I mean, a Fighter doesn't really have a pressing need for DEX if they're not doing Archery; they don't have DEX save prof, so their performance in that area is still only so-so unless you dip or spend a feat for the prof even if it is allegedly a "better" save to invest in (personally my play experience says that what saves you see during a campaign aren't nearly predictable enough to make DEX an objectively better choice; WIS actually seems to be the one that crops up the most), and while it's fun to roll 30+ on Initiative once or twice (War Mage w/ Alert from DM's homebrew Background feat rules), there's not enough value in it to make STR the objectively worse pick you make it out to be. Plus, again, my proposal means the player can't match the base DPR and AC of a rapier, so how is it bad for the game balance for a sub-optimal pick to exist?
I'll grant that there's probably no argument that will sway you, because you seem to have it very fixed in your head that DEX is some kind of optimum combat stat (it's not).
And why should I be required to multiclass just to fill a basic fighting archetype?
FYI, I thought I remembered this and did a little digging, there's actually an SA response that giving a spear finesse doesn't break anything, so why are you so opposed to a single extra sub-optimal finesse option?
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I could see them adding something in a future book, but it would thus be a lot more limited in availability, when the last time a game had a guy with a doublebladed scimitar
The barbarian in my current group is using a DBS lol
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
I mean, a Fighter doesn't really have a pressing need for DEX if they're not doing Archery; they don't have DEX save prof, so their performance in that area is still only so-so unless you dip or spend a feat for the prof even if it is allegedly a "better" save to invest in (personally my play experience says that what saves you see during a campaign aren't nearly predictable enough to make DEX an objectively better choice; WIS actually seems to be the one that crops up the most), and while it's fun to roll 30+ on Initiative once or twice (War Mage w/ Alert from DM's homebrew Background feat rules), there's not enough value in it to make STR the objectively worse pick you make it out to be. Plus, again, my proposal means the player can't match the base DPR and AC of a rapier, so how is it bad for the game balance for a sub-optimal pick to exist?
I'll grant that there's probably no argument that will sway you, because you seem to have it very fixed in your head that DEX is some kind of optimum combat stat (it's not).
And why should I be required to multiclass just to fill a basic fighting archetype?
FYI, I thought I remembered this and did a little digging, there's actually an SA response that giving a spear finesse doesn't break anything, so why are you so opposed to a single extra sub-optimal finesse option?
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
The fact that you feel you should conform to a single model is not proof that DEX is objectively better. It cannot provide even equal AC to heavy armor, initiative does not hold significant sway over combat on its own merit- particularly on a full martial, and the 5-15% shift in saving throws without prof to scale with it is nice but not reliable, and DEX saves are not so intense and ubiquitous that it’s near-essential for survival or even effective performance.
Also, why are people so scared of giving finesse other Masteries when it already has arguably the single most effective one-handed one with chainable advantage? Do you really think that pushing, tripping, or creating a single instance of disadvantage are somehow more optimized choices? You’re literally saying DEX shouldn’t be able to choose to be less effective because it’s too good.
I mean, a Fighter doesn't really have a pressing need for DEX if they're not doing Archery; they don't have DEX save prof, so their performance in that area is still only so-so unless you dip or spend a feat for the prof even if it is allegedly a "better" save to invest in (personally my play experience says that what saves you see during a campaign aren't nearly predictable enough to make DEX an objectively better choice; WIS actually seems to be the one that crops up the most), and while it's fun to roll 30+ on Initiative once or twice (War Mage w/ Alert from DM's homebrew Background feat rules), there's not enough value in it to make STR the objectively worse pick you make it out to be. Plus, again, my proposal means the player can't match the base DPR and AC of a rapier, so how is it bad for the game balance for a sub-optimal pick to exist?
I'll grant that there's probably no argument that will sway you, because you seem to have it very fixed in your head that DEX is some kind of optimum combat stat (it's not).
And why should I be required to multiclass just to fill a basic fighting archetype?
FYI, I thought I remembered this and did a little digging, there's actually an SA response that giving a spear finesse doesn't break anything, so why are you so opposed to a single extra sub-optimal finesse option?
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
The fact that you feel you should conform to a single model is not proof that DEX is objectively better. It cannot provide even equal AC to heavy armor, initiative does not hold significant sway over combat on its own merit- particularly on a full martial, and the 5-15% shift in saving throws without prof to scale with it is nice but not reliable, and DEX saves are not so intense and ubiquitous that it’s near-essential for survival or even effective performance.
Also, why are people so scared of giving finesse other Masteries when it already has arguably the single most effective one-handed one with chainable advantage? Do you really think that pushing, tripping, or creating a single instance of disadvantage are somehow more optimized choices? You’re literally saying DEX shouldn’t be able to choose to be less effective because it’s too good.
actually it can provide equal AC to heavy armor. level 19 now, but 12+6 is 18.
vex is broadly effective but not always the best answer all situations. Masteries aren't just about whats the best mastery, they are about what situational benefits can this weapon/class/playtype provide. Vex has no use if you have advantage, and its effectiveness decreases with your accuracy increasing.
the point isnt they should have an ineffective mastery, the point is does the game design want to give finesse weapons strong versatility in mastery.
I do think 1h or finesse might need a new mastery option, (they don't have many) but I'm not sure they want to open up versatile as the baseline.
I mean, a Fighter doesn't really have a pressing need for DEX if they're not doing Archery; they don't have DEX save prof, so their performance in that area is still only so-so unless you dip or spend a feat for the prof even if it is allegedly a "better" save to invest in (personally my play experience says that what saves you see during a campaign aren't nearly predictable enough to make DEX an objectively better choice; WIS actually seems to be the one that crops up the most), and while it's fun to roll 30+ on Initiative once or twice (War Mage w/ Alert from DM's homebrew Background feat rules), there's not enough value in it to make STR the objectively worse pick you make it out to be. Plus, again, my proposal means the player can't match the base DPR and AC of a rapier, so how is it bad for the game balance for a sub-optimal pick to exist?
I'll grant that there's probably no argument that will sway you, because you seem to have it very fixed in your head that DEX is some kind of optimum combat stat (it's not).
And why should I be required to multiclass just to fill a basic fighting archetype?
FYI, I thought I remembered this and did a little digging, there's actually an SA response that giving a spear finesse doesn't break anything, so why are you so opposed to a single extra sub-optimal finesse option?
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
The fact that you feel you should conform to a single model is not proof that DEX is objectively better. It cannot provide even equal AC to heavy armor, initiative does not hold significant sway over combat on its own merit- particularly on a full martial, and the 5-15% shift in saving throws without prof to scale with it is nice but not reliable, and DEX saves are not so intense and ubiquitous that it’s near-essential for survival or even effective performance.
Also, why are people so scared of giving finesse other Masteries when it already has arguably the single most effective one-handed one with chainable advantage? Do you really think that pushing, tripping, or creating a single instance of disadvantage are somehow more optimized choices? You’re literally saying DEX shouldn’t be able to choose to be less effective because it’s too good.
actually it can provide equal AC to heavy armor. level 19 now, but 12+6 is 18.
vex is broadly effective but not always the best answer all situations. Masteries aren't just about whats the best mastery, they are about what situational benefits can this weapon/class/playtype provide. Vex has no use if you have advantage, and its effectiveness decreases with your accuracy increasing.
the point isnt they should have an ineffective mastery, the point is does the game design want to give finesse weapons strong versatility in mastery.
I do think 1h or finesse might need a new mastery option, (they don't have many) but I'm not sure they want to open up versatile as the baseline.
I didn’t say Vex was absolutely perfect, but is there another one-handed option you can see that you’d rather make regular use of, purely on the merits of what it does for your combat performance? And you’re also making my point that having Vex doesn’t mean you won’t want another option, and currently the only other Finesse option that has an effect on the target is Slow. Even if getting the Versatile pool was a step too far (I don’t believe it is, but clearly some others strongly disagree), the Finesse pool is barely knee-deep at the moment. Broadening it does not take anything away from other builds, and frankly if the very existence of more DEX options is “harmful” to people’s experience, that seems to be more a case of taking a very confrontational and stifling approach to design and play.
As it currently stands at hough, I don’t think they have another vector for it; the pre-reqs check weapon properties, and for one-handed that seems to mean Finesse, Light, and Versatile. I suppose they could go d6 with no features for Sap, but otherwise it’d be a major shuffle to get an option in there without using Versatile.
I mean, a Fighter doesn't really have a pressing need for DEX if they're not doing Archery; they don't have DEX save prof, so their performance in that area is still only so-so unless you dip or spend a feat for the prof even if it is allegedly a "better" save to invest in (personally my play experience says that what saves you see during a campaign aren't nearly predictable enough to make DEX an objectively better choice; WIS actually seems to be the one that crops up the most), and while it's fun to roll 30+ on Initiative once or twice (War Mage w/ Alert from DM's homebrew Background feat rules), there's not enough value in it to make STR the objectively worse pick you make it out to be. Plus, again, my proposal means the player can't match the base DPR and AC of a rapier, so how is it bad for the game balance for a sub-optimal pick to exist?
I'll grant that there's probably no argument that will sway you, because you seem to have it very fixed in your head that DEX is some kind of optimum combat stat (it's not).
And why should I be required to multiclass just to fill a basic fighting archetype?
FYI, I thought I remembered this and did a little digging, there's actually an SA response that giving a spear finesse doesn't break anything, so why are you so opposed to a single extra sub-optimal finesse option?
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
The fact that you feel you should conform to a single model is not proof that DEX is objectively better. It cannot provide even equal AC to heavy armor, initiative does not hold significant sway over combat on its own merit- particularly on a full martial, and the 5-15% shift in saving throws without prof to scale with it is nice but not reliable, and DEX saves are not so intense and ubiquitous that it’s near-essential for survival or even effective performance.
Also, why are people so scared of giving finesse other Masteries when it already has arguably the single most effective one-handed one with chainable advantage? Do you really think that pushing, tripping, or creating a single instance of disadvantage are somehow more optimized choices? You’re literally saying DEX shouldn’t be able to choose to be less effective because it’s too good.
I've stated repeatedly why dex is better than str. You keep saying that's no big deal. You're not correct. I make dex saves nearly constantly. I roll initiative every battle, and going first is always good. being able to position ahead of the enemy is good. What's strength give me. 2h weapons. 1 AC tops (unless I spend a feat). Uhm...encumbrance that most parties don't track? I can kick doors open? I am always shocked when my DM actually calls for a STR save (it's happened, just not often)
As pointed out, dex CAN provide equal AC if you wanna spend a feat, but spending a resource takes away from what str brings to the table. str just brings nothing of benefit to the table.
And you're here wanting to improve dex even more, and appear shocked that people are like, no, dex doesn't need any help. Dex has enough going for it. It does not need any help. I am glad that Dex is not getting any additional masteries. If I had my way, Longbows would become a str weapon as they should be. STR needs to not have dex power creeping it anymore than has already happened.
EDIT: Let's be clear here. I'm a fan of dex. Your proposal fits my playstyle and how I want to play better than the current rules do. I am saying that I believe it's not good for the game for my playstyle to be even better than it already is. the fact is, that better weapon mastery selections requiring strength is a GOOD THING. That should not be watered down.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
they should just add new masteries to finesse, and if needed another finesse weapon.
rogues are designed to be able to generate advantage via hide, so, vex is less useful for them when playing peak rogue, so I think they need another mastery option, but it doesnt need to be push/topple/sap.
they actually need more masteries anyway imo.
versatile finesse might not be a big deal, or it might depending on the future plan for weapon/mastery development/subclasses, and internal balance.
but adding a new mastery to finesse isnt a systemic change, it doesnt interact with anything else.
essentially, I think the problem is finesse doesnt have enough/the right masteries, not neccesarily finesse needs versatile masteries.
IMO: The real life examples where we see a speed spear or speed staff are (in my observation) generally being done by people I would classify as Monks. They use Dex without regard to finesse. So, they already can use a spear with dex, or a quarterstaff with dex. For Martial Versatile weapons, Kensei.
An argument could be made that the Bard College of Dance should also be able to do that (since sword-dancers are usually more focused on speed and precision than brute strength). But I think most of those sword-dancer examples are already being done with weapons we would classify as finesse anyway (sabers, usually, IIRC).
Is there a weapon I think is missing from the lineup that I might say should be finesse and versatile? There is one, that you currently have to sort of squint to reskin. That's a long chain or heavy rope (think the kind use for mooring large yachts and small freighters, or age of sail ships) or a slungshot (not a slingshot, but a slungshot). Right now, you can do a light chain with the whip, changing the damage to bludgeoning (for chain, heavy rope, or slungshot ... but you'd want piercing for a rope dart). But a chain or slugshot can be heavier than that, but they're still very much based on speed and dex over brute strength. They aren't so much versatile in the bastard sword sense (two hands together for a more powerful swing), but many of the techniques shift back and forth between one handed and two handed control (especially fast adjustments to the radius of the swing, which can dramatically adjust the velocity ... while you can swing a slungshot one handed, you don't get that rapid velocity or direction adjustment when you're just using it like a flail). That's where I would put a versatile finesse weapon:
Martial Melee Weapon Long Chain - 1d4 bludgeoning - finesse, reach, versatile (1d6) - Slow - 4 lb - (not sure of the cost)
That could be used for a bunch of different weapons: a longer manrikigusari / kusari-fundo, a longer slungshot, a meteor hammer, etc. And also adjusting the damage type for things like the kyoketsu-shoge (piercing w/ topple), kusarigama (slashing), and rope dart (piercing).
(this also fills in the missing reach bludgeoning weapon)
You could also do a Short Chain version of that that just removes the Reach part, but you're basically just making a finesse flail at that point. There IS some support for that (shorter versions of the manrikigusari/kusari-fundo, and nunchaku), but that starts to get into lots of fiddly statistics that seem to be the anathema of 5e (a 5e principle I largely agree with). If you're reskinning, you could probably just say it's a Monk with a funky version of a quarterstaff (you're just redefining what percentage of the quarterstaff is bendy vs rigid -- something that doesn't really have any impact on game mechanics).
But that's the main place where I would put a versatile finesse weapon: a long chain/cord weapon that is more of a fast spin than a whipping motion.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
My sword and board fighters are ALL dex, because it's better than str. There's no opportunity cost to be better. Sword and Shield is d8. They took flex away, so that's as good as it gets. I can go rapier and do the same damage as I can with str. Again, the init bonus you try to ignore is relevant. The saves are better, enemy mage fireballs for example are what save type again? Falling into a pit is what kind of save type again?
If dex wasn't so much better (it is) why do you care so much that you can't use it and poach the best bonuses? Just use str and flavor it as being dexterous.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
The barbarian in my current group is using a DBS lol
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
The fact that you feel you should conform to a single model is not proof that DEX is objectively better. It cannot provide even equal AC to heavy armor, initiative does not hold significant sway over combat on its own merit- particularly on a full martial, and the 5-15% shift in saving throws without prof to scale with it is nice but not reliable, and DEX saves are not so intense and ubiquitous that it’s near-essential for survival or even effective performance.
Also, why are people so scared of giving finesse other Masteries when it already has arguably the single most effective one-handed one with chainable advantage? Do you really think that pushing, tripping, or creating a single instance of disadvantage are somehow more optimized choices? You’re literally saying DEX shouldn’t be able to choose to be less effective because it’s too good.
actually it can provide equal AC to heavy armor. level 19 now, but 12+6 is 18.
vex is broadly effective but not always the best answer all situations. Masteries aren't just about whats the best mastery, they are about what situational benefits can this weapon/class/playtype provide. Vex has no use if you have advantage, and its effectiveness decreases with your accuracy increasing.
the point isnt they should have an ineffective mastery, the point is does the game design want to give finesse weapons strong versatility in mastery.
I do think 1h or finesse might need a new mastery option, (they don't have many) but I'm not sure they want to open up versatile as the baseline.
I didn’t say Vex was absolutely perfect, but is there another one-handed option you can see that you’d rather make regular use of, purely on the merits of what it does for your combat performance? And you’re also making my point that having Vex doesn’t mean you won’t want another option, and currently the only other Finesse option that has an effect on the target is Slow. Even if getting the Versatile pool was a step too far (I don’t believe it is, but clearly some others strongly disagree), the Finesse pool is barely knee-deep at the moment. Broadening it does not take anything away from other builds, and frankly if the very existence of more DEX options is “harmful” to people’s experience, that seems to be more a case of taking a very confrontational and stifling approach to design and play.
As it currently stands at hough, I don’t think they have another vector for it; the pre-reqs check weapon properties, and for one-handed that seems to mean Finesse, Light, and Versatile. I suppose they could go d6 with no features for Sap, but otherwise it’d be a major shuffle to get an option in there without using Versatile.
I've stated repeatedly why dex is better than str. You keep saying that's no big deal. You're not correct. I make dex saves nearly constantly. I roll initiative every battle, and going first is always good. being able to position ahead of the enemy is good. What's strength give me. 2h weapons. 1 AC tops (unless I spend a feat). Uhm...encumbrance that most parties don't track? I can kick doors open? I am always shocked when my DM actually calls for a STR save (it's happened, just not often)
As pointed out, dex CAN provide equal AC if you wanna spend a feat, but spending a resource takes away from what str brings to the table. str just brings nothing of benefit to the table.
And you're here wanting to improve dex even more, and appear shocked that people are like, no, dex doesn't need any help. Dex has enough going for it. It does not need any help. I am glad that Dex is not getting any additional masteries. If I had my way, Longbows would become a str weapon as they should be. STR needs to not have dex power creeping it anymore than has already happened.
EDIT: Let's be clear here. I'm a fan of dex. Your proposal fits my playstyle and how I want to play better than the current rules do. I am saying that I believe it's not good for the game for my playstyle to be even better than it already is. the fact is, that better weapon mastery selections requiring strength is a GOOD THING. That should not be watered down.
Any time an unfathomably powerful entity sweeps in and offers godlike rewards in return for just a few teensy favors, it’s a scam. Unless it’s me. I’d never lie to you, reader dearest.
Tasha
they should just add new masteries to finesse, and if needed another finesse weapon.
rogues are designed to be able to generate advantage via hide, so, vex is less useful for them when playing peak rogue, so I think they need another mastery option, but it doesnt need to be push/topple/sap.
they actually need more masteries anyway imo.
versatile finesse might not be a big deal, or it might depending on the future plan for weapon/mastery development/subclasses, and internal balance.
but adding a new mastery to finesse isnt a systemic change, it doesnt interact with anything else.
essentially, I think the problem is finesse doesnt have enough/the right masteries, not neccesarily finesse needs versatile masteries.
IMO: The real life examples where we see a speed spear or speed staff are (in my observation) generally being done by people I would classify as Monks. They use Dex without regard to finesse. So, they already can use a spear with dex, or a quarterstaff with dex. For Martial Versatile weapons, Kensei.
An argument could be made that the Bard College of Dance should also be able to do that (since sword-dancers are usually more focused on speed and precision than brute strength). But I think most of those sword-dancer examples are already being done with weapons we would classify as finesse anyway (sabers, usually, IIRC).
Is there a weapon I think is missing from the lineup that I might say should be finesse and versatile? There is one, that you currently have to sort of squint to reskin. That's a long chain or heavy rope (think the kind use for mooring large yachts and small freighters, or age of sail ships) or a slungshot (not a slingshot, but a slungshot). Right now, you can do a light chain with the whip, changing the damage to bludgeoning (for chain, heavy rope, or slungshot ... but you'd want piercing for a rope dart). But a chain or slugshot can be heavier than that, but they're still very much based on speed and dex over brute strength. They aren't so much versatile in the bastard sword sense (two hands together for a more powerful swing), but many of the techniques shift back and forth between one handed and two handed control (especially fast adjustments to the radius of the swing, which can dramatically adjust the velocity ... while you can swing a slungshot one handed, you don't get that rapid velocity or direction adjustment when you're just using it like a flail). That's where I would put a versatile finesse weapon:
Martial Melee Weapon
Long Chain - 1d4 bludgeoning - finesse, reach, versatile (1d6) - Slow - 4 lb - (not sure of the cost)
That could be used for a bunch of different weapons: a longer manrikigusari / kusari-fundo, a longer slungshot, a meteor hammer, etc. And also adjusting the damage type for things like the kyoketsu-shoge (piercing w/ topple), kusarigama (slashing), and rope dart (piercing).
(this also fills in the missing reach bludgeoning weapon)
You could also do a Short Chain version of that that just removes the Reach part, but you're basically just making a finesse flail at that point. There IS some support for that (shorter versions of the manrikigusari/kusari-fundo, and nunchaku), but that starts to get into lots of fiddly statistics that seem to be the anathema of 5e (a 5e principle I largely agree with). If you're reskinning, you could probably just say it's a Monk with a funky version of a quarterstaff (you're just redefining what percentage of the quarterstaff is bendy vs rigid -- something that doesn't really have any impact on game mechanics).
But that's the main place where I would put a versatile finesse weapon: a long chain/cord weapon that is more of a fast spin than a whipping motion.