Venture-Agent, Nebraska—Omaha
|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
In Qadira and throughout the Padishah Empire, Sarenrae’s worshipers praise the Dawnflower through dance. Her more warlike followers adapted these dances into graceful martial forms, and their swashbuckling style is feared throughout the Inner Sea region and beyond for its ability to devastate foes with a scimitar through motion and agility regardless of strength of arms.
The Whirling Dervish archetype in Advanced Class Origins does not include a restriction to worshipers of Sarenrae in its text. However, it is clear from the description of the archetype and description of the abilities that it is strongly tied to Sarenrae.
Should a restriction be added to the Campaign Clarifications document?
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If we had that discussion when the book came out, I would agree that you have a point. However, that archetype has been legal for years, adding a campaign clarification after the fact... really does not help anybody, and could explode a couple of characters.
Likely 90 % of characters will already venerate Sarenrae or a very similar entity, and frankly if at this point someone wants to make a character using this archetype..I am very much fine with that.
That and the fact that Dervish Dance was changed from a regional feat to a general one, leads me to believe, that limiting the archetype after the fact... would be a net negative.
---
Not sure what prompted that questions.
EDIT. Just read this...
So slight derail, but I've found a way that allows Dex to damage with the bladed brush regardless of your reading of the feat without multiclassing, going rogue, or using the agile enchantment.
Whirling Dervish Swashbuckler gets dex to damage with any weapon she can use swashbucklers finesse with at level 4, and bladed brush makes glaives qualify for swashbuckler's finesse.
Probably the best way to do it, and it works great for entering into the Devoted Muse Prestige Class.
EDIT2
If a GM says that the combination with bladed brush is stupid, he might have a leg to stand on that this does not actually work.
(At this point I am kinda hoping for a new version of bladed brush to be included in a new source or a blog) ..
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler f inesse.
If you use bladed brush, you most definitely carry a weapon in your off-hand.
---
Even after reading Marks post about the issue... my opinion on the issue does not change.. and I am currently in the planning stages of an Artful Muse and a Whirling Dervish..
I really doubt that is is really a serious problem, that needs to be addressed, considering the possible damage.
|
|
[PFS Legal] Whirling Dervish
Source Advanced Class Origins pg. 23 (Amazon)
In Qadira and throughout the Padishah Empire, Sarenrae’s worshipers praise the Dawnflower through dance. Her more warlike followers adapted these dances into graceful martial forms, and their swashbuckling style is feared throughout the Inner Sea region and beyond for its ability to devastate foes with a scimitar through motion and agility regardless of strength of arms.
Dawnflower’s Mercy (Ex): While violence is sometimes necessary to cleanse evil, Sarenrae’s desire for redemption prevents her dervishes from reveling in a foe’s defeat.
Not to mention the entire thing is oozing with the redemption/but kicking of saranrae from the flavor text to the abilities.
Now if that isn't a 100% "you must worship saranrae to take this feat", it's at least a yellow flag on it.
|
Venture-Agent, Nebraska—Omaha
|
If we had a campaign clarifications document when the archetype was first released, I believe this would have been included.
Furthermore, Mark provided developer commentary explaining that the intention was for the archetype to be limited to worshipers of Sarenrae, similar to the Dawnflower Dervish archetype for bards.
Personally, I have a kickass character idea for a Qadiran follower of Shelyn combining the archetype with Bladed Brush. She's the perfect compliment to the veiled witch character I wrote up for Tonya's next character contest. I don't want the restriction applied to the archetype, but I think it should be. And if Leadership decides not to, I'd like the peace of mind.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
attempts to combine it with bladed brush (a Shelynite feat)
Not sure what prompted that questions.
Your post came while I was editing mine ^^ .
Frankly, I am very uncertain about the mechanical effects of no longer fulfilling the prereq. of your class (or worse archetype) e.g. I have no idea what happens to a Hunter who ceases to be neutral.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
If we had a campaign clarifications document when the archetype was first released, I believe this would have been included.
Furthermore, Mark provided developer commentary explaining that the intention was for the archetype to be limited to worshipers of Sarenrae, similar to the Dawnflower Dervish archetype for bards.
Personally, I have a kickass character idea for a Qadiran follower of Shelyn combining the archetype with Bladed Brush. She's the perfect compliment to the veiled witch character I wrote up for Tonya's next character contest. I don't want the restriction applied to the archetype, but I think it should be. And if Leadership decides not to, I'd like the peace of mind.
It is a very nice concept, and I totally understand the desire to get a clarification on this issue before you build it.
|
Hey look, I inspired a thread!
Anyways, Sebastion I'm not seeing the bolded line in my copy of the archetype. Any idea why?
Also, considering that the archetype doesn't say its limited to only Sarenrae worshipers, I took it as simply copying a common Qadiran fighting style.
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler f inesse.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Hey look, I inspired a thread!
Anyways, Sebastion I'm not seeing the bolded line in my copy of the archetype. Any idea why?
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler f inesse.
I bolded it, to indicate that a GM could argue that the combination does not work. Sorry, I might not have been clear enough.
Not sure what result people would prefer, either the combination works (which helps the people who argue that Bladed Brush is broken) or it does not.
Also, considering that the archetype doesn't say it's limited to only Sarenrae worshipers, I took it as simply copying a common Qadiran fighting style.
An entirely valid point, and one where I partly agree. It's entirely reasonable to learn a fighting style that has been heavily influenced by specific religious teachings... and not care about the religion bit.
|
Venture-Agent, Nebraska—Omaha
|
Hey look, I inspired a thread!
Anyways, Sebastion I'm not seeing the bolded line in my copy of the archetype. Any idea why?
Also, considering that the archetype doesn't say its limited to only Sarenrae worshipers, I took it as simply copying a common Qadiran fighting style.
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler f inesse.
I see that line in my copy of the PDF. But, I don't think it applies to the combination. The benefit it is referring to is treating a scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon. By that reading, you could get Dex-to-Damage with a rapier while two-weapon fighting, though.
Which book are you looking at?
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Hey look, I inspired a thread!
Anyways, Sebastion I'm not seeing the bolded line in my copy of the archetype. Any idea why?
Also, considering that the archetype doesn't say its limited to only Sarenrae worshipers, I took it as simply copying a common Qadiran fighting style.
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler f inesse.I see that line in my copy of the PDF. But, I don't think it applies to the combination. The benefit it is referring to is treating a scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon.
Which book are you looking at?
The line is not bolded in the original text, that was me.
I am not entirely sure what the intention is, the archetype seems to have been written to "add" the Dervish Dance fighting style to the class.. the holy weapon or a certain deity.. and it seems to expect, that players would use a scimitar.
I have been burned too often, when it comes to developer mind reading, so am not going to speculate what is intended... but I know GMs and enough might use this line of reasoning to hamper a character.
|
Designer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The part you guys are looking at now is also poorly worded. Looking back on my early work sometimes makes me proud, but in this case, I mostly see how I could have made the whole thing clearer by specifying a stronger scope on the no-shield-no-off-hand part of dervish finesse. That and the religious requirement of course.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
The part you guys are looking at now is also poorly worded. Looking back on my early work sometimes makes me proud, but in this case, I mostly see how I could have made the whole thing clearer by specifying a stronger scope on the no-shield-no-off-hand part of dervish finesse. That and the religious requirement of course.
Everyone makes mistakes, and those very special reading skills come from years of having to argue with players (of course you are a 5 star GM yourself), I am also very much aware that editing can sometimes twist your wording so very slightly... and suddenly, with the help of the many creative gamers out there, you end up with a situation nobody expected or wanted.
If it helps, I hate reading almost everything I wrote a couple of years ago ^^ Situations like this are prone to happen in this hobby, it's just one of the perks of organized play that GM calls like this might need an answer.
|
|
Oh wait guys, I was looking at the wrong thing. The important part of the archetype is this.
Dervish Finesse (Ex): A whirling dervish can treat a
scimitar as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for the
purposes of the swashbuckler’s f inesse and all feats and
class abilities that refer to such a weapon. She must not be
carrying a weapon or shield in her off hand to gain this benef it. This ability alters swashbuckler finesse.
It alters Swashbuckler's finesse but does not replace the normal benefit. So you still get the normal swashbuckler's Finesse benefits with 1 handed piercing weapons.
Because of that the Dervish Dance abilty works with it.
Dervish Dance (Ex)
At 4th level, a whirling dervish can use her Dexterity modifier instead of her Strength modifier on melee damage rolls when using her swashbuckler finesse. She counts as having the Dervish Dance feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites.
Anyways, I just think it makes a really cool character concept. A warrior who adaps the traditional dervish fighting style of Qadira to the glaive. It really fits Shelyn too, as she's all about creating new art forms and such.
|
At any rate, with Bladed Brush not being allowed, it's a moot point.
This tread was spwaned due to Jurassic Pratt's post in the thread about Bladed Brush, hence why it is being brought up here.
However, I disagree with changing the archetype to require the deity. After this long it has a larger negative impact on the community as a whole as people already have characters built around it, and honestly the "dervish" concept feels more Qadiran then specifically Sarenrae. Especially considering the Qadira campaign setting calls out other Deities being worshipped and it could easily be that my Qadiran human, who was raised in Qadira could learn that fighting style from a master who did without worshipping the worship.
So, I vote no.
|
|
While I'm normally on the 'inclusion' side of the fence, the idea of that much cultural blend in two nation-states that traditionally have warred with each other for centuries seems a bit 'off'.
While there is a valid argument 'since it is not written in the description SPECIFICALLY', when the discussion came up in the other thread I had a disconnect because the Dervish seemed very much to be devoted to Sarenrae, much like Bladed Brush is devoted to Shelyn.
The fact that a developer has indicated that their initial design idea was that this was related to the sacred path of a given deity, even if it doesn't have 'full weight' in PFS, should be a telling point as well.
EDIT: Figured out the disconnect for me, at least. It feels sort of like Lawful Good paladins of Asmodeus...
|
|
While I'm normally on the 'inclusion' side of the fence, the idea of that much cultural blend in two nation-states that traditionally have warred with each other for centuries seems a bit 'off'.
*eye twitch*
Shelyn is NOT a Taldan only deity, she is worshiped in Qadira, she is worshiped all over Golarion.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I'm normally on the 'inclusion' side of the fence, the idea of that much cultural blend in two nation-states that traditionally have warred with each other for centuries seems a bit 'off'.While there is a valid argument 'since it is not written in the description SPECIFICALLY', when the discussion came up in the other thread I had a disconnect because the Dervish seemed very much to be devoted to Sarenrae, much like Bladed Brush is devoted to Shelyn.
The fact that a developer has indicated that their initial design idea was that this was related to the sacred path of a given deity, even if it doesn't have 'full weight' in PFS, should be a telling point as well.
EDIT: Figured out the disconnect for me, at least. It feels sort of like Lawful Good paladins of Asmodeus...
Wei Ji: Shelyn is not a "Taldan" deity. She is an Inner Sea deity who is worshipped even in Tien Xia (per Dragon Empires Gazetter). The Qadira, Jewel of the East campaign setting that was recently released even states that there is Shelyn worshippers in Qadira. So while there is a disconnect for you, the canon does not make it unreasonable for a Dervish or Samurai to worship Shelyn.
Sarenrae’s worship is the most widespread in Qadira but the empire comprises many cultures and peoples, and is highly tolerant in matters of faith. In addition to the faiths of Abadar, Calistria, Irori,Lamashtu, Nethys, Rovagug, and Shelyn..
While the developer has spoken his intention, the fact the deity requirement did not make it into the final product is equally telling to me. Plenty of archetypes and PrC were printed prior to the ACO with deity requirements clearly stated, and for this to be 2+ years later to now be an issue only brought up by the possible interaction of it with a deity specific feat seems ridiculous on some level. If the requirement was so important, then it should have been addressed before this point.
Whirling Dervish can easily be a Qadiran themed archetype that draws much from the fact Sarenae is the primary deity in Qadira.
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And "paladins of Asmodeus" is a bit much. (Just saw the edit.) It's two good deities, neither of whom seem to have any issue with... uh... culture mixing.Paladin of Asmodeus.. that is a Hellknight right?
No, it's an old bit of controversy from a since-decanonized article on Asmodeus.
|
|
While the developer has spoken his intention, the fact the deity requirement did not make it into the final product is equally telling to me. Plenty of archetypes and PrC were printed prior to the ACO with deity requirements clearly stated, and for this to be 2+ years later to now be an issue only brought up by the possible interaction of it with a deity specific feat seems ridiculous on some level. If the requirement was so important, then it should have been addressed before this point.
There's PrCs that have Deity requirements that are clearly listed but I don't know of any Archetypes that had Deity requirements.
|
Contributor
|
While the developer has spoken his intention, the fact the deity requirement did not make it into the final product is equally telling to me. Plenty of archetypes and PrC were printed prior to the ACO with deity requirements clearly stated, and for this to be 2+ years later to now be an issue only brought up by the possible interaction of it with a deity specific feat seems ridiculous on some level. If the requirement was so important, then it should have been addressed before this point.There's PrCs that have Deity requirements that are clearly listed but I don't know of any Archetypes that had Deity requirements.
The Dawnflower dervish bard is the most well-known one.
|
|
The Dawnflower dervish bard is the most well-known one.While the developer has spoken his intention, the fact the deity requirement did not make it into the final product is equally telling to me. Plenty of archetypes and PrC were printed prior to the ACO with deity requirements clearly stated, and for this to be 2+ years later to now be an issue only brought up by the possible interaction of it with a deity specific feat seems ridiculous on some level. If the requirement was so important, then it should have been addressed before this point.There's PrCs that have Deity requirements that are clearly listed but I don't know of any Archetypes that had Deity requirements.
*nods*
I just came across that in my search. The fact that that's the one is ironically hilarious.
|
|
No, it's an old bit of controversy from a since-decanonized article on Asmodeus.And "paladins of Asmodeus" is a bit much. (Just saw the edit.) It's two good deities, neither of whom seem to have any issue with... uh... culture mixing.Paladin of Asmodeus.. that is a Hellknight right?
Out of curiosity, how does one find out about things being de-canonized? This is the second de-canonization I've heard of, the other being something about Erastil (probably the misogynistic parts, but I have no idea). But... do they change the books or something? Or is it simply lurking in one of the giant "ask James Jacobs (et al)" threads that are nearly impossible to keep up with?
|
Contributor
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Out of curiosity, how does one find out about things being de-canonized? This is the second de-canonization I've heard of, the other being something about Erastil (probably the misogynistic parts, but I have no idea).
It's a... complicated process. They prefer not to emphasize the removed content.
Your best bet is to consult the newest content (in this case, Inner Sea Gods) and if it's not there, it's not there.
|
|
Out of curiosity, how does one find out about things being de-canonized? This is the second de-canonization I've heard of, the other being something about Erastil (probably the misogynistic parts, but I have no idea).It's a... complicated process. They prefer not to emphasize the removed content. Your best bet is to consult the newest content (in this case, Inner Sea Gods) and if it's not there, it's not there.
*involuntary twitch* That is... an awful way to do it. There's so much flavor and backstory that appear in other materials that never make it into the hardcovers and seems to still be considered canon.
But anyway, thank you--if that's the answer, that's the answer!
|
|
Fixing broken flavor is as important as fixing broken mechanics.
Sure, but fixing flavor while breaking mechanics after such very long period of time does more harm then good. This is still a game which is driven primarily by mechanics first.
Fixing it after 3, or maybe even 6 months, sure. Fixing it after 2+ years feels like bad precedent and an unhealthy decision for the PFS environment as a whole. This drives people away from a game when a decision like this breaks their characters they spent a lot of time on.
Fixing broken flavor is as important as fixing broken mechanics.Sure, but fixing flavor while breaking mechanics after such very long period of time does more harm then good. This is still a game which is driven primarily by mechanics first.
Fixing it after 3, or maybe even 6 months, sure. Fixing it after 2+ years feels like bad precedent and an unhealthy decision for the PFS environment as a whole. This drives people away from a game when a decision like this breaks their characters they spent a lot of time on.
My first instinctive reaction to this was "grandfather characters which would be broken by this" but I don't know how the PFS powers-that-be feel about that kind of thing, and I certainly haven't thought much about whether it would be a good or bad idea in the long run.
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
My first instinctive reaction to this was "grandfather characters which would be broken by this" but I don't know how the PFS powers-that-be feel about that kind of thing, and I certainly haven't thought much about whether it would be a good or bad idea in the long run.Fixing broken flavor is as important as fixing broken mechanics.Sure, but fixing flavor while breaking mechanics after such very long period of time does more harm then good. This is still a game which is driven primarily by mechanics first.
Fixing it after 3, or maybe even 6 months, sure. Fixing it after 2+ years feels like bad precedent and an unhealthy decision for the PFS environment as a whole. This drives people away from a game when a decision like this breaks their characters they spent a lot of time on.
I came to PFS after the Aasimar and Tielfing grandfathering.. and I still play with players who have plenty on reserve... so I would not expect a very generous grandfathering.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Fixing broken flavor is as important as fixing broken mechanics.Sure, but fixing flavor while breaking mechanics after such very long period of time does more harm then good. This is still a game which is driven primarily by mechanics first.
Fixing it after 3, or maybe even 6 months, sure. Fixing it after 2+ years feels like bad precedent and an unhealthy decision for the PFS environment as a whole. This drives people away from a game when a decision like this breaks their characters they spent a lot of time on.
But not enough time to consider that Sarenrae worship is an inherent part of the archetype.
|
|
Fixing broken flavor is as important as fixing broken mechanics.Sure, but fixing flavor while breaking mechanics after such very long period of time does more harm then good. This is still a game which is driven primarily by mechanics first.
Fixing it after 3, or maybe even 6 months, sure. Fixing it after 2+ years feels like bad precedent and an unhealthy decision for the PFS environment as a whole. This drives people away from a game when a decision like this breaks their characters they spent a lot of time on.
But not enough time to consider that Sarenrae worship is an inherent part of the archetype.
Considering the designer who made the archetype clearly stated that it was something they felt was an inherent part when they created it, I find that statement just not true. It is not like after the fact he came back and said, "you know I think this would work better as only for Sarenae worshipers." Waiting 2+ years after it went to print and now saying it should get fixed is a bit much.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering the designer who made the archetype clearly stated that it was something they felt was an inherent part when they created it, I find that statement just not true. It is not like after the fact he came back and said, "you know I think this would work better as only for Sarenae worshipers." Waiting 2+ years after it went to print and now saying it should get fixed is a bit much.
"Jingasa, table of six? Jingasa?"