Most common house rules and Weapon Finesse.

[NewJeffCT]

OK, folks, I do not post in the House Rules forum too often, as our group basically has not really used any House Rules in our 3.0 and 3.5 campaigns.

However, we are thinking about adding a few when I brought up what I thought was an unfair penalty if you want to be a DEX based swashbuckler type fighter. You have to take the Weapon Finesse feat if you want to be one of the 3 Musketeers, Legolas, Captain Blood, Zorro or Drizzt. However, if you want to be Conan, Lancelot, Wulfgar or similar, you do not have to do that. My proposal to my DM was that you get to choose at first level if you want to be a DEX or STR based fighter. He is thinking about it. (By the way, this would not affect my current character, a cleric from a peaceful religion.)

That said, what are the most common House Rules out there? Is my proposal legitimate and does anybody out there do similar?

 

[Spatzimaus]

Not to be too pedantic about it, but giving everyone Weapon Finesse for free benefits... the people who'd use Weapon Finesse. Giving free Feats in general isn't something I like doing, especially if that Feat only benefits a small cross-section of players.

DEX affects Initiative, Reflex saves, AC, ranged attacks, and a lot of useful skills like Hide and Move Silently, while STR only affects melee attacks, melee damage, carrying capacity, and a few rarely-used skills. It's not like DEX-based fighters are underpowered. They already have big advantages over the brute-force types; yes, they aren't as effective in offensive melee combat as the big tanks, and they SHOULDN'T be, since they totally dominate in every other category. Forcing them to pay a Feat to get even more of an edge isn't exactly overkill.

If you're dead set on giving something like this to the players, the only way I think it'd be acceptable is if you gave something analogous to others, some combat-related Feat they can use. For example, let the player pick: Power Attack (for the STR types), Weapon Finesse (for the DEX people), Expertise (INT), or Zen Archery (WIS). Even so, you're still giving more Feats to players than normal, which skews game balance a bit.

 

[NewJeffCT]

Thanks for the response. I thought about it afterwards, and it does penalize the STR based fighters a bit, I think. Though, it is offset by there being a limited amount of choices in Finesse weapons.

However, with their extra feat, the STR based fighter can take Improved Initiative at first level, in addition to Weapon Focus and Power Attack. Or, they can take Weapon Focus, Power Attack & Cleave. They still have more options, I think, at the lower levels.

 

[Crothian]

One thing to remeber, Dex already does more things then str, so by allowing dex based fighter to get weapon finesse for free makes their high dex score that much more powerful.

 

[Plane Sailing]

On the other hand, I can't see any reason why you could decide that certain weapons were *only* finessable weapons and that anyone who uses them *has* to use their Dex and not their Str. Make those the light one handed weapons (including rapier). Disregard the Finesse feat but roll its effects into these weapons

The fact that these weapons all do less damage than the heavier weapons and restrict your AC compared to normal 1H weapons (which can be used with shields) is an adequate balancing factor IMO.

At the same time you could eliminate the basic TWF feat and allow anyone with skill in all martial weapons to attempt TWF as a basic style in the same way they can fight sword & board or 2H style. (the limitation is to prevent all rogues taking immediate advantage of the style, which is arguably too good for them. They have to either take a feat like normal or multiclass with Ftr which slows down their sneak attack progression). This would thus slightly benefit the dex based fighter who wants to use a sub-optimal style (TWF).

Cheers

 

[kwiqsilver]

When I run a game, the Weapon Finesse feat is free. The idea of swinging a sword more accurately due to strength is just preposterous.
I don't think any of the game designers have ever studied any fighting styles, armed or unarmed.

 

[John Q. Mayhem]

I think the Str-to-attack is based on the idea of battering down an opponent's defenses, rather than being more accurate.

 

[DonAdam]

Once upon a time I made the rapier an exotic weapon but made weapon finesse a part of it. That made it too weak.

I think having weapon finesse affect all finesseable weapons was the right compromise.

 

[Darklone]

When I run a game, the Weapon Finesse feat is free. The idea of swinging a sword more accurately due to strength is just preposterous.
I don't think any of the game designers have ever studied any fighting styles, armed or unarmed.

I will try to be nice, so please don't feel offended. As posted in another thread right now, I was in your "Dex to hit" camp a long time. Till I started to fight with real swords and other weapons. I'm pretty fast by myself and did fencing and martial arts for years as well. But if you ever tried to fight with a rapier against some guy with a bastard or greatsword who knows what he does, you will pretty fast understand why strength (which means: to strike faster and more precise due to better control of your weapon, not to bash harder which will destroy your weapon) is more important than simple speed. Btw: A rapier is faster than a greatsword. But not so much faster that it would help you. Actually pretty often you will hit someone faster with a greatsword than with a rapier.

I still prefer two one handed light weapons, but I have a very hard time against buddies with quarterstaffs or bastard swords... even the ones I can beat easily if we both have the same weapons.

Historically, rapiers (made from bronze) have already been made since 2000 BC in Kurgan and other countries around the Mediterranean sea. The reason they haven't been used are (among price and durability): They were inferior against someone armed with a spear or a normal sword (which was not as slow as many think).

So I think these game designers you rant about actually knew more about fighting styles than many RPG dudes who post so wisely on internet boards. (Again, I was such a stupid dude by myself some years ago)

 

[RangerWickett]

It's all ambiguous. Strength is obviously the amount of force you have in your body. Dexterity is obviously your ability to move your body agilely. But you need strength in order to be agile. Olympic gymnasts might not be able to bench press huge weights, but their bodies are certainly muscular and toned. Olympic fencers (and hell, me, now that I'm fencing regularly) have rather developed muscles in their forearms.

Does this mean they should have a high Strength score? No, I don't think so.

You can certainly use your physical strength to gain the upper hand in combat, even with a foil, which is a dinky, light weapon. In bouts I've had, some people really use a lot of force to drive your blade out of the way, so it's hard for you to parry. But I've also fenced people who feint a lot, moving their blade around so it's hard for you to parry. Both methods make it hard to parry, but one utilizes Strength, the other Dexterity.

Really, if anything, I think Weapon Finesse ought to be applicable to all weapons.