless your already at that Max Dex the improved Dexterity generally improves your AC. Now don't overlook the advantages of lighter weight armors; I can certainly see some characters with a DEX 16 giving up their Breastplates for a Chain Shirt for the reduced ACP and ability to move faster. Although it doesn't come into play to often remember that wearing no armor means no Max DEX so AC for those characters continues to rise. Without being restricted by armor most arcane caster types only see the benefits of a high DEX and if allowed to apply that modifier to attacks as well will see a big jump in their normal attack bonus. Sure arcane casters don't get into melee often but when they do a +2 attack modifier is a lot better than a -1 modifier and normally a much bigger percent of their BAB as well. Do what you want in your own game as it will not matter what gets said here. If a DM had free weapon finesse it would probably alter my character creation a bit. If a player came to me asking for it I'd tell the 'NO'. As long as the players and DM can agree on a houserule anything can be done but just be aware that the end result may not be a game most of us are familiar with.
Ranger REG 09-10-07, 02:05 AM	For certain characters ... and is that really all that bad? Yeah. But if you prefer Dex to apply to all melee and ranged attack rolls by default, then you might as well drop D&D and play the other RPGs. :bored:
StruckingFuggle 09-10-07, 02:20 AM	Don't forget Weapon Finesse has that little +1 BAB prereq that many who do take the feat complain about. There is that, but I think that level 1 sucks enough already that giving Finesse to rogues and other light warriors isn't really all that breaking level 1. So why should weapon finesse be a free option for everyone even if it doesn't do them any good? Well then they wouldn't take it. /shrug It's an option, not a mandate. And why shouldn't it take a whole feat? If you're giving away free feats because "I'm not as good as him" at whatever why should it be limited to finesse warriors. 'Cause life's not fair. :P I guess all told I don't even think Finesse should be a feat. Or at least, just a feat - maybe make it like the armor and weapon profs, where they're technically feats, but they're also given free to a whole lot of classes. Hm ... Yes, in fact, now that I say it I think that that's exactly how it should be. And it's no more required to be fair or even-handed than how only some people get certain armor or weapon profs at first level.. It is true that (armor + Max Dex) is pretty much +8 AC but unless your already at that Max Dex the improved Dexterity generally improves your AC. Now don't overlook the advantages of lighter weight armors; I can certainly see some characters with a DEX 16 giving up their Breastplates for a Chain Shirt for the reduced ACP and ability to move faster. Although it doesn't come into play to often remember that wearing no armor means no Max DEX so AC for those characters continues to rise. Hm. True. Yet you still can't say that "focusing less on Dex means more AC" (for most people) Without being restricted by armor most arcane caster types only see the benefits of a high DEX and if allowed to apply that modifier to attacks as well will see a big jump in their normal attack bonus. Sure arcane casters don't get into melee often but when they do a +2 attack modifier is a lot better than a -1 modifier and normally a much bigger percent of their BAB as well. New solution to that: exclude most spellcasters from the list of classes that get weapon finesse as a free feat at first level. Do what you want in your own game as it will not matter what gets said here. If a DM had free weapon finesse it would probably alter my character creation a bit. If a player came to me asking for it I'd tell the 'NO'. As long as the players and DM can agree on a houserule anything can be done but just be aware that the end result may not be a game most of us are familiar with. "not be a game most of us are familiar with"? You make it sound like it's a huge sweeping change that'll do profound things to the game... o.o Yeah. But if you prefer Dex to apply to all melee and ranged attack rolls by default, then you might as well drop D&D and play the other RPGs. Huh. Why do you suggest that? Either way, nah, I think I'll continue to stick with modded D&D. That's one of the nice things about the game. Some things are easy to change.
bkdubs123 09-10-07, 02:58 AM	Get. Rid. Of. Weapon Finesse. Hey, while you're at it, get rid of all sorts of idiotic feats like Power Attack, Short Haft, and I dunno... Precise Shot. Basically, feats that anyone has to take to be viable for their weapon choice get a little foolish for me. If the ability provided is so integral to the styles of play they are intended for than why aren't they actually integrated into the proficiency for the weapon? I want to do away with/relax the requisites on a great number of feats though so I'm a bit biased on this issue.
StruckingFuggle 09-10-07, 03:21 AM	Hey, while you're at it, get rid of all sorts of idiotic feats like Power Attack, Short Haft, and I dunno... Precise Shot. I can get behind all of those except Short Haft, but I'm for upgrading Short Haft to basically be "this weapon strikes reach and adjacent at no penalty" (at some sort of pre-requisite), because I like the idea of "donut" weapons. Beyond that one little disagreement, though ... rock on.
runestar 09-10-07, 03:33 AM	I hope they adress this whole subject by introducing an armor, not dex included, is DR in 4E. They would also need to revise just about every aspect of combat in that case, if armour became AC. It just doesn't work as is.:P
Johnny_Angel 09-10-07, 03:37 AM	If I were a player with a high STR score, I'd expect to get powerful throw for free if high DEX characters got Weapon Finesse for free.
StruckingFuggle 09-10-07, 04:13 AM	If I were a player with a high STR score, I'd expect to get powerful throw for free if high DEX characters got Weapon Finesse for free. Well if that was the area where you primarily focused your combat training (or you were a fighter), maybe.
TheCheshireCat 09-10-07, 11:07 AM	My point is that it stretches the suspension of disbelief, to have to retrain yourself in a weapon you're supossed to be proficient with to learn how to do it in the way most advantageous to you. For instance, I'm in the Air Force and I learned how to defend myself with a combat knife. I'm tall, but of a slight frame. There's no WAY I would have become "proficient" in the knife if I had learned it the way our instructor uses it, he who is 250lbs of mountain. I figure I'm finessing the weapon, and I didn't have to take any more time to learn it than did the other people in my class. I do, however, see the point that was made that high dex increases the to hit chance AND the AC. But in the end, most people would end up with a higher touch AC, lower flatfooted AC, and the same total AC, no? I'm thinking this might open the door to DEX based fighters and the like. Fighter's which might take a 10 for STR, but then choose finessable weapons. My one question is, as again, I'm away from my books at the moment, are you allowed to power-attack with a finessable weapon? This might be the reason to go with a class based "finesse proficiency" option. And, should I go with the "finesse proficiency", what should I give to the Tanks? And should I give something to the spellcasters, different from the other two types? I appreciate the insights that everyone has given so far, it's helped to clear up and bring to light many problems that I have/have not forseen.
StruckingFuggle 09-10-07, 11:38 AM	My one question is, as again, I'm away from my books at the moment, are you allowed to power-attack with a finessable weapon? This might be the reason to go with a class based "finesse proficiency" option. Yep. But most finessable weapons are either light (and those that aren't are exotic), so they don't exactly benefit from Power Attack. (I may be forgetting a weapon or two)
Shadowhowler 09-10-07, 01:47 PM	Yep. But most finessable weapons are either light (and those that aren't are exotic), so they don't exactly benefit from Power Attack. (I may be forgetting a weapon or two) Most notable power attacking finessable weapon is the spiked chain, since it is two handed. Stupid spiked chain...
StruckingFuggle 09-10-07, 03:13 PM	<s>Stupid</s>Awesome spiked chain... Fixed for ya. :D
Shadowhowler 09-11-07, 10:57 PM	Fixed for ya. :D Heh. :P Yes, mechanicly, it is in fact awesome... but the IDEA of the weapon is just plain stuid, IMO.
Hanzo187 09-12-07, 09:25 PM	You know, why not, during character creation, allow any character to make one Light weapon that the character is proficient in (such as a short sword, kukri, dagger, or kama), and make it a Finesse weapon for that character. That way, you get a bit of a comprimise, and flavor-wise, the character would have a specialty weapon (if he's a stealthy or finesse-y character). You could restrict it further to only characters w/ 15+ Dex at the time of creation. Maybe that would work?
Finarin Panjoro 09-13-07, 09:30 AM	While I agree that in reality that is how training would work (a dextrous warrior would train to finesse rather than use strength) I think it is a mechanically disastrous decision to allow this for free. Dexterity is already governs to many bonuses compared to Str and Con. This removes any difficulty in the deciding between strength and dexterity. For game balance reasons, Weapon Finesse is a great feat. It is also a very valuable feat that is frequently taken despite its existing cost. This tells me it is also a well balanced feat. Making a 'finesse proficiency' doesn't seem to change anything if you still have to take that feat (or be awarded it by a class, but then its essentially free if all of the classes that would take weapon finesse get finesse proficiency).
yrogerg 09-14-07, 07:34 AM	While I agree that in reality that is how training would work (a dextrous warrior would train to finesse rather than use strength) I think it is a mechanically disastrous decision to allow this for free. Dexterity is already governs to many bonuses compared to Str and Con. This removes any difficulty in the deciding between strength and dexterity. For game balance reasons, Weapon Finesse is a great feat. It is also a very valuable feat that is frequently taken despite its existing cost. This tells me it is also a well balanced feat. Making a 'finesse proficiency' doesn't seem to change anything if you still have to take that feat (or be awarded it by a class, but then its essentially free if all of the classes that would take weapon finesse get finesse proficiency). I agree. The ability to narrow the number of ability scores you need in this manner should be worth a feat, or at least a class ability. However, I have never heard of any claims that rogues are underpowered in the game balance world, and need the power boost represented by a free feat to keep up with standard level-appropriate challenges. In fact, to the contrary: the amount of damage a rogue with TWF can do to a valid target is simply staggering. Yes, it only works in particular situations against particular monsters, but it's also not a rogue's only class ability. Basically, if you think that rogues (and wizards) are underpowered, this houserule might have merit. But, from a balance perspective, I personally don't see why they should be getting an extra free feat.
Mandarbgrim 09-14-07, 07:50 AM	Eikre's argument kinda reminds me of hearing decent chess players talk about how annoying it is to play someone who is smart, but doesn't actually know how to play. They do randomly stupid and illogical things that are very offputting and because of this can win the game.
smacfarl 09-14-07, 09:39 AM	So I think the think that balances a high dex that everyone is missing here is armor penetration. Sure the whole armor class idea is a simplistic model, but I think it's time to rethink this, to make things agree with common sense more. Most people who are talking strength issues in modern fencing are missing the fact you aren't wearing armor, and you don't have to physically wound your opponent. Consider the famous concluding sequence in the movie Rob Roy as the little fencer literally skewers the giant Scotsman, who ends up grabbing the blade of his opponents weapon cutting his hand wide open, so that he can take a massive swing with the larger sword in his other hand and slice the guy in half! So we have a classic dexterity vs strength combat with no armor. Strength makes the big guys grapple (and throws) if he had used them much more effective. We can also imagine that if they were pugilists the extra damage may stun, daze or knock out the smaller faster opponent if the blow can land. Where as the small more dextrous guy get lost of hits in, but does less damage with them. Maybe the strength also compliments constitution so bigger guys can take more damage. Now add in armor. If the big guy is in plate mail, it's really hard to see how the lighter weapon is going to penetrate. If the big guy is wearing chain gloves, when he grabs the smaller opponents weapon there's a good chance his hand would not even be cut. Of course this assumes that grappling in gauntlets permits as good a grip as bare handed. You could imagine this going either way depending on the nature of the material in the links within the gloves and how the hand compresses the links during the grip. So I think if you implement what would be a common sense amount of damage reduction based on armor hardness than an increased ability to hit, ends up balancing with the lesser or perhaps no amount of damage you do with each of those hits. The only argument I've read against the dexterity argument is the math model, of a +1 to hit beating a +1 damage over many successive roles. I think if you consider armor as a damage limiter than this disadvantage completely disappears. And also this works with common sense. Sure I can aim for some join spot in fresh full plate armor to get my blade into the wearer. But if I am in active combat this is a real feat. Most of my attacks are going to strike the armor proper, and I'm not going to get the edge of the blade through if I'm not really strong with a really sharp edge. As armor takes damage, perhaps through the current hardness model then more damage should get through to the wearer. If I am attacking a guy in chain mail, it should be easier to break some links and make some wholes in it to get to the wearer, than to punch through full plate, or god forbid adamanite. I have another scenarios outlined on this thread, using a maul http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=923299 Also I think the base feats like Power Attack, and Point Blank Shot should be the result of normal weapon proficiency. Anybody can pull a bow back, particularly one less than 20lb, but it takes proficiency to hit a target within 30' every time. Which brings up another topic. I think default bow ranges are too short, but that's another thread....
ruff0126 09-14-07, 11:23 AM	I would say the option of giving weapon finess to everyone is overpowered in the long run as str already has little to affect. If you did it I would only give it to FULL BAB classes and only at first level as they spend most of their time in serious weapon training, the 3/4 not so much and have to get a feat to qualify. So, either rogues all dip fighter at first level to get 2 nice feats, martial weapon and armor profs or they stay rogue get many more skill points and have to blow a feat to fight finessly. Ya that sounds more balanced. Just my 2cp :fight!:
MICKING 09-17-07, 03:04 PM	I don't agree with getting weapon finesse for free. it grants an ability like anyother feat and you wouldn't get those for free. so if your dex is higher then your strength; you're going to have to suck it up and get the feat.