So I ask again to reiterate, why is it that adding this across the board would break the system? In fact, it makes so much sense and is so desirable that the game designers added it in the way of unchained rogues and weapon enhancements. There are systems out there better than Pathfinder at simulating blow-for-blow fencing or martial arts.īut we're deviating from the topic based on the number of threads I've read, the community agrees that adding one's dexterity modifier to finesse and ranged damage makes a certain sense, and is something that is widely desired. Perry does exist, but Pathfinder combat is on the abstraction side of the spectrum in order to simplify and speed up play. I understand that all role playing games reside somewhere on the spectrum between abstraction and simulation. "Logically speaking" is a term that, when applied to the abstractions of game mechanics, usually can be parsed as "I want this to be so." "Logically speaking" being very strong enables you to produce an equal and opposite force to incoming blows, thus negating their effectiveness, thus increasing your AC. Adding constitution to AC, your character being physically resilient, there's a logical argument for that. Hark wrote: Why not add strength to AC? Logically speaking, the physical power of a character helps in no way to avoid or absorb an attack. So what am I missing? Why is not adding your dexterity to finessed weapons and ranged attacks fair and balanced? Or alternatively, why is adding your dexterity damage to finessed and ranged weapons OP? For home games at level 8-14 the extra 4-6 damage is low compared to the sneak attack dice of rogues or anything a wizard can do frankly. As well, 1000+ gp to create a weapon that adds dexterity modifier to damage is a high cost when the strength fighter gets it automatically and can get a flat +1 to attack and damage for that same price.Įven when observed through the lens of Pathfinder Society, and extra 2-4 damage at low levels is mediocre at best IMHO. Two feats is a steep price to pay to be a viable character, let alone the penalty of adding damage only with strength via compound bows or thrown weapons, and not threatening thus no AOOs for ranged attackers without *another* feat and even then only within 5 feet. But when you look at the party as a whole, the melee fighter is free to take helpful feats like power attack, cleave, weapon focus, and the like to maximize his usefulness while a ranged fighter is nearly required to take point blank shot and precise shot just to be basically effective. Logically it follows that if a fighter uses a bow, should he add his dexterity modifier to attack and damage rolls it is fair and balanced when focused solely on the fighter. My theory revolves primarily around the fighter class both in the sense that I want a ranged fighter to be as effective as a melee fighter, as well as making sure that the fighter class doesn't become obsolete by allowing rogues or rangers to out-perform in and out of combat.Ī basic fighter adds his strength modifier to attack and damage modifiers. Why shouldn't I allow a) weapon finesse to add a PC's dexterity modifier to melee damage and b) ranged attacks get the dexterity modifier to damage. I feel I have a handle on the how, but now that I'm running a home game I want to understand the why. Mostly revolving around unchained rogues, agile weapon enhancement, gunslingers and mythic weapon finesse. There are a lot of threads about ways to add a PC's dexterity modifier to damage.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |