Change to Weapon Finesse

[envida]

I have to say I agree with JediBob. I don

[KingofThieves]

I don't think it's too powerful either. At least from a natural build standpoint.

 

But when you take into account the amount of powerful uber items in the original KotOR games you can easily see why people would complain. Imagine having an 18 natural score for both strength and dex and then adding another combined + 14 from items. That would accumulate to quite the well-rounded player just as it is, let alone adding a feat that let you hit with both your str and dex modifiers...

 

Remember that the benefits of a balanced character in D&D and D20 is just that. Balance. It's SUPPOSED to be your attack rolls that you are sacrificing.

 

I do think that this type of thing would be GREAT for a prestige class. It's nice to fill out the jedi robe and still have some punch to your shot from a half-decent strength boni. But you should be concentrating on building this balance, same as you would a strength focussed character or dex focussed character.

[213374U]

Melee however, is another situation entirely.  In melee fighting, one's ability to hit a target is dependant on both the fighter's ability to power through opponents defenses and whether or not they're coordinated enough to swing where they aim.  The two attributes compliment each other.  Thus, I think it would be more realistic if the attack bonus was determned by a combination of the two.  However, this would represent a fundamental shift from the original structure of the game, and as such has probably been either overlooked, ignored, or deemed unnecessary.

I suggest you re-read the description of the Strength characteristic. It's not supposed to be just raw physical power but also the ability to get the most out of one's muscles, including wielding weapons at peak efficiency. That's why Dexterity doesn't influence attack rolls and damage bonuses. You see, following your reasoning, you could have a high dexterity increase the critical range of every weapon since you could argue you can have your PC 'aim' for critical spots. DEX works for lockpicking, but it doesn't help you much when you need to wield a two-handed sword.

 

 

Some more than others, particularly if they chose a poor means of presentation.  It's a shame that the discussion has to descend so quickly into profanity and infantile raving - behavior which I have been guilty of responding to in kind.  I suppose such is inevitable in situations where people are blessed with the protection of distance and anonymity.  Without the fear of repurcussions, the a**hole principle is in full affect.

What's that supposed to mean? That I wouldn't react the same way if you told that stuff in my face? You're making an awful lot of assumptions there, buddy.

 

May I remind you it was you who started the flamewar? I just came along for the ride. Really, you aren't going to impress anyone by using that patronizing tone. Show some of that maturity you claim to have, just forget it and move on.

 

 

I do think that this type of thing would be GREAT for a prestige class. It's nice to fill out the jedi robe and still have some punch to your shot from a half-decent strength boni. But you should be concentrating on building this balance, same as you would a strength focussed character or dex focussed character.

That is not such a bad idea. However, the class would have to have huge drawbacks regarding either skills or Force powers, lest we go back to the imbalance problem.

[JediBob]

... You see, following your reasoning, you could have a high dexterity increase the critical range of every weapon since you could argue you can have your PC 'aim' for critical spots. DEX works for lockpicking, but it doesn't help you much when you need to wield a two-handed sword.

 

You're blowing what I'm saying a little out of proportion. I know, you're just trying to prove a point, but still. Such extreme cases could be brought up for lots of things. For example, one could say that strength should affect ranged attacks, as weapons can be heavy (in particular heavy rifles - think of a SAW or portable gatling in modern terms). In such a situation, strength would affect how well a character could aim due to the fact that the stronger they were, the easier it would be to hold the weapon up to aim. What you're doing is the same as saying that because this argument could be made, then item weight shouldn't be included in the game. That doesn't seem to be the strongest platform to argue from to me.

 

Dexterity doesn't help much when you need to wield a two-handed sword? Um... ok. If that's the case, please explain to me how Weapon Finesse exists then. What is the Weapon Finesse feat if not a concession of the fact that Dexterity does affect accuracy with melee weapons (like a two-handed sword)? What you say would make a fine argument as to why Weapon Finesse shouldn't exist at all, but it doesn't really support why it should stay as it is. The current Weapon Finesse doesn't argue that Dexterity can't increase one's accuracy with melee weapons, just that it can't do so in tandem with Strength. It says that you're either accurate because you are strong, or because you're dextrous. The two are wholly separate, and one cannot assist the other. Come on man, you and I both know that's just crazy talk. If the point is that Dexterity doesn't affect the accuracy of melee weapons, then the feat should not exist at all. However, if it's elected that Weapon Finesse should stay, then people are admitting that Dexterity does indeed affect the accuracy of melee weapons, and as such the system should be implemented properly.

 

Listen Leet, I admitted that I flamed you, and that I shouldn't have. But lets not confuse things. My actions were a response to yours, not an initiation of hostilities. I posted; you responded to things I hadn't said. I pointed this out, and you became hostile. I then responded in kind. If you want to drop it, then sure, I'll drop it. If you haven't noticed, I grew tired of the whole thing several posts ago. Hence the relatively small amount of effort that I've been putting into it. Yes, I should let it go completely, but you're being hypocritical when you tell me that I should be mature and drop it, while all the while acting childish by continuing with it yourself. You said before that this was a waste of your time. Then, by all means, stop wasting it. We both should.

[><FISH'>]

OMG WTF IS WITH ALL THESE SUPER-HUGE-GIGANTIC-ENORMOUS POSTS??!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

[draakh_kimera]

@Jedibob:

 

The problem with the previous example is that a twohanded sword is twohanded for a reason: it's heavy! At least, most are. The point of weapon finesse is that instead of relying on brute force to hit an opponent you rely on quickness and agility, both which are quite hard to achieve with heavier melee weapons. As for strength affecting long ranged weapons, it's more a question of being strong enough to hold the weapon properly and having the stamina to keep it that way. As for having accuracy because of either strength or dexterity and why they can't work in tandem, well, it's two different ways of fighting. Either you choose to go at your opponent as hard as you can, hoping that they won't hit too hard, or you rely on your agility to not get hit and get in some hits, not necessarily strong. Also, it's damn near impossible to put raw strength and agility together so that you get the most out of both.

 

EDIT: It's also harder to rely on strenght when you're fighting with smaller or lighter weapons, and that's where finesse comes in...

[213374U]

You're blowing what I'm saying a little out of proportion.  I know, you're just trying to prove a point, but still.  Such extreme cases could be brought up for lots of things.  For example, one could say that strength should affect ranged attacks, as weapons can be heavy (in particular heavy rifles - think of a SAW or portable gatling in modern terms).  In such a situation, strength would affect how well a character could aim due to the fact that the stronger they were, the easier it would be to hold the weapon up to aim.

Yup. That's exactly the case. In D&D there are no such heavy ranged weapons, but rest assured that if I'm the GM I'm not going to allow a STR 8 character use a composite long bow, no matter what the rules say, because logic and common sense dictate it's not possible.

 

But all that isn't really relevant to the issue at hand. The fact is that acquiring weapon finesse means changing completely the way a character fights. Let's turn the argument around. If you allow the character to add its STR modifier to to hit rolls, then why don't add it to damage rolls too? After all, you are assuming that the character's STR has a role in wielding a weapon, so it makes sense that, the stronger the character, the harder they swing. The answer is obvious: because it would be too unbalancing, but it also points out a flaw in the logic of the original reasoning.

 

Weapon competence and weapon specialization are the feats that represent a character's proficiency with a certain weapon. Adding weapon finesse on top of that they way you're proposing would mean counting the same character trait (that is, skill with a particular weapon) twice. Weapon finesse isn't supposed to do that, because it's a fundamentally different concept.

 

That is as far as it goes following the rules to the letter. Now, if you ask me, weapon finesse works when you're talking about low weight weapons (weightless in the case of a lightsaber), but it really can't hold itself when you apply it to heavier/bulkier weapons. No matter how many years your character has spent studying under teh l33t n!nja master, there's no way in hell they're going to wield a halberd in a 'subtle' way. That's why I don't like weapon finesse at all, and that's the reason I'm so adamant about modifying it to be even more cheesy.

 

 

My actions were a response to yours, not an initiation of hostilities.  I posted; you responded to things I hadn't said.  I pointed this out, and you became hostile.  I then responded in kind.

Um, IIRC, you reacted badly when I called you a n00b. Well, sorry pal, but you're a n00b. We have all been, but still that doesn't change that fact. If you consider that an offense, this one's not going to be the last flamewar you're going to be involved in. Your call.

 

 

Yes, I should let it go completely, but you're being hypocritical when you tell me that I should be mature and drop it, while all the while acting childish by continuing with it yourself.

Hypocritical? Naw. You haven't been around long enough, but if you had, you'd know that I just flame people for fun. And it gets even better when it's them who start the flamefest. I have admitted it on several occasions. If anything, that makes me a jerk, albeit a coherent, honest one. )

 

 

OMG WTF IS WITH ALL THESE SUPER-HUGE-GIGANTIC-ENORMOUS POSTS??!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

It's called debating.

[JediBob]

OK, I'm going to try to respond, but you'll have to forgive me if my brain wanders a little. I've been up for over 30 hours and my thoughts aren't quite as lucid as they should be.

 

Quite true, a heavy weapon would prove more difficult to apply finesse to, whereas a light weapon would prove a less effective tool for applying strength. Still, the game doesn't differentiate between heavy and light weapons when applying bonuses for all Strength and all Dexterity characters, so I don't think it's really fair to do so for characters with both attributes.

 

You're also right when you say that it takes Strength to hold a ranged weapon and Stamina to keep it there. Of course, even Stamina is dependant upon Strength. Have two people hold a dumbell in front of them in their outstretched hands and you'll notice the stronger one will last longer. And that's assuming the target remains stationary. Otherwise you're going to need some strength to move that thing. And then there's the recoil to worry about. The larger the weapon, the stronger you have to be to handle that recoil. Although I've always been curious as to why so many ranged weapons in Star Wars even have recoil, seeing as how they're energy based as opposed to being true projectile weapons. I suppose recoil just looks cool and provides a sense of power.

 

That being said, both are bad examples. They get way too far into specifics than what is practicle for creating a game and as such should be ignored when considering game mechanics. Which was sort of my point. Bad examples, baaaaaaaaaad.

 

As for having accuracy because of either strength or dexterity and why they can't work in tandem, well, it's two different ways of fighting.  Either you choose to go at your opponent as hard as you can, hoping that they won't hit too hard, or you rely on your agility to not get hit and get in some hits, not necessarily strong.  Also, it's damn near impossible to put raw strength and agility together so that you get the most out of both.

 

For starters, what you're saying here sounds more appropriately applied to weapon fighting styles than attribute bonuses. Consider this possibility. You have your aggressive and defensive melee/lightsaber styles (which the game does). Aggressive is where you're going as hard as you can and defensive where you hang back, dodge, and jab in some light hits. Now, here's where the added attribute bonuses come in. A stronger person, even when holding back, is still going to benefit from the fact that they are indeed stronger. "Light" is a subjective term. What would be a light punch for a professional boxer would probably be somewhat heavy for the rest of us. As such, a "light", defensive attack from a strong fighter is going to have a better chance of getting through defenses than a similar hit from a weak fighter. Likewise, someone who is incredibly coordinated and has fast reflexes is going to be more accurate and succesful even when going all out than someone who has trouble tying their own shoes or takes three seconds to react to enemies defensive maneuvers.

 

Going all out or holding back are fighting techniques, and as such are applied after physical attributes. At least that's what makes the most sense to me.

[JediBob]

... rest assured that if I'm the GM I'm not going to allow a STR 8 character use a composite long bow, no matter what the rules say, because logic and common sense dictate it's not possible.

 

Cool.

 

If you allow the character to add its STR modifier to to hit rolls, then why don't add it to damage rolls too?

 

Um... I'm pretty certain I'm misreading this, because the Strength modifier does in fact add onto damage rolls, which I'm sure you know. So... yeah.

 

... because it would be too unbalancing...

 

As you've said many times. I don't argue that if this system were simply cut and pasted onto things as they are now, there would be balance issues. I guess the point I've failed to express properly is that I would hope the developers to be intelligent enough to adapt to the new situation. Whether by simply creating smarter enemies, a wider range of setups in the enemies, fixing some of the balance issues that already exist in the game that would contribute, whatever. I don't think that just because the developers haven't really been able to create a balanced game, doesn't mean that it can't be done. At least I hope not.

 

Weapon competence and weapon specialization are the feats that represent a character's proficiency with a certain weapon. Adding weapon finesse on top of that they way you're proposing would mean counting the same character trait (that is, skill with a particular weapon) twice. Weapon finesse isn't supposed to do that, because it's a fundamentally different concept.

 

Ah, I think here's where we run into our fundamental differences. I don't see the Dexterity bonus to attack as having anything to do with one's skill with a weapon. It's one's inherent ability to move with coordination, and react quickly, and as such is separate from skill achieved through training. Weapon Finesse just represents a character's ability to apply their innate ability. Perhaps this isn't the written definition, I can't remember, but since the whole idea is to rewrite part of the game setup, I don't really see a problem with that.

 

No matter how many years your character has spent studying under teh l33t n!nja master, there's no way in hell they're going to wield a halberd in a 'subtle' way.

 

Very, very true. However, when someone with high dexterity wields that halberd, while by no means being able to do so subtley, they will at least be able to so to a greater degree of subtlety than someone who is less coordinated/has slower reflexes.

 

That's why I don't like weapon finesse at all...

 

Ah, I thought so. Your argument makes a little bit more sense now. I have to admit, without the changes that I've been pushing (with proper balances mind you), I would probably prefer if the feat weren't there at all either. If you're not going to do something right, don't do it at all and whatnot.

 

Um, IIRC, you reacted badly when I called you a n00b. Well, sorry pal, but you're a n00b. We have all been, but still that doesn't change that fact. If you consider that an offense, this one's not going to be the last flamewar you're going to be involved in. Your call.

 

I don't deny that I'm a noob, my post count screams it. This fact doesn't bother me. However, when someone uses it as you did - in an attempt to undercut and invalidate anything I have to say - that's going to piss me off. It's all about context. You used it as a slur, so what did you expect? You knew what you were doing when you wrote it.

 

I just flame people for fun. And it gets even better when it's them who start the flamefest. I have admitted it on several occasions. If anything, that makes me a jerk, albeit a coherent, honest one.

 

Well, perhaps you're straightforward after all. As you said, I haven't seen you on enough posts to really know yet. Still, such behavior is a perfect example of what I was referring to with, "the protection of distance and anonymity." Let's face it, if someone were to behave in the same manner towards strangers on the street, they would be lucky to keep all of their teeth. That's the real test of someone's character I suppose; how they treat others when they're safe from repurcussions.

 

OMG WTF IS WITH ALL THESE SUPER-HUGE-GIGANTIC-ENORMOUS POSTS??!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

It's called debating.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Damn straight.

[cewekeds]

Strength and Stamina are not the samething. I don't see Bodybuilders winning long distant races. Stamina I think comes from your CON because it effects how much damage you can take. The body takes less energy to run which means the body can take more damage.

 

You should not get the full bonus from strength and DEX. reason the fighting style is different. You might hit alittle harder but since you causing damage in different way. STR. is bashing and Dex is slicing. a fencer does not improve much being stronger rather having balance and speed IMO. I think half of the strength bonus should be added to your attack but not all. I rather they just go with styles because that what it would come down to. One fighting style would mix both well while another would increase your attack and lower your defense or increase your defense and dincrease your attack. They kinda did with the light saber but swords should be added.

 

How are ways to make the game more difficult without increasing levels of your enemy?

[213374U]

Ah, I think here's where we run into our fundamental differences.  I don't see the Dexterity bonus to attack as having anything to do with one's skill with a weapon.  It's one's inherent ability to move with coordination, and react quickly, and as such is separate from skill achieved through training.  Weapon Finesse just represents a character's ability to apply their innate ability.  Perhaps this isn't the written definition, I can't remember, but since the whole idea is to rewrite part of the game setup, I don't really see a problem with that.

No. That would mean that somebody naturally gifted with quicker reflexes and better hand-eye coordination would actually be more efficient with a certain weapon than other who had received intensive training, as the weapon specialization is supposed to represent. At least that would be the conclusion drawn from seeing what a 16 DEX (only moderately high), 14 STR and the modified weapon finesse would do when compared to the same stats and weapon specialization feat. Raw talent is important, but it's nowhere as useful as training.

 

Weapon finesse is supposed to be a different, learnt fighting style which relies on fast, agile, well-aimed blows to overcome the enemy defenses, as opposed to the 'regular' style which probably involves piercing the defenses rather than circumventing them.

 

 

However, when someone with high dexterity wields that halberd, while by no means being able to do so subtley, they will at least be able to so to a greater degree of subtlety than someone who is less coordinated/has slower reflexes. 

I think you are confusing finesse with proficiency. The way I see it, some weapons can't be used with any degree of finesse at all, since they rely on raw strength to be operated. Such is the case of blunt weapons, halberds, and most of the longer mast weapons which require great momentum to inflict maximum damage.

 

 

Well, perhaps you're straightforward after all.  As you said, I haven't seen you on enough posts to really know yet.  Still, such behavior is a perfect example of what I was referring to with, "the protection of distance and anonymity."  Let's face it, if someone were to behave in the same manner towards strangers on the street, they would be lucky to keep all of their teeth.  That's the real test of someone's character I suppose; how they treat others when they're safe from repurcussions.

You're taking things out of proportion, and you know it. It's not like I go hurling insults around at every man and his dog, but the fact that I don't make conversation with strangers on the street may have something to do with it. When I hear someone do a stupid remark or an offensive comment toward me, I react accordingly.

 

Still, I don't see how you might think that calling you a n00b undermines the validity of your arguments, but then again, it's not really my problem how you choose to interpret my comments.

 

 

How are ways to make the game more difficult without increasing levels of your enemy?

For starters they could have the enemy characters take advantage of their combat feats, the same way any player would. Using cover, flanking (not that they're implemented but still), area effects, group tactics, and retreat routines are just a bunch of things that come off the top of my head right now. From what I've read, enemies don't even use their Force powers anymore. It seems it would be hard to make the game any easier.

[JediBob]

Strength and Stamina are not the samething. I don't see Bodybuilders winning long distant races. 

 

True, Strength and Stamina aren't the same thing, just as Constitution and Stamina aren't, but then again, they are all related. When lifting a heavy object, such as a weight, or a weapon, only a strong person is going to be able to lift it for any prolonged period of time. Now, they're not going to be able to do so nearly as long as someone who has good Strength and Constitution, but the strength is required. Take a professional weightlifter as an example. No, they're never going to win a marathon (in fact I think it would be quite humorous to see one try - all that excess body weight from the muscles not in use, the same reason they wouldn't be able to win a pullup competition), but they would be able to throw weights around all day that would make a regular person tired after a few minutes.

 

a fencer does not improve much being stronger rather having balance and speed IMO.

 

Quite true, whereas a person wielding a two handed battle axe won't get nearly the same benefit from their dexterity. They'll still get something, but it will be minimal. It's too bad the game doesn't take weapon type into account. Then again, maybe that would be too complex a system for a game.

 

I rather they just go with styles because that what it would come down to. One fighting style would mix both well while another would increase your attack and lower your defense or increase your defense and dincrease your attack.

 

An intersting idea, but one should never ignore the physical characteristics of the individual. Think Bill Gates vs. well... any heavyweight fighter, professional football player, hell a 12 year old schoolgirl would suffice. Yes, technique would matter, and yes training would matter, but physically, Gates is screwed.

 

That would mean that somebody naturally gifted with quicker reflexes and better hand-eye coordination would actually be more efficient with a certain weapon than other who had received intensive training, as the weapon specialization is supposed to represent.

 

True, physical characteristics shouldn't overshadow a lifetime of training. Although, physical characteristics should not be underestimated either. Not everyone can become a professional athlete. No matter how much time or training the average citizen puts in, no matter how much heart they have, or love of the game, they're not physically capable. "Rudy" was an inspiration, but the guy couldn't play football. He didn't have the physical capability. Now, that said, if physical stats are overshadowing the training feats, then perhaps the overall bonuses from stats should be lessened, or the bonuses from training increased. Perhaps a little of both.

 

Weapon finesse is supposed to be a different, learnt fighting style which relies on fast, agile, well-aimed blows to overcome the enemy defenses, as opposed to the 'regular' style which probably involves piercing the defenses rather than circumventing them.

 

With the inclusion of fighting styles into the game, which this game has done, I think this definition of Weapon Finesse has become obsolete.

 

The way I see it, some weapons can't be used with any degree of finesse at all

 

Despite the name of the feat, Dexterity is about more than just finesse. It's about coordination and reflexes (even the game says this). You're right, someone with a halberd will not be able to fight with subtlety, but they will still benefit from coordination and quick reflexes, and as such will still benefit from their dexterity.

 

I don't see how you might think that calling you a n00b undermines the validity of your arguments

 

Oh? It's all about intent and context. I ask you, to what purpose did you make the remark? If I was mistaken in how I took the comment, then what was your intent? In what way did saying it contribute to the conversation?

 

For starters they could have the enemy characters take advantage of their combat feats, the same way any player would. Using cover, flanking (not that they're implemented but still), area effects, group tactics, and retreat routines are just a bunch of things that come off the top of my head right now.

 

I couldn't agree with this statement more.