Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Dervish Dance... Scimitar only... why, exactly?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

1 to 50 of 131 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aside from the name referencing a culture where the Scimitar is used, I am talking about the mechanics.

Dervish Dance is an extension of Weapon Finesse (Along a Feat Chain requiring Weapon Finesse).

The goofy thing here is that Weapon Finesse doesn't work with a Scimitar.
Kind of a strange combination.

Does anyone else think that perhaps the Dex to damage Feat should have been usable with perhaps all Light weapons, or at least the Rapier?

-Uriel

PS:I House-Ruled that Weapon Finesse worked with both Scimitar and Quarterstaff a while back, but that is another subject.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

My group house-ruled that when you take Dervish Dance, you choose one Finessable weapon (or Scimitar) to apply it to. Which is why I get to use it with what is obviously the most stylish weapon: the sword cane.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

In my game I allow a different feat for any finessable one handed or light weapon. Like 'fencers dance' for a rapier. It just doesnt make sense to impose that kind of restriction and i dislike the overuse of scimitars exclusively because this feat is the only one of its kind. Its an abuse of what is otherwise a very interesting flavor (the dervishes).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Dervish Dance exists mostly to enable a specific type of in-world build associated with a specific deity and type of fighting popularized by her followers... it's unlikely we'll do the same for rapiers or any other weapon.

In fact... if "Every Dex build" is indeed taking the feat, that argues to me that it's too good of a feat in the first place and should probably have tougher prerequisites.

James also said here that a feat to add Dex to finesse weapon damage was too good.

Dervish Dance is a VERY good feat, and in this case, as far as scimitar use is concerned, the Weapon Finesse prerequisite is almost a tax. You can still use Weapon Finesse on other legal weapons, of course, but Weapon Finesse NEVER directly helps you with a scimitar. Dervish Dance is the only feat in that short chain that actually helps you with scimitar fighting.

Weapon Finesse isn't useless to your character, since you can still use it on things like daggers or rapiers or other Weapon Finessable weapons, but yes, it's no use for your scimitar fighting at all other than to help you qualify for the feat you want.

allowing a melee character to concentrate ALL of his mojo on Dex rather than splitting that between Dex and Str is relatively huge. A feat like this NEEDS to have a price, in other words.


Same, in my game a Magus wanted to use a different kind of weapon so I let other swords work with dervish dance.

Osirion

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've got a female Bard/Assassin (NPC spy/ally of the party) in my Kingmaker game that I am going to let use it with her hidden boot-daggers. Optimized? Hardly. Cool? Heck Yeah!


i think that fighting with just one weapon is enough for the tax.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Because it was originally a feat intended just for warriors from a specific region and/or deity where scimitars were heavily used.


Grick wrote:

Dervish Dance exists mostly to enable a specific type of in-world build associated with a specific deity and type of fighting popularized by her followers... it's unlikely we'll do the same for rapiers or any other weapon.

In fact... if "Every Dex build" is indeed taking the feat, that argues to me that it's too good of a feat in the first place and should probably have tougher prerequisites.

James also said here that a feat to add Dex to finesse weapon damage was too good.

Dervish Dance is a VERY good feat, and in this case, as far as scimitar use is concerned, the Weapon Finesse prerequisite is almost a tax. You can still use Weapon Finesse on other legal weapons, of course, but Weapon Finesse NEVER directly helps you with a scimitar. Dervish Dance is the only feat in that short chain that actually helps you with scimitar fighting.

Weapon Finesse isn't useless to your character, since you can still use it on things like daggers or rapiers or other Weapon Finessable weapons, but yes, it's no use for your scimitar fighting at all other than to help you qualify for the feat you want.

allowing a melee character to concentrate ALL of his mojo on Dex rather than splitting that between Dex and Str is relatively huge. A feat like this NEEDS to have a price, in other words.

I'll never agree with JJ on this. There is already a price for the feat, the inability to attack with *anything* other than that one weapon if you want that Dex to damage, according to JJ himself.

If he actually just said "because it's a specific flavor for a specific region of our specific game world" I'd have more respect for it than this "it's too powerful" defense.


I don't get it. Either way, after you take Weapon Finesse and Dervish Dance, you use Dex to hit and damage. The fact that the scimitar isn't Finessable only matters for the one or two levels when you have Weapon Finesse but not Dervish Dance, and even then it just means you use something other than a scimitar for those levels. You're still spending the same number of feats to get the same net effect.

The only thing I see "scimitar only" taxing is flavor.


Hmmm DEX-fixated titan mauler halfling barbarian using a small great sword one-handed and cajoling one's DM to accept that great sword for dervish dancing...that would be a giggle. The points he saves can go into CHA for all the posing he'll be doing when some lithe, but not overly muscular "child" just danced in and poked holes in everyone.

Though an earthbreaker would be funnier since it would be considered piercing, so he'd be doing only pool cue stabs with its spikes.

Shadow Lodge

The dervish dance was designed for the dervish dancers, a sect of Saranre worshipers. The Scimitar is Saranre's weapon. For all weapon finessable weapons there is the Agile weapon enhancement. Which does not have the one hand, no shield requirement.


Seriphim84 wrote:
The dervish dance was designed for the dervish dancers, a sect of Saranre worshipers. The Scimitar is Saranre's weapon. For all weapon finessable weapons there is the Agile weapon enhancement. Which does not have the one hand, no shield requirement.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. The "too powerful" defense just falls flat on its face when you point out Agile. Just call it for what it is, a flavor reason, which is much more respectable.

Osirion

Nicos wrote:
i think that fighting with just one weapon is enough for the tax.

Like my magus does not get usage out of weapon finess.

For those times I absolutely must deliver my spell I still make a regular touch attack instead of using spellstrike. I also keep a dagger as backup a weapon, just in case.

I do believe they should include alternate weapons, or at least feat variations, for increase character diversity.

Silver Crusade

Rapiers? Really?

Go watch "Raiders of the Lost Arc". That guy swinging his sword all over the place who wanted to kill Indiana Jones was an example of what this feat is about. That's why your second hand has to be free while using it with a one handed scimitar - the scimitar will be passed back and forth between hands while you dance around, swinging your sword.

But the whole point of the fighting style is that it only works with edged weapons. It's all about swinging a sword, not thrusting with one. I can see the case for allowing it with other one handed slashing weapons, but rapiers are thrusting weapons. Fencing is a completely different fighting style.

Now, if you wanted an equivalent feat, I could see it. But not as part of the same feat.


I'm not seeing how restricting it to scimitar is a tax. Is the fact that you need to use a different weapon for the level between getting Weapon Finesse and getting Dervish Dance supposed to be a major drawback somehow?

Fromper wrote:

Rapiers? Really?

Go watch "Raiders of the Lost Arc". That guy swinging his sword all over the place who wanted to kill Indiana Jones was an example of what this feat is about. That's why your second hand has to be free while using it with a one handed scimitar - the scimitar will be passed back and forth between hands while you dance around, swinging your sword.

But the whole point of the fighting style is that it only works with edged weapons. It's all about swinging a sword, not thrusting with one. I can see the case for allowing it with other one handed slashing weapons, but rapiers are thrusting weapons. Fencing is a completely different fighting style.

Now, if you wanted an equivalent feat, I could see it. But not as part of the same feat.

Reflavoring is a thing. I'm currently playing a Witch who in terms of flavor is just a wizard with some funny branches of research; are you really going to tell me, "No, you can't do that, if you're not the mad old crone who cooks children then you can't play a witch, your class needs to be wizard"?

Not to mention that having two mechanically identical feats be separate just so they can have different names is stupid.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's a powerful feat.

Because Dex is already a god-stat. Using it for damage as well means it's even better and Str is nearly irrelevant. I think it's fair for it to have a prerequisite.

I'm usually against "feat taxes".

But, a) making Dex even better is a hell of a feat.
And b) Weapon Finesse is not a bad prerequisite to fulfill.

Funny thing is... Scimitars are so good, that even if Dervish Dance was allowed to "any one weapon of your choice", most people would still use it with scimitars.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Derivsh dance already has a price. It requires the use of the least effective method of combat. One handed with nothing in your offhand. Assuming you dont try to sneak around that (with armor spikes or unarmed strikes or something else) the price is a fair one for dex to damage, and its significant in terms of power. And I get that for JJ it was there for a specific in world build, but having it be the only way to do that particular thing (when mechanically the scimitar is one of the best one handed martial weapons) skews what kind of characters people make. A rapier is not better hten a scimitar. Arguably its worse (slashing is better then piercing). So the end result of a 'fencers dance feat' is no power grab, and it doesnt shoehorn tons of dex based characters into the dervish flavor, which doesn't fit every character concept.

Shadow Lodge

I have a Human urban barbarian who is running as a fencer style character. He uses a "cutlass" and moves quickly around killing everything. He is brutal. I think that as a feat it is very powerful but not destructively so. My problem with allowing this for any finesse-able weapon is that it kills the classic fighter. Who wants to be clunky and slow with no save vs fireball when you can be quick, agile, with a great AC, great saves, great movement and only loosing 2-10 points of damage depending on level. This is the first and likely last time I will use this feat.

I think the best thing about this feat is that it is one handed so you can't combine it with Parana strike. So at least you need a str 13 to be really good. without that it would turn str into a dump stat for fighters.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Its a silly feat. When 95% of Magii have it, well, that has to tell you something...


Well, if any of my players asked, I'd allow it to be applyable to any one-handed weapon of his/her choice, but I'd not remove Weapon Finesse as a prerequisite.

Hell, I'd even homebrew a few feats for duelists. Maybe using Int instead of Dex.

(I know, I know. There is a Duelist PrC. But it's rather underwhelming).


Seriphim84 wrote:
My problem with allowing this for any finesse-able weapon is that it kills the classic fighter.

What finesse-able weapons are so much better than a scimitar that they would have that effect when the scimitar doesn't already?

Osirion

Why not just completely abuse this by making your scimitar smaller, thus moving it down into the light weapons category.

This would allow pirahna strike. Changing 1d6 to 1d4 is not that big of deal and with pirahna strike you could effectively deal more consistent damage.

Shadow Lodge

Roberta Yang wrote:
Seriphim84 wrote:
My problem with allowing this for any finesse-able weapon is that it kills the classic fighter.
What finesse-able weapons are so much better than a scimitar that they would have that effect when the scimitar doesn't already?

When a halfling can have a 6 str and deal +7 or more points of damage in a hit. At least when it is a one handed weapon you have to spread yourself out some. Between Parana Strike and Dervish Dance applying to all light weapons, we do anything else?

Osirion

The thought that a Samurai wielding a katana or a European duelist with a rapier (Which does have a blade, folks, although it is primarily a thrusting weapon. We aren't talking fencing with a foil here. D&D/PF wanted to list just the primary damage style of a weapon, cool, but to stand on that as logic, when longswords and shortswords as well as greatswords and katanas cut and stab...isn't a sound argument) isn't as agile as a scimitar wielding dervish is silly.

As someone pointed out, it (DD Feat) has created a bizarre world where all sorts of characters suddenly wield scimitars. Primarily the Magus, as well as any Dex favored races (Especially ones who take a Str hit).

I'm not advocating Great Axe Dervishes or whatnot, but using it with Finessable weapons isn't overpowered, being able to choose one Finessable Weapon, even less so.

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Roberta Yang wrote:
My group house-ruled that when you take Dervish Dance, you choose one Finessable weapon (or Scimitar) to apply it to. Which is why I get to use it with what is obviously the most stylish weapon: the sword cane.

Sounds good to me. I'd certainly allow it with a rapier or whip, and might even toss in an exception or two, like the quarterstaff (but maybe not the spiked chain...).

Flavor 'requirements' tend to feel like 'suggestions' to me anyway.


Personally, I find it sorta funny that you can't dex with a Katana actually when that was such a popular build back in the Oriental Adventures days with the Iaijutsu Master.

For everything else though, a single enhancement(agile) will do. Which argueably is much better, since it doesn't cost you a feat & some skill ranks you wouldn't have to have wasted.


Seriphim84 wrote:
When a halfling can have a 6 str and deal +7 or more points of damage in a hit. At least when it is a one handed weapon you have to spread yourself out some. Between Parana Strike and Dervish Dance applying to all light weapons, we do anything else?

So the only reason it would be an issue is bypassing the 13 Str prerequisite on Power Attack?

That's still not going to change the fact that using a single one-handed melee weapon with no shield is absolutely not going to have amazing damage output. You don't get the damage per hit of two-handing, the attacks of two-weapon fighting, the defense of sword-and-board fighting... and good luck wearing decent armor with only 6 Str.


Roberta Yang wrote:

I'm not seeing how restricting it to scimitar is a tax. Is the fact that you need to use a different weapon for the level between getting Weapon Finesse and getting Dervish Dance supposed to be a major drawback somehow?

Well, restricting it to scimitar IS a tax, because scimitar is a martial weapon. All my dexy rogues and my poor Oracle of Sarenrae can't use one without multi-classing somewhere or burning a third feat on martial weapon familiarity.

Shadow Lodge

Roberta Yang wrote:
Seriphim84 wrote:
When a halfling can have a 6 str and deal +7 or more points of damage in a hit. At least when it is a one handed weapon you have to spread yourself out some. Between Parana Strike and Dervish Dance applying to all light weapons, we do anything else?

So the only reason it would be an issue is bypassing the 13 Str prerequisite on Power Attack?

That's still not going to change the fact that using a single one-handed melee weapon with no shield is absolutely not going to have amazing damage output. You don't get the damage per hit of two-handing, the attacks of two-weapon fighting, the defense of sword-and-board fighting... and good luck wearing decent armor with only 6 Str.

That 20 dex halfling with a mithril chain shirt with have a 20ac which is perfectly respectable without magic. He will also have a 16 touch ac which is amazing for a fighter. And he will have no problems carrying it. If we does though muleback cords are cheap.

Damage wise, my urban barbarian is doing just fine against the oracle of battle. At level 4 I am putting out 1d6+11 (6 dex, 4pa, 1 magic) and he is putting out 2d6+10 (6str/half 3pa/half 1 magic). Plus he has a better ac 22(10+6dex+4armor+1magic+1natrual=22) vs 21(+9armor+1magic+1natrual) and a far better touch. And my guy isn't optimized for it. he has a 15 cha. If I ad really milked it for the 20 starting dex he would have been even more powerful.

I like the feat but allowing it for every light weapon is just to much.

Edit: no more computer tonight. so I am not ignoring you if I don't respond. Enjoying the debate Roberta :)


Since the feat affects a martial, non-finesse-able, slashing weapon that doesn't otherwise benefit from the Weapon Finesse feat, expanding it to encompass other finesse-able weapons doesn't make much sense from a mechanics standpoint. It would make more sense to expand it to other martial, non-finesse-able, slashing weapons (such as longsword).


Gwen Smith wrote:
Roberta Yang wrote:

I'm not seeing how restricting it to scimitar is a tax. Is the fact that you need to use a different weapon for the level between getting Weapon Finesse and getting Dervish Dance supposed to be a major drawback somehow?

Well, restricting it to scimitar IS a tax, because scimitar is a martial weapon. All my dexy rogues and my poor Oracle of Sarenrae can't use one without multi-classing somewhere or burning a third feat on martial weapon familiarity.

If your oracle is not battle, metal, ancestor, etc. All you need is a ring of revelation: skill at arms to use the scimitar.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Brotato wrote:
Seriphim84 wrote:
The dervish dance was designed for the dervish dancers, a sect of Saranre worshipers. The Scimitar is Saranre's weapon. For all weapon finessable weapons there is the Agile weapon enhancement. Which does not have the one hand, no shield requirement.
This is exactly what I'm talking about. The "too powerful" defense just falls flat on its face when you point out Agile. Just call it for what it is, a flavor reason, which is much more respectable.

Except of course that agile didn't make it into the ultimate equipment book...so maybe they DO consider that ability too powerful? Not that I agree with that assessment mind you. I think the melee classes could do with a bit less MAD myself.


If scimitars, why not curved short swords, or daggers that look like small scimitars (though you could just take small scimitars), or scimitars on a stick (covers polearms like guan dao, glaive and naginata), or lots of small little scimitars on a chain (spiked chain).

Paizo Employee Creative Director

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Brotato wrote:

If he actually just said "because it's a specific flavor for a specific region of our specific game world" I'd have more respect for it than this "it's too powerful" defense.

That's why I chose the scimitar and not another weapon for the feat.

And frankly, if I thought I could get away with it, I would do similar feats for similar weapons, or perhaps just a generic "add your Dex instead of Str" type feat to damage, but that's something the design team, not me, feels is too powerful. (You'll note that Dervish Dance has yet to show up in a rules hardcover...)

To a certain extent, I agree with them.

To a greater extent, I'm still pretty frustrated that there's not really a core option to play a full-on swashbuckler—AKA a fighter who favors 1 weapon, no shield (or just a buckler), and light armor. The only options to make that character as they exist now is to build it as a rogue (which sacrifices attack power and adds some flavor—sneak attacks and trap stuff—that doesn't really fit with a swashbuckler's themes) or as a fighter (and simply be at peace with the fact that your chosen fighting style means you'll have a lower AC and do less damage than any other fighting style affords).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

There is a problem with going too far in the just add you X ability to Y rolls instead of Z ability, everything becomes bland. For me 4E went to far like that (I played it for a year and a half and I still enjoy it). If you can use pretty much any ability for AC and HP and Attacks etc, why bother having different ones? It almost becomes in combat use 20+, skills the only thing that it made a dif (and that was changed a lot too)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
mach1.9pants wrote:
There is a problem with going too far in the just add you X ability to Y rolls instead of Z ability, everything becomes bland. For me 4E went to far like that (I played it for a year and a half and I still enjoy it). If you can use pretty much any ability for AC and HP and Attacks etc, why bother having different ones? It almost becomes in combat use 20+, skills the only thing that it made a dif (and that was changed a lot too)

This is why I think the problem isn't that martials are too MAD - the problem is that casters are too SAD. Instead of giving each martial character a single god-stat, force casters to make actual decisions with their stats as well, instead of having one stat control maximum level spell to cast and save DC's and spells per day and concentration checks, and having no stat at all control the effects of spells (duration, range, damage, etc) or attempts to overcome spell resistance or any number of other things that are based solely on caster level. It would be cool to choose between specializing in, for example, having harder-to-resist spells versus specializing in spells that have more effect when they do work, just by choosing how to distribute attribute points.

When everyone has one stat they care about that they can pump everything into, there are no real decisions to make. And when it doesn't even matter which stat you pump everything into because they all have pretty much the same effect? That's a problem.

Osirion

Roberta Yang wrote:
When everyone has one stat they care about that they can pump everything into, there are no real decisions to make. And when it doesn't even matter which stat you pump everything into because they all have pretty much the same effect? That's a problem.

Casters that pour everything into one stat are giving up on other important things; Hit points, AC, Skills, Saving throws, etc.

If you don't care about those things, a fighter is perfectly capable of dumping everything into Strength. How many mix/maxed fighters do you see running around with a 20 strength 7 intelligence and 7 charisma? There were three at a table I played at last month.


James Jacobs wrote:
Brotato wrote:

If he actually just said "because it's a specific flavor for a specific region of our specific game world" I'd have more respect for it than this "it's too powerful" defense.

That's why I chose the scimitar and not another weapon for the feat.

And frankly, if I thought I could get away with it, I would do similar feats for similar weapons, or perhaps just a generic "add your Dex instead of Str" type feat to damage, but that's something the design team, not me, feels is too powerful. (You'll note that Dervish Dance has yet to show up in a rules hardcover...)

To a certain extent, I agree with them.

To a greater extent, I'm still pretty frustrated that there's not really a core option to play a full-on swashbuckler—AKA a fighter who favors 1 weapon, no shield (or just a buckler), and light armor. The only options to make that character as they exist now is to build it as a rogue (which sacrifices attack power and adds some flavor—sneak attacks and trap stuff—that doesn't really fit with a swashbuckler's themes) or as a fighter (and simply be at peace with the fact that your chosen fighting style means you'll have a lower AC and do less damage than any other fighting style affords).

I appreciate your candor, and share in your frustration with the lack of core swashbuckling fighter, which I will admit I'm probably engaging in some transference toward you in regards to, which I apologize for. I appreciate your constant presence on the boards, and your genuineness in dealing with the populace.


I think I have an old Swashbuckler homebrew that focused a lot on Dex and Cha.

It was a mix between ranger/bard minus the spell casting.

I was something like this:

Full BAB
Good Fort & Ref saves; Bad Will save
d10 HD
6 skill ranks per level

Lvl 1: Cha to AC (In addition to Dex; max Cha bonus = class lvl) as long as it was wearing light or no armor.
lvl 2: Bonus Feat: Dodge; Improved Feint/Disarm/Dirty Trick
Lvl 3: Evasion
Lvl 4: Add Cha to Initiative (in addition to Dex) and some skill checks (Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand, Sense Motive and Ride)
Lvl 5: Add Dex to damage (as long as it had 1 hand free and was wearing light or no armor)
Lvl 6: Bonus Feat: Force of Personality (I use some 3.5 feats)/Greater Feint/Disarm/Dirty Trick
(...)
I don't remember the rest exactly. I know it eventually got to add his Cha modifier to damage rolls whenever he caught an enemy flat-footed.

It was pretty good, and very fun to play.


The idea that adding dex to damage is too powerful for a feat is kind of defeated by the fact that the Agile weapon enchantment exists.

Really, the Dervish Dance feat is only good until you can afford the Agile enchantment, after that you're going to want to Retrain Dervish Dance because feats are simply more important than the gold you spend for the magic.


James Jacobs wrote:
Brotato wrote:

If he actually just said "because it's a specific flavor for a specific region of our specific game world" I'd have more respect for it than this "it's too powerful" defense.

That's why I chose the scimitar and not another weapon for the feat.

And frankly, if I thought I could get away with it, I would do similar feats for similar weapons, or perhaps just a generic "add your Dex instead of Str" type feat to damage, but that's something the design team, not me, feels is too powerful. (You'll note that Dervish Dance has yet to show up in a rules hardcover...)

To a certain extent, I agree with them.

To a greater extent, I'm still pretty frustrated that there's not really a core option to play a full-on swashbuckler—AKA a fighter who favors 1 weapon, no shield (or just a buckler), and light armor. The only options to make that character as they exist now is to build it as a rogue (which sacrifices attack power and adds some flavor—sneak attacks and trap stuff—that doesn't really fit with a swashbuckler's themes) or as a fighter (and simply be at peace with the fact that your chosen fighting style means you'll have a lower AC and do less damage than any other fighting style affords).

There's also the amusing irony that the Swashbuckler rogue archetype is not proficient in buckler...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Doomed Hero wrote:

The idea that adding dex to damage is too powerful for a feat is kind of defeated by the fact that the Agile weapon enchantment exists.

Really, the Dervish Dance feat is only good until you can afford the Agile enchantment, after that you're going to want to Retrain Dervish Dance because feats are simply more important than the gold you spend for the magic.

That seems to say more about the enhancement. It's already the most powerful +1 enhancement in the game.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Doomed Hero wrote:

The idea that adding dex to damage is too powerful for a feat is kind of defeated by the fact that the Agile weapon enchantment exists.

Really, the Dervish Dance feat is only good until you can afford the Agile enchantment, after that you're going to want to Retrain Dervish Dance because feats are simply more important than the gold you spend for the magic.

Once again...not really. UE did NOT include agile in the list of weapon enchantments. That is a pretty strong indication that the game designers actually DO think the ability to add dex to damage was too powerful if they left it out of the hard cover book.


The drawbacks for dervish dance are not just needed weapon finesse and a free hand. It also can only be used with a scimitar which is a martial weapon. For a fighter or magus not much of a problem, but for a rogue or bard who it really helps there is an extra feat tax of martial weapon, or a trait to get proficiency with scimitar.

As it stands the earliest a single class rouge or bard can get dervish dance is 3rd and that is assuming you are human. For a nonhuman the earliest is 5th. If it can be used with a rapier or any other weapon a human rouge can get it at 2nd level and anyone else by 3rd.

To me this seems to be about right. A rouge is not supposed to be able to out damage a fighter in straight up melee combat. As it stands by the time most rogue's are picking up dervish dance the fighter will have weapon focus, weapon specialization and probably power attack.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Cards, Companion, Maps, Pawns, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Gwen Smith wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Brotato wrote:

If he actually just said "because it's a specific flavor for a specific region of our specific game world" I'd have more respect for it than this "it's too powerful" defense.

That's why I chose the scimitar and not another weapon for the feat.

And frankly, if I thought I could get away with it, I would do similar feats for similar weapons, or perhaps just a generic "add your Dex instead of Str" type feat to damage, but that's something the design team, not me, feels is too powerful. (You'll note that Dervish Dance has yet to show up in a rules hardcover...)

To a certain extent, I agree with them.

To a greater extent, I'm still pretty frustrated that there's not really a core option to play a full-on swashbuckler—AKA a fighter who favors 1 weapon, no shield (or just a buckler), and light armor. The only options to make that character as they exist now is to build it as a rogue (which sacrifices attack power and adds some flavor—sneak attacks and trap stuff—that doesn't really fit with a swashbuckler's themes) or as a fighter (and simply be at peace with the fact that your chosen fighting style means you'll have a lower AC and do less damage than any other fighting style affords).

There's also the amusing irony that the Swashbuckler rogue archetype is not proficient in buckler...

Although at least she doesn't have to worry about all that trapfinding stuff.


I've made up some houserule feats in my game. One of the fighter/rogues has taken them and by level 7.

Using a rapier and nothing in the other hand.

He gets to add dex to hit via weapon finesse.
He add dex and int to damage although it is precision based.
Fighter and rogue levels stack for purposes of fighter feats and sneak attack. He has sneak attack 4d6.
+2 to hit and +2 AC
weapon focus and specialisation.

For the low low price of 8 feats. A two handed weapon fighter deals more damage with 3 feats although they have probably grabbed weapon focus and specialisation as well. Vital strike and a two handed weapon deals way more damage when they have to move, AC is similar and the two handed weapon user has 3 feats left over as well. Throw in improved crits via a falchion and its not pretty. The duelist however does get things like better saves, skills and initiative via the igh dex. However since the duelist also has a high int the thw fighter probably has his second highest score in con or maybe even dex.

Rather than saying XYZ is better in this situation compare it to whats else is available. My duelist archtype is elss of a problem for me as the DM as it still deals less damage and doesn't have a 30% chance of almost one shotting anything. An archer is still gona habe more attacks, be able to make more full attacks and probably outdamage the duelist as well although that may vary by sneak attacks. The duelist is still going to be less offensive/threatening than fly, suggestion, haste, black tentacles and various other 3rd and 4th level spells.

In pathfinder the optimal melee build by a large margin seems to be large two handed weapons often married to a 18-20 crit range. Power atack, vital strike, furious focus, win.


I know people keep using this as a magus thing, but an elven free hand fighter archetype with dervish dance could be really interesting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Modules Subscriber

Hmm... is it just me, or wouldn't the visuals of this feat be fitting for an Elven Curve Blade, as well?


Funky Badger wrote:
Its a silly feat. When 95% of Magii have it, well, that has to tell you something...

The same argument is a strong one vs. a lot of feats no body complains about. Like power attack for fighters, rangers, barbarians.

Most classes/playstyles have some feats that nearly everyone of them takes.
Like archers takeing precise shot.

To allowing dervish dance for more weapons: If you allow it with a selection of weapons then martial versatility (I think that was the feat's name) will work with it. That could be an unwanted byeffect.

1 to 50 of 131 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Dervish Dance... Scimitar only... why, exactly? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.