Ahunting's page

Thank you for your reply Hiruma Kai.

I don't see "Personal Enhancement" or "Improved Get'em" any where? Where can I locate these things?

Unless Enemies are running defenses well below the way they are calculated for PCs (ie 10+Dex+KAC/EAC) it seems like characters are going to be hovering much closer to 50%, which I think most tables are going to feel is pretty low.

This causes you no concern?

I am very concerned about the hit curve. Bonus to attack roll has basically gone away in Starfinder (except weapon focus of focus of course).
But defense bonuses seem to be alive and well, is the idea that everyone is just going to miss a lot more? Am I missing something?

I'm not totally sure fall into this group. But my sub status keeps moving backwards for no reason I can tell. Do I need to take some action?

However, the combination of Martial Versatility + Slashing Grace allows you to apply Slashing Grace to all the weapons in a weapon group. Slashing Grace says that while you are wielding that weapon one-handed, you get to treat it as a one-handed weapon. So, since Phalanx Soldier allows you to wield a spear/polearm in one hand, Slashing Grace then allows you to treat it as a one-handed weapon.

Martial Versatility doesn't come into play in that part.

I agree if you follow the the exact wording of Phalanx soldier you could get away with applying Slashing Gracing to a nodachi as it is a polearm, as it would be counting as a one handed slashing weapon assuming you had Swashbuckler finesses or its equivalent. But that does not mean you can suddenly duel wield them. It simply means that you can do it with one. Now I admit SGing a Nodachi is pretty good trick. But pulling it off take you until 5th level so I'm not overly concerned on the topic.

If your trying to use Martial Versatility to somehow make all polearms one handed nothing in ether the wording of the feat or the archetype indicates that to me. I could very be miss understanding what your saying, if so please explain.

RumpinRufus wrote:

Eigengrau, I'm a bit confused in what you're doing. It looks like you're taking Slashing Grace with the sibat, which is a weapon that is only in the Spears weapon group. So it's not clear how you'd be using Martial Flexibility to get Slashing Grace for either Polearms or Heavy Blades.

Argh. I was so tired when I wrote that.

I had mistakenly confused Tiger Fork and Sibat. I was thinking that Sibat was Polearm and Spears group like the Tiger Fork. It'd take to long to explain what I was trying to do, which is wrong anyway. Sorry.

However with the following build I should be able to use a Nodachi with Slashing Grace. Nodachi is a Heavy Blade and a Polearm. Phalanx Soldier at level 3 can use any polearm as a 1-handed weapon while using a shield.
So strapping on a buckler and taking a -1 to hit w/my off hand attack, I could dual wield them both.

Swashbuckler 1 / Phalanx Soldier 4 Human.

1. Swashbuckler Finesse, Weapon Focus Nodachi, Two weapon fighting
2. Two Weapon Defense
3. Any 2 Feats here (these feats will be retrained at level 5)
4.
5. Martial Versatility (W.Focus), Slashing Grace.

So at level 5 I retrain my 2 feats that I got at level 3 and my 2nd level feat to Weapon Specialization and Martial Versatility (Slashing Grace), and Martial Versatility (W.Specialization). This will now get me Weapon Focus, Slashing Grace & Weapon Specialization with every Heavy Blade & Polearm.

So if I did dual wield Nodachis, I'd be at a -1 to hit on my offhand due to wearing a buckler. However I'd be happy with that due to getting my full Dex bonus on damage with my offhand, where a STR based person could not.

Now none of this is possible without Phalanx Soldier of course. I think I got it better explained this time.

If you sat down at my table I wouldn't let that fly. Phalanx solider says nothing about making all polearms counting as one handed weapons. It just says that you can use one in your primary hand as a one handed weapon when your carrying a shield. That does not make a polearm in your offhand count as one handed weapon

No where in the Slashing Grace Feat does it say that you need the Swashbuckler's Finesse version of Weapon Finesse.

Quote:

Slashing Grace (Combat)
You can stab your enemies with your sword or another
slashing weapon.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus
with chosen weapon.
Benefit: Choose one kind of one-handed slashing
weapon (such as the longsword). When wielding your
chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a
one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and
class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a
swashbuckler’s or a duelist’s precise strike) and you can
add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength
modifier to that weapon’s damage. The weapon must be
one appropriate for your size.

If the feat required Swashbuckler's Finesse it would say it in the Prerequisites instead of standard Weapon Finesse.

Swashbuckler Finesse and all its variants (Daring Champion etc) specifically says it counts as weapon finesse for the purposes of feat requirements.

One handed is the issue. Nodachi does not fit that category. Slashing Grace's wording is actually pretty specific. When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon.

It limits your options on what can and cannot be used on and how it can be used, and it does not actually mean it make it finesse-able unless you have the Swashbuckler finesse feature, or the weapon is naturally finesse-able.

Weapons that are naturally finesse-able and do slashing damage I think is limited to only Aldori-Dueling sword and the Bug Saber (With Exotic Weapon Prof, of course). If your ready to spend more feats into the effort (IE Exotic weapon Prof), you could use it with most of the exotic weapon one handed table (All that do Slashing of course), which opens up a list of options.

Bastard Sword and Falcata both being very interesting options imo.

I have serious doubts about the legality of martial flexing into this combo. For certain you still must meet the one handed specification regardless. Its already been posted that a piercing version of SG, will come out in October. But I would ask your GM or venture captain before using Martial Flexibility to qualify for SG.

I'd argue that it's not improvised, it is meant to stab a target. The wording to me (it replaces the extra attack from rapid shot) suggests to me it should be considered as a regular arrow attack only it just happens to be in melee. The problem with special snow flake feats, is that they are hard to adjudicate. Note that raw this attack knocks back any creature it hits. Giants, dragons anything, no CMD, no nothing.

How hard is it to say? "Oops sorry, I forgot to record My character's alignment I meant it to be <________> Good." If he had managed that problem would have been solved. I don't blame the Cleric, it's not his fault that the ranger's player failed to complete the character creation. The GM's call was fair, lacking something else it fair way to go. The ranger could have spoken up, I can't see anyone objecting. So a character lost and a lesson learned.
No serious harm done.

Blind fight seems particularly good for someone focused on pummeling, since that '1 hit for your whole full attack' thing can work against you with concealment. But you don't always end up in darkness, so putting actual feats into blindfight could be questionable (at least when there are more routinely relevant stuff)

Thus the point being to flex into blindfight, or into any other feat you need. I have an expression I use "Silverbullet mages", players who just happen to always have the exactly needed spell(s) racked. (I'm sure as they claim it has nothing to do with scouting scenarios.) This class allows you to do the same thing martially, but without the need for fore knowledge. It won't be as effective, as feats are more limited then spells. But a reactive fighting style is very strong, and if you have a truly comprehensive feat list or knowledge of the feat list. You can certainly pull off some useful tricks.

Still not happy with the Warpriest, but it does treat it's level as BaB for Feat Selection, and counts as a Fighter for Fighter Only Feats.

Codzilla was a 3.0/3.5 thing, and required a lot of splat books and navigating a few grey areas, and focused on self-buffing.

You can't get them until third and every three level there after and you still must meet the standard pre-reqs that means your always one level behind. IE you can't get weapon spec until 5th and so on. It's just to little to late. On the upside it's one less class we have to do the total math on from the ACG.

Brawlers are solid, smart players will use them to amazing effect, getting the perfect feat to fit the situation. Base class wise you grab WF+PA+PS+CE and you face roll until you need to worry about saves. Then you get creative. But there so much flexibility. Just have decently balanced stat array, carry of copy of the combat feat list with you and your set. Need Fire resist? multi-into perfect style or one of the elemental fighting styles. Need to hit in the dark, grab blind fight. Can't melee? Grab throw anything, Point blank, and precise, and go to town with rock, branches, whatever is at handy. Need to win the jousting contest? No problem Mounted combat, ride by attack, and Spirited Charge. Can't get near the big dragon cause its got all the reach? Dodge, mobility, spring attack. Yeah those are all 3 feat combos but you can scale down easily.

Now they are subpar divine casters who gave up domains and 9th level spells for weapon focus at first, and couple bonus feats. Not a good trade. If they are part fighter make'em fight like a real martial class.

I disagree, this is major nerf to the class. I don't think its fine, it basically means you need to go down that silly 3 feat of their's which just means we are looking at new major feat tax.

Honestly if this happened at my table, I'd fail the table. Zero Prestige, move on. While I agree they epicly screwed the pooch, but they tried to follow orders and those orders did not include do this stealthy. They simply said get this guy out of town without killing him.

I'd sit down and talk to the barbarian's player for a bit, make sure he/she understood the system well enough to do something like strike to subdue, and make sure she/he understood why this had happened, and what they had intended to happen.

But I am honestly more concerned that a GM is shocked when a NPC dies after fighting a party for 3 rounds. I mean most low table I see combat rarely make it into round 3. Even at high tables 1 NPC very rarely last 3 rounds with a party, unless it is a very serious NPC.

PFS isn't about a punitive relationship between GMs and Players. Certainly actions have consequences as they must. But it is about having fun as a table. Both GM and Players, telling the story of the scenario together. When failure happens it happens to the table as a whole unit not simply from the actions of one player.

Of course if a player is abusive and doing such things on purpose then they should be handled by the local VC. But it doesn't sound like that is what happened here. It sounds like poor judgement on all sides snowballing into a failed table.

I hope I'm joining the chorus when I say this class really needs finesse at 1st, just push riposte back to 2nd, and throw weapon finesse in there.

After that I like the class a lot and I think it will accomplish its goal just fine.

Hey Guys,

Can we get an answer to this question?

I discussed this with my local venture Captain, and a couple of our local GMs, everyone I talked to so far agreed they would consider them all as "a Sling" at their tables. My balance projections don't suggest this would be horribly unbalancing, in fact offering a decent alternative to bow builds would seem to be a good idea.

Thanks

I could probably help you if you can quote the exact text of the feat. I don't have UC yet.

I thought that might be against the EULA, so I didn't.

Ok so UC, Pg 119 Sling Flail Combat feat,
I am unclear about some wording here, as I first read it, it basically makes a sling into a melee weapon that is considered a flail. Which seems fairly clear, however upon closer consideration my question comes from the special section the phrase "Also Apply" which feats are used? Flail? Sling? Flail and Sling?
If so how does this feat relate to stitched slings, from HoG, and it relationship or lack there of to Whip-Slinger also for HoG?

The great thing about errata is that it can also be errated. Fixing the trait to a balanced solution showes that Paizo takes feed back seriously and that they take balance serously. It's a win win situation. As opposed to blindly nerf bating a popular trait and then simple believing that all is well and moving on, which just leaves everyone worse off.

Ahunting wrote:

Something like that would prevent it from vanishing whole sale from society play but still close an obvious exploit.

It will still get used in PFS.

I want a wizard with a longsword like Gandolf.

I want a halfling rogue with a slingstaff like Taslhoff.

It just won't get used by the DPR/ optimizer crowds as much.

There will always be sticks in the mud. But it has mysteriously gone from being the most popular melee trait to vanishing completely from every character I have run across over the course of the last week or so.

I don't think anyone can make the case that heirloom weapon wasn't vastly over powered. It gave the effect of three feats for the price of half a feat. However this change means it becomes useless.

I think a more compromised position would make more sense. Reduce it to martial or simple, as per character race.(ie must be martial or simple to that character) and make it a masterwork weapon. This loses the two strongest components of the trait while keeping a solid rules reason to take it, and a solid role play reason as to why your family would bother to pass this weapon down father to son etc.

Something like that would prevent it from vanishing whole sale from society play but still close an obvious exploit.

My concern on this Scorpion Whip is described as "this Whip" which I assume means it function as a whip baring the non-lethal damage and armor part of the program. I however hate assuming anything, and would prefer to have it clarified, 15 reach, Provokes can be used on Adjacent target? Though the logic for it provoking becomes much less clear when its dealing lethal damage. Not that it really matters it an easily solvable problem.
Its not becoming the next Spiked chain b/c the feat and trait support for it are much stronger.