This "clone" silliness is tiresome. One feat does not make a clone. If it did then go preach about all the THF barb clones and all the TWF rogue clones. Or any wizard with all the key metamagics.IMO:
It's cheezy if there's no story to the character or it's an empty clone of another character or the character can only be described as a collection of classes.
You're not describing a clone.
Cheezy clone: making a 2-weapon fighting CG Drow Ranger/Fighter/Barbarian with a Panther figurine of wonderous power as an Animal Companion. Who then has a similar backstory and personality.
Making a tribute: See the Looking For Group webcomic. (similar based design, completely different backstory and personality)
Just taking TWF doesn't make a character a clone.
/facepalm
That was my point. One feat does not make a clone.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The must choose feat combined with point buy is what makes the clone.
Main reason we stopping doing point buy was this.
Within the structure of having 6 stats and only so many points, you ended up with the exact same stats for every 'type' of build.
TWF rogues looked the same, blah blah blah.
When you combine something like point build and dervish dance you get a character that looks/acts/plays the same built by totally different people who have never met each other over and over again.
There WERE dex builds for a magus before DD, people tried weapon finesse and rapier for example. No one makes the sub optimal build anymore. Now the only variance in the build is people trying to drop Str on a character fighting with a scimitar to 7!
The cheese comes in where this players isn't or is expecting to not play by encumbrance rules.
23 lbs is all a str 7 can carry in a light load. Once you move into medium your max Dex is wasted.
IF he wears armor he's going to get there even faster, and AC penalties amassing the the point where he cant climb or jump.
Oh no problem, Ill just be a kensai, no need for armor. great that's not a pattern, no clonery happening (let me see 7 str, dervish dance, kensai, fighting with a scimitar).
The cheese still lays on thick, because at 23 lbs, this guy cant wear clothes, carry his weapon, and adventuring gear... but he expects to. I couldnt easily find the weight of a spell book so I didnt add that in.
But this guy needs someone else to carry his stuff!
A guy who expects to fight in combat one handed with his sword.
But because it mechanically works in combat, this is the route the troops will follow to make this same min/max build over and over again.
That's what makes the limburger clone.
Side note: I dislike point buy, but rolling makes wildly unfair characters (either too powerful or too weak compared to the rest of the party).
My suggestion would be to roll 36 times (3d6 or 4d6 drop lowest, or whatever you like) in a 6x6 table, then give said table to the PCs and offer them the ability to take any row, column, or diagonal of stats they'd like.
Everyone has the same opportunity to have equal stats, but they still get choice.
Someone on the forum here deserves credit for that idea, but I don't recall who it is.
yea, the point buy system was really built o speed up making characters and avoid playing yahtzee.
So it was with good intentions and not foreseeing "The BUILD" syndrome.
I've never really seen "unfair" characters come out of rolling unless the rolling was done at home or this is a character i used before in another game....
Most of the time, a character has to deal with some really lame crap stat. Which is in it's own way fun. It always something annoying like a wizard with a 7 wisdom, or a fighter with an 8 Dex.
We do 3d6 re roll 1s. Which works out to between a 10-15 point build most of the time.
We have fielded fighters with 14 str because that was the best that came out.
But with the right racial pics, we have had decent 18s (super stars) too.
most of us usually will play the same 'kind of character'
The wife is either a rogue, or a paladin. (she's playing a ninja oracle, which seems to be a combo of the two right now)
I usually play a magus or an inquisitor
Then there is the usual wizard
The archer
blabh blah blah.
After a while with point build, they are the same.
Now we have the new "point build creep" going on where now, EVERYONE is making 25 point build characters.... no in our game, just on these boards...it's creeping... why because if you stick with 15 or 20, youll always have the exact same stats. So to have different you need more!
No one would ever think of a 10 point build....poo might as well go home and eat porage.
At least the dice give some kind of variance, so when the character you rolled dies you can actually look forward to maybe having a better one, not "Scoundrel II the revival!"
|
I couldnt easily find the weight of a spell book so I didnt add that in.
3 lbs for a standard spellbook. 1 lb for a traveling or compact spellbook, but these hold fewer pages.
Please don't assume all Dervish Dancers dump strength down to 7. Players who go that route are leaving themselves vulnerable not only to emcumberance but have a lower CMD and are vulnerable to strength drain. With a strength of 7, you are one Ray of Enfeelblement away from collapsing under the weight of your own clothes.
IMO:
It's cheezy if there's no story to the character or it's an empty clone of another character or the character can only be described as a collection of classes.
This "clone" silliness is tiresome.
Umm, you know you can get two "clone" characters and run them completely different right? Personality goes a LONG way into the way the character is run/played.
I can get a Ranger/Rogue TWH using Dervish Dancer and twin scimitars.. with all the same feats.. and give you two vastly different characters.
Change the race and volla! I have a totally different story for you.
Heck, I can get Drow's the same build above and give you two drastically different characters just by tweaking a single skill (Religion for example)
Its not the STATS its the STORY
Also note, Dervish Dancers who drop Str below 13 also lose Power Attack, and can't benefit from Piranha Strike.
My DD elven Magus has 14 Str, 18 dex, 18 Int (post racials, 25 point buy). Having no strength to carry loot means you have to leave it behind if it's too bulky. The other party members aren't mules, and to expect them to carry your crap/share is fairly insulting.
Buy an actual mule, Gherrick. ;)
But yeah, even on the Dervish Dancer Magus I built for fun months ago, he had 13 Str for Power Attack and the ability to carry some stuff. And then I went and made a Staff Magus (say hello Tor) and he's got 18 Strength.
I don't see the problem with Magi using the Dervish Dancer feat. It's pretty much designed to shore up their weaknesses, and you can just as easily fluff it as how Magi are trained to fight. It's not "Dawnflower Dancer" or "Saranraen Disciple of How To Hit Things With a Scimitar" so the only reason to argue IT'S AGAINST THE FLUFF is if you've got a big ol' stick up your ass about changing fluff. And 3.X/PF is practically DESIGNED to LET you change the fluff as you please. As long as the crunch is the same, who cares if you learned to use speed over brute strength with a scimitar from a tanned guy in a turban or a mage-warrior?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The other game, I actually got Dexios (my inquisitor) into combat after getting a judgement up, a couple buff spells, and bane. He was able to be quite effective between his katana, bane, divine favor and a spiritual weapon. The fighter player was a bit shocked. I explained that Dex is a sprinter, his fighter is a marathon runner. I can out-do him in the short run, but he doesn't 'run out of tricks'.
It's the same with the Magus, maybe moreso. He's going to be able to do massive damage with the burst-crit, but will run out. It's a game style to 'balance' out by occasionally making the party run a marathon.
The concern over the Dervgus seems to be that it is the 'bestest magus ever'. I don't know enough to say. I do know that the Dervgus appears to be the 'most common' and the feats required are 'fluffy'. Maybe using the weapons range and multiplier would cut down on the Dervgus.
The Strength Katana magus above is another example, using the high threat range weapon. A falscata magus (Falgus?) would be more atttracive, for example, if it kept that X4 crit for spell strike. Sure your katana/scimitar magus will crit more often, but who doesn't like rolling 20d6 at 5th level? (or 40d6 at 10th?)
I think Dervish Dance is a bit strong. I mean EWP Aldori Dueling Sword and EWP Elven curved blade also allow Weapon finesse with their namesake weapons.* But Dervish dance is effectively the same feat cost (Unless you're playing a character who doesn't get all MWP, or MWP: Scimitar for free.) If DD *just* allowed finessable scimitars, it might be better. But it adds Dex to damage as well.
If there was a 'generic feat' that allowed dex to damage (for one weapon) it would be better. That would make the curved blade and Aldori dueling sword, for example, more tempting.
*
I couldnt easily find the weight of a spell book so I didnt add that in.3 lbs for a standard spellbook. 1 lb for a traveling or compact spellbook, but these hold fewer pages.
Please don't assume all Dervish Dancers dump strength down to 7. Players who go that route are leaving themselves vulnerable not only to emcumberance but have a lower CMD and are vulnerable to strength drain. With a strength of 7, you are one Ray of Enfeelblement away from collapsing under the weight of your own clothes.
OH I agree.
I'm not assuming anything, in fact i wouldn't even make this kind of character, but once someone posts the build and everyone argues how great and viable it is there is the stampede to make it. Any DM that hits them with str drain is poo poo'd as meta gaming and taking advantage of the PC....
I was simply stating that this his how the Clone characters start, point buy, must have feat, min max.... bang, there is only one way to do it.
Is a TWF a must have for a twf build? No. it's must have for an extra attack with your off hand.
at 6th level a fighter could make his iterative attack with an off hand weapon if he so chose and thematically be a two weapon fighter.
But technically speaking you aren't a TWF without TWF.
You CAN be a dex magus without DD, and there was dex magus's before the feat. It's BECOME must have because it is SO much better mechanically than other options. which has been stated by Devs of the earmark of an OP feat.
Coining the use of core feats as examples is facile. They are not the same.
every barbarian isn't the same that swings a great axe. But they can get awfully close using the same point buy.
Buy an actual mule, Gherrick. ;)
But yeah, even on the Dervish Dancer Magus I built for fun months ago, he had 13 Str for Power Attack and the ability to carry some stuff. And then I went and made a Staff Magus (say hello Tor) and he's got 18 Strength.
I don't see the problem with Magi using the Dervish Dancer feat. It's pretty much designed to shore up their weaknesses, and you can just as easily fluff it as how Magi are trained to fight. It's not "Dawnflower Dancer" or "Saranraen Disciple of How To Hit Things With a Scimitar" so the only reason to argue IT'S AGAINST THE FLUFF is if you've got a big ol' stick up your ass about changing fluff. And 3.X/PF is practically DESIGNED to LET you change the fluff as you please. As long as the crunch is the same, who cares if you learned to use speed over brute strength with a scimitar from a tanned guy in a turban or a mage-warrior?
No 'it's against the fluff' is 1) it wasnt made a core feat (due to some disagreements internally at paizo) and 2) JJ as much as said it wasn't meant as a general use/access feat (because of it's potential for over use)
So NO, it's NOT how magi train, there's no real reason for any particular magus (especially at low level never having traveled to the area) to know the feat, let alone having it be standard fare.
IF perhaps the character was already a dex build and upon travels came into the land where he saw/witnessed the fighting style and then spent the RP time to learn the feat etc etc, then he can pick it up.
But this is along the same lines of argument of people who want to play a paladin and ignore the code. Well my paladin is a lying paladin.... sigh.
Suddenly every min/max magi has some strange tie to this desert people and the goddess sarenrae and/or the PC argues he doesn't need to explain because the feat is so wide spread. It's not the case.
Why would anyone make a character with the automatic assumption that they can take that feat at 3rd level?
|
Well in my version of Golarion, most Magi do. And for that matter, my Paladins can lie, but only in cases of it preserving the Greater Good.
I ask again, what the hell DO you want? Are you going to be whiny and pissy whenever someone brings a character to the table that isn't a bog-standard greatsword fighter (who doesn't have Power Attack, apparently)?
Why do you even participate in these discussions if it's mostly you complaining about things your group apparently doesn't even f*@@ing use?
Now you're getting into the idea of feats for a specific culture or region.
Personally, I'm very much against the concept. If you want a certain culture to favor such a feat, then add that as a side note.
For example, Dervish Dance could exist (with a different name--Improved Weapon Finesse?) and allow you to deal dex-based damage with any finesse weapon.
Then there could be an extra note like:
"The people of Qadira (or whatever) favor this fighting style, and get [the following extra benefits when using a scimitar.] In Golarion, the majority of people using this feat will be Dervish Dancers from Qadira."
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's NOT culturally limited to one area or faith, though. It'd say so on the feat if it was.
Fluff is not immutable. That's why it's FLUFF.
Respectfully Seranov, I disagree. In the feats section of the ISWG.
The following feats are available to all characters and creatures that qualify for them. Note
that some of these feats have strong ties to specific regions, races, or religions, but in most cases that shouldn’t preclude you from taking one of these feats for any character you wish—provided you include elements in your character’s history that satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM’s satisfaction.
Emphasis mine. It may not be explicit in the feat itself, but it is in the section.
I'm interested in seeing this "perfectly balanced" game that these xenophobic gamers seem to want, where everything is balanced so equally that feat/spell/class disparity is kept at a bare minimum, and ultimately everything feels and plays basically the same... oh wait, that game exists. They called it 4th Edition. But people don't like that game because of how everything feels and plays basically the same. Go figure.
You don't know a thing about 4E.
It started out with Orcus. They decided to try a 3.5 version of it and ToB was made.This was a success, but then they nerfed Orcus and we got 4E.
That is right, they screwed with Orcus and we got 4E out of the deal.
Why was Orcus better? You didn't have non-recover encounters or Dailys.
So you didn't have to use each one by one each encounter.
You could use same maneuver one more than once/encounter.
Balance has nothing to do with why they don't like 4E: they messed with ToB recover ability of maneuver, inflated hps of monsters (so Kobold aren't weak), etc.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's NOT culturally limited to one area or faith, though. It'd say so on the feat if it was.
Fluff is not immutable. That's why it's FLUFF.
Respectfully Seranov, I disagree. In the feats section of the ISWG.
Emphasis mine. It may not be explicit in the feat itself, but it is in the section.The following feats are available to all characters and creatures that qualify for them. Note
that some of these feats have strong ties to specific regions, races, or religions, but in most cases that shouldn’t preclude you from taking one of these feats for any character you wish—provided you include elements in your character’s history that satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM’s satisfaction.
This has further been called out and explained by paizo staff as to why and the whole concept of whether it was op blah blah blah. It was never meant to be a universally accessed feat known Golarion wide.
This is a left up to a DM feat.so at level 3 you want to take this feat and the DM says no because you havent found it, seen it or have reason to know it exists. Are you going to have a personal break down and start chanting about imagination?
You start your character at level 1. ASSUMING with a build you will be able to take dervish dance at the next possibility.
My character grew up knowing dervish dance.... interesting, can't be so. You cant take it at level 1.
My character grew up knowing of it's existence because his father was a noble in the chelish courts of the queen and the sword sages of the desert people were a regular entertainment every spring.... hmmm ok. Now, at level 3 how are you going to train the feat? Travel home? Hope to see them entertain again and ask to train in the feat?
TRavel to their home and find someone to train you?
Assuming the other PCs aren't inconvenienced by your side trek.
What happens if the other players want to continue the adventure? Do you take a sub optimal feat you can train in? Or retire that character as he wanders off to train his feat and make another one?
Maybe levels later, your replacement character dies, then you can bring back your original character who is back from his quest to train dervish dance....?
This build ASSUMES you can just train the feat any and everywhere, all the while ignoring the text that governs it.
That's whats wrong with it.
The character would need to have both a campaign and a reasonable background explaining ready and easy access to the feat.
Example: The player wants to play an elven spell dancer from the ARG. He also wants a Dervish Dance build. He discusses with the DM of the possibility of reskinning the feat into his elven society due to the nature of his archetype etc. The DM agrees this is reasonable.
However, upon attaining level 3, the party could be in riddle port, with no access to training for this feat. Not in Kyonin or even crying leaf where he may find a spell dancer with the feat....
The assumption that the characters 'evolve' is cheesy and lame.
This is the same for spell casters assuming ability to learn certain spells at certain levels. Have you seen the spell? did you find it to learn somewhere? Do you go out of your way to seek someone who knows the spell and pay them to teach it to you?
No poof, Ive got it because it's "part of my build"
Yet, if anyone plays this way it's wrong, because it's not creative and lacks imagination.... noted.
so the 'right' way is to allow anyone access to anything they want because they want it. And a company like Paizo, ever worried about word count in their books, printed the above no apparent reason, other than to wasted word count?
They seem comparable to me.
The eberron one and gunslinger are more extreme, but the middle two I could see happening a lot.
With the samurai, you could discuss with the DM about wanting to Reskin using the samurai alt class, european weapons and armor but Samurai class mechanics for a more mounted, mobile knight/cavalier. Which, depending on the DM may or may not be allowed.
For the Dervish dance kosac barbarian guy in the frozen north, you might speak with the DM about your tribe having that kind of background/culture similar to kosacs of russia and then I could see it thematically working, IF the DM wanted to allow it.
I can also see both saying NO.
It seems there is some kind of consensus trying to build that says it's in print and is valid to be used anywere under any circumstance.... which isn't taking in the entirety of the printed document it is in, into consideration. any use of that feat outside of it's intended printed connotation is pure house rule.
i can understand dissallowing stoneage gunslingers. unless they came from another world. where then, they would be screwed by being unable to find upgraded versions of their tech. it would be preventing a PC from screwing themselves over.
Samurai? take the mechanics, cross out "Samurai" and write "Knight". rename a few weapons, problem solved.
Dervish Dance Barbarian of the north? there are similar cultures you could use, like the Kosac, or you could change the weapon and allow a different but similar style for the barbarian. maybe instead of using a scimitar, it uses some kind of longsword type weapon or something else.
i can understand dissallowing stoneage gunslingers. unless they came from another world. where then, they would be screwed by being unable to find upgraded versions of their tech. it would be preventing a PC from screwing themselves over.
Samurai? take the mechanics, cross out "Samurai" and write "Knight". rename a few weapons, problem solved.
Dervish Dance Barbarian of the north? there are similar cultures you could use, like the Kosac, or you could change the weapon and allow a different but similar style for the barbarian. maybe instead of using a scimitar, it uses some kind of longsword type weapon or something else.
Yes, of course, could does not equal will or should.
The assumption that just because there IS could it = should, or else your imagination sucks and you are a crappy gamer is wrong, and the Onus is its there , i see it, i want it and I'm going to dismiss anything "I Think" is an unreasonable restriction is also wrong. Ignoring the fact that it should be a rare build, under rare circumstances. Otherwise it makes zero sense for the Devs to have put it out that way. And the title Dervish Dance should have been something else like greater weapon finesse. or some such thing and they would have just thrown it in UC.
I don't think it's overpowered. It's fairly common build for magus. The only sad thing, is that you can't do it with other weapons (mainly: rapier).
If your DM rules out dervish dancing, then you'd have to buy an Agile weapon.
Now, at level 3 how are you going to train the feat? Travel home? Hope to see them entertain again and ask to train in the feat?
TRavel to their home and find someone to train you?
Interesting approach. Let's say you want to take cleave instead. Do you make the character go home and find a master with the feat to teach it to you too? What if the PC level up in the third level of a dungeon? Don't you allow him to take any feat until he manage to go back to home?
What about an AP like Serpent's Skull. The characters are in an solitaire island, with no access to civilization or masters, and only a few NPC they can relate to. Don't you allow them to take any feat, except those that the NPC they talk to have?
If the answer to those above is that you let them to learn cleave without needing a master, as long as they fulfill the pre-requisites, why making it different for Dervish dance?
Let's suppose the character IS a sarenrae devotee from Quadira. He is playing Serpent's skull. Since he is there from level 1, can't he take the feat either?
Same goes with any other AP. Let's suppose the character is a Sarenrae devotee dervish from Quadira, which happen to be around Sandpoint, wandering, when the goblins attack in the begining of RotRL. So, he can't take the feat either. Because he's not going to make the travel aaaaaaaalllll the way back to Quadira just to take the feat at lvl 3.
Requiring a master for the feat bassically ban the feat from the game, except for AP that take place in Quadira. It bans it, even for Quadira characters, devotees of Saerenrae, and dervish dancer cultist of the Dawnflower. And bassically ban most feats from the game for AP that do not take place in a Metropoli. There aren't a lot of people with Clustering arrows in Sand point. If you require a master, and training, for every feat, then lots of feats aren't possible to take in lots of campaigns. Unless you waive every feat training, except dervish dance.
Now, at level 3 how are you going to train the feat? Travel home? Hope to see them entertain again and ask to train in the feat?
TRavel to their home and find someone to train you?Interesting approach. Let's say you want to take cleave instead. Do you make the character go home and find a master with the feat to teach it to you too? What if the PC level up in the third level of a dungeon? Don't you allow him to take any feat until he manage to go back to home?
What about an AP like Serpent's Skull. The characters are in an solitaire island, with no access to civilization or masters, and only a few NPC they can relate to. Don't you allow them to take any feat, except those that the NPC they talk to have?
If the answer to those above is that you let them to learn cleave without needing a master, as long as they fulfill the pre-requisites, why making it different for Dervish dance?
Let's suppose the character IS a sarenrae devotee from Quadira. He is playing Serpent's skull. Since he is there from level 1, can't he take the feat either?
Same goes with any other AP. Let's suppose the character is a Sarenrae devotee dervish from Quadira, which happen to be around Sandpoint, wandering, when the goblins attack in the begining of RotRL. So, he can't take the feat either. Because he's not going to make the travel aaaaaaaalllll the way back to Quadira just to take the feat at lvl 3.Requiring a master for the feat bassically ban the feat from the game, except for AP that take place in Quadira. It bans it, even for Quadira characters, devotees of Saerenrae, and dervish dancer cultist of the Dawnflower. And bassically ban most feats from the game for AP that do not take place in a Metropoli. There aren't a lot of people with Clustering arrows in Sand point. If you require a master, and training, for every feat, then lots of feats aren't possible to take in lots of campaigns. Unless you waive every feat training, except dervish dance.
Dervish Dance is SPECIFICALLY restricted. It is NOT a generally accessible feat, no matter HOW you want to make it one.
In serpents skull the PCs specifically have special access to their factions when they need things (including possibilities of training).
Some feats like Improved TWF are natural extensions of earlier feats like TWF or Great Cleave vs Cleave. Other feats can be picked up from normal towns and such, or even learned or becoming aware of them having seen them or having knowledge of them.
This IS NOT the case of a restricted feat, class, feature or spell or what have you. The fact that it's even possible to be done is not generally known.
In SS the Devs specifically put the factions there for that kind of mulligan and others.
the fact of the matter still remains Dervish Dance is DM fiat, he can allow it or not. You can't claim it a 'common build' just because a lot of people on the boards talk about it, conveniently ignoring the printed restriction purposely put there by the devs to prevent it from being common.
edit: so for example with the 1st level quadirian. That would be a DM discussion, with the fish far out of water, thing. Perhaps later on in the game there would be some way to have their faction have a representative of that kind of training background. Or you could mulligan that the character came from a long line of practioners of this type of sword fighting and therefor has been working on the feat from day one... at level three he actually gets it to work.
Hwo do you work that out for a character who has never been to quadira or even seen the feat in use?
Dervish Dance is SPECIFICALLY restricted. It is NOT a generally accessible feat, no matter HOW you want to make it one.
Yes, it's restricted. That's why ISWG say that you should build a backgroud to take it, but that the fact it's tied to a certain religion shouldn't preclude you to take it with any character you wish
In serpents skull the PCs specifically have special access to their factions when they need things (including possibilities of training).
Some feats like Improved TWF are natural extensions of earlier feats like TWF or Great Cleave vs Cleave. Other feats can be picked up from normal towns and such, or even learned or becoming aware of them having seen them or having knowledge of them.
What about Quickened spell or extend spell? If nobody in the factions I'm in good relations have it... can't I take it? Because it's perfectly possible that no single NPC has that feat in a given town in an AP. Specially AP like Serpent's skull or Jade Reagent, and specially with feats from recently released books.
This IS NOT the case of a restricted feat, class, feature or spell or what have you. The fact that it's even possible to be done is not generally known.
In SS the Devs specifically put the factions there for that kind of mulligan and others.
the fact of the matter still remains Dervish Dance is DM fiat, he can allow it or not. You can't claim it a 'common build' just because a lot of people on the boards talk about it, conveniently ignoring the printed restriction purposely put there by the devs to prevent it from being common.
It's DM Fiat, with a *strong* suggestion in the ISWG that says you shouldn't be precluded to take it, as long as you build a background for it. Yes, the DM can ban it. I have banned Leadership and it's not even related to any culture. A DM can ban *anything*. But dervish dance shouldn't be special, as long as you build a background for it.
edit: so for example with the 1st level quadirian. That would be a DM discussion, with the fish far out of water, thing. Perhaps later on in the game there would be some way to have their faction have a representative of that kind of training background. Or you could mulligan that the character came from a long line of practioners of this type of sword fighting and therefor has been working on the feat from day one... at level three he actually gets it to work.
Hwo do you work that out for a character who has never been to quadira or even seen the feat in use?
So let's go back to your example. I'm a Chelish Magus, who saw the style in a qadiran bard company in Cheliax. I spent time with them, learning. I din't get it to work, but got Weapon Finesse, and first rank in dancing. Then I left the company. I go in a ship to Serpent Skull. I keep trying and training, every single day. I get to level 3. Can I get it?
And I quote "provided you include elements in your character’s history that satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM’s satisfaction."
Key phrases here being satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM's...
Sure, I never say it's not that way. Work with your DM, present a background justification. If he isn't satisfied, ask what will satisfy him. Once you know what would satisfy him, work around that character background conception. And then add it to the character you wish, which shouldn't be precluded to take it just because it's not tied to the culture or religion that dominate the feat. That phrase is just as key as the justify your choice and satisfy world verosimilitude.
A DM that says "no, you can't take the feat, ever, in any circumstances, unless you are a cleric of saernenrae", isn't compliant to the "not preclude it to any character you wish" just as much as a player who don't build a background for it isn't compliant to the "justify it for the world verosimilitude" bit. A player asking what would you require for his character to justify his background and satisfy the world verosimilitude is NOT the same than a player asking the feat working with a falchion or a halberd. The first one *should* get an answer about what would make the feat possible, (like the cossack example you gave), the seoond player should get a "no".
I'm surprised that there's so much argument over it. Just talk to the GM about it. If he says yes, great. If not, go with something else.
But remember that the more the GM likes your character concept, the more he is likely to say yes.
Personally I would not have a problem with a non-Sarenrae or non-Qadiran background for this feat in a game I was running, as long as the backstory for it is good. Backstory is a part of roleplaying, and if he can't do that then I'm not likely to do him favours, whereas if it makes him think more about his character and what he is like, then... mission accomplished.
Peet
And I quote "provided you include elements in your character’s history that satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM’s satisfaction."
Key phrases here being satisfy world verisimilitude and justify your choice to your GM's...
Sure, I never say it's not that way. Work with your DM, present a background justification. If he isn't satisfied, ask what will satisfy him. Once you know what would satisfy him, work around that character background conception. And then add it to the character you wish, which shouldn't be precluded to take it just because it's not tied to the culture or religion that dominate the feat. That phrase is just as key as the justify your choice and satisfy world verosimilitude.
A DM that says "no, you can't take the feat, ever, in any circumstances, unless you are a cleric of saernenrae", isn't compliant to the "not preclude it to any character you wish" just as much as a player who don't build a background for it isn't compliant to the "justify it for the world verosimilitude" bit. A player asking what would you require for his character to justify his background and satisfy the world verosimilitude is NOT the same than a player asking the feat working with a falchion or a halberd. The first one *should* get an answer about what would make the feat possible, (like the cossack example you gave), the seoond player should get a "no".
and it becomes cheese when everybody and their brother wants to use it and push it because it's real goal is a optimization thing and I can get more bang for my buck by dropping my STR to 7 and pumping my int and dex and yadayda.
It's not cheese when you come with .... I got this idea for an Kosac from Irrisien wastes.... And you want to play it in SS? Yes... ok.... why is in the jungle. I dunno, he's lost, finds himself on the ship.... ship wreck, blah blah blah.... OkIn this case you would have a PC who is (initially at least) stated out etc from cold waste survival, who got some wander lust and ended up ship wrecked in the jungle.... sub optimal to say the least. Not Cheese (even if hes a bazillion miles away)
How the heck is he going to get Dervish Dance on smugglers shiv?
The aforementioned had me down feat.... something he's been practicing from child hood (due to the culture) and finally perfects it.
Ok. I'm Game.
Same Same for the Elven spell dancer. Which DRIPS wanting this feat. I could also see the arguement of "he's been practicing it for a 100 years" (seeing as I ruled it would be reasonable for the elven culture... a Dex-y type fighting people, to have the equivalent of this feat)
Give me a REASON to say yes. Pulling off some RAD Min Max with a weak story is making me want to rule against it.
To be honest, if we were to start a LOF campaign tomorrow, I'd be almost disappointed if i DIDNT see the feat (a freehand fighter with it would be awesome).
In a wandering Golarion campaign I might want to introduce feats and weapons or items that you can just pick up along the way and DEMANDING the feat because you should just be able to find it anywhere at level 3 when sometime between level 7 and 9 your characters might actually BE in qadira will make me say NO. (at least until you find/see the feat)
The cheese comes in when it becomes "I must be allowed this now"
You might want to make a urban barbarian, I might also say "no." for whatever reason, who knows.
First I did not read all posts however, a group I was in once had some guy playing a elven mags. 2 make a long story short he used a curved elven blade with keen &if critical all the time. 2 games later he was the target of the em, basically killed his character due to the cheese factor. Only that player was upset about his character death.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First I did not read all posts however, a group I was in once had some guy playing a elven mags. 2 make a long story short he used a curved elven blade with keen &if critical all the time. 2 games later he was the target of the em, basically killed his character due to the cheese factor. Only that player was upset about his character death.
Actually, he should be killed for his illegal character.
The Magus cannot use Spell Combat with a two-handed weapon, and Keen and Improved Critical do not stack with each other.
Im sorry i dont follow... the magus used an elven curved blade (odd choice considering the 1 handed aspect of spell combat) had keen... got that. did a lot of crits got that.
2 games later what now? The DM targeted him and killed him? and he did it BECAUSE of cheese?
And everyone was happy his character was dead.....erm.
Well if my interpretation is right, then, here's what I think:
A Magus with a two handed weapon is hardly an exploit, in fact it's the opposite of that.
And Elf with a curved blade isn't Out of character, it's a racial weapon common to them.
He got Keen on his weapon one way or another, not overly odd.
There are no standard restrictions and in one case he took a suboptimal route in favor of, Im assuming Two handed weapon damage.
Effectively focusing on his crit threat, THF and spell strike, ignoring spell combat.
That's not cheese.
I'd rather make a character with a scimitar, rapier, Katana or the like TBH so I can use spellcombat too.
The elven curve blade gives 1 more average damage over the katana (which would require a feat, most likely to use, where as the curve blade is 'free)
and 2 more average damage over the rapier or scimitar.
Theres a clear trade off for not doing spell combat and action economy loss for a slight gain in average damage that can be mulitplied on a more likely crit because of keen.
But is this character 'cheesier' than the rapier using version of the same character.
2 points melee damage vs. no using spell combat?
No.
the Dervish Dance looses no features for the gain. spends two more feats than say your example. and requires a feat that is supposed to be limited and rare.
It's also open to further exploit of dumping str to 7 (something others have already championed)
Where as your example can't remotely do that because STR is required to get a THF bonus at all.
there is definitely less cheese in the elf curve blade if any at all.
Because the guy crit'd too much the DM killed him?
the DM allowed the character in first place.
He could have said "no keen in my world"
Or no elven curved blades.
Or no magi.
Although that probably wouldnt change much the same player could have made an elf fighter and took a feat instead of keen and been even more dangerous TBH.
did this guy not see this coming at level 1?
IF they were upset about the spellstrike crit thing, it should have been apparent that that can't really happen all that often due to the lack of spells per day.
Im sorry i dont follow... the magus used an elven curved blade (odd choice considering the 1 handed aspect of spell combat) had keen... got that. did a lot of crits got that.
2 games later what now? The DM targeted him and killed him? and he did it BECAUSE of cheese?
And everyone was happy his character was dead.....erm.Well if my interpretation is right, then, here's what I think:
A Magus with a two handed weapon is hardly an exploit, in fact it's the opposite of that.
And Elf with a curved blade isn't Out of character, it's a racial weapon common to them.
He got Keen on his weapon one way or another, not overly odd.There are no standard restrictions and in one case he took a suboptimal route in favor of, Im assuming Two handed weapon damage.
Effectively focusing on his crit threat, THF and spell strike, ignoring spell combat.That's not cheese.
I bet that they allowed him to use spell combat with a two handed weapon (either by decision, or a failure to properly read the class) Which is, indeed, overpowered. It's not a surprise that everybody felt the character was cheese. Because it was.
Isn't the elven curve blade one of those exotic weapons that if you have the proficiency may be used one handed but if you don't it must be used two handed (as a martial weapon)? It's basically the elven version of a bastard sword. So as an elf he could use it one-handed if he is proficient in martial weapons.
Peet
|
In Matthew's world, technological limitations and mental observations of strategy are the exact same thing. Good to know.In any game world, that's the case. Good to see you're learning.
"I want to play a gunslinger in a stone age world."
"Guns haven't been invented yet. No Gunslinger.""I want to play a Samurai in your dark European fantasy."
"There's no Asia in my world. No Samurai.""I want to play a Ulfen barbarian who has spent his entire life fighting Irrisen, he's using Dervish Dance."
"You have no connection to the south to learn. No Dervish Dance.""I want to hop on the lightning rail and go from Waterdeep to Baldur's gate."
"This isn't Eberron, there isn't a lightning rail, despite both worlds using the exact same rules and mechanics."1) and 4) (specially 4) are obvious. You can't hop in a lightning rail that doesn't exist, and you can't force other NPC to invent it and build it for you.
2) and 3) are completelly different though. The player can build a background that support it. It doesn't affect the world, just his character (as oppossed to, say, a lightning train to Waterdeep) The Ulfen barbarian with no conection to the south to learn is specially funny, as this story is based on a real one..
There are also dark mediaval european knights which use horses, splinter armor, bows and curved cavalry swords, with great resolve and honorboud to a feudal lord. The russian boyars for example. The only thing you need to re-skin is the Samurai name. Everything else fits perfectly
See 2 I assumed he meant samurai FLAVOR...not the class. If it's the class...yeah it's the same as 3 and should honestly be a none issue.
IMO:
It's cheezy if there's no story to the character or it's an empty clone of another character or the character can only be described as a collection of classes.
This "clone" silliness is tiresome.
Umm, you know you can get two "clone" characters and run them completely different right? Personality goes a LONG way into the way the character is run/played.
I can get a Ranger/Rogue TWH using Dervish Dancer and twin scimitars.. with all the same feats.. and give you two vastly different characters.
Change the race and volla! I have a totally different story for you.
Heck, I can get Drow's the same build above and give you two drastically different characters just by tweaking a single skill (Religion for example)
Its not the STATS its the STORY
I think there is some misunderstanding here. What I meant by "clone silliness" is the silliness of people calling someone using one feat a clone. I suppose I could have said that better.
Calling clone on someone because of one feat is tiresome. One feat does not make a clone.
There that is said better.