| 19 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At 2nd level, a bard can choose one type of Perform skill. He can use his bonus in that skill in place of his bonus in associated skills. When substituting in this way, the bard uses his total Perform skill bonus, including class skill bonus, in place of its associated skill's bonus, whether or not he has ranks in that skill or if it is a class skill.
I'm somewhat confused on how this is supposed to work with the masterpiece Pageant of the Peacock, RAW.
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.
Now, if I have Cha 16, no ranks in Bluff, and 4 ranks in Perform (act), my skill bonuses for Bluff and Perform (act) are +3 and +10, respectively. I'm allowed to use my Perform (act) skill bonus in place of my Bluff bonus. So, when I'm using Pageant of the Peacock, it is a Bluff check with a skill bonus of +10, from Perform (act), and after that I get the +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks from the masterpiece, making it a total of +14 Bluff check?
To me, this seems to be the correct reading of the rules. I'm especially interested in the RAW, as this is used in Pathfinder Society.
So, it would be +14 to, for example, appraise something using Perform (act). Thanks.
Or, +16 if it was a knowledge skill, because the bonus from Bardic Knowledge stacks, according to James J. Gotcha (and we're talking about bard4).
The next question is, when you're bluffing that you can, say, appraise and you don't have a single rank in appraise, are you considered untrained?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, I assume this is how it's intended to work.
Let's take a 4th level Musetouched Aasimar Bard, with Pageant of the Peacock masterpiece, and Perform (Act) selected for Versatile Performance. Her abilities are 10 10 10 7 10 20, and for skills she has selected max ranks for Craft (Calligraphy), Disguise, Perform (Act), and Profession (Diva). She has Circlet of Persuasion, Magnifying Glass, and a cracked Pink and Green Sphere Ioun Stone for Bluff. Her feats are Deceitful and Skill Focus (Perform (Act)).
Her Perform (Act) is 4 (ranks) +3 (class skill) +5 (Charisma) +3 (Skill Focus, unnamed) +2 (Aasimar, racial) +3 (Circlet of Persuasion, competence), for a total of +20.
Her Bluff is, due to Versatile Performance, the same as her Perform (Act); that is, +20. The Ioun Stone doesn't stack because it's competence bonus, the same as the Circlet. And it's up to the GM if the feat bonus from Deceitful would stack. JJ said he might stack it, but I think it's safe to assume it doesn't stack.
When using Pageant of the Peacock, her Bluff score gets a +4 circumstance bonus, and is upped to +24.
When using Pageant of the Peacock, she can make an Appraise check using her Bluff score. Any Perform (Act) tools don't help, but the Magnifying Glass grants a +2 circumstance bonus on Appraise checks involving any item that is small or highly detailed. As circumstance bonuses stack, her Appraise score for that kind of a action would be +26.
Similarly, if she uses Pageant of the Peacock to substitute a Knowledge skill, the end result is the same +26. This time the +2 (unnamed) bonus comes from Bardic Knowledge, in addition to the +24 from Bluff.
Wonky? Yes.
PFS legal? Definitely.
Looks like you have the whole thread wrapped up. ;)
I think I'll be taking this Masterpiece if I ever roll up a new Bard, if only to outsmart the party's Wizard simply by being a pompous bimbo.
(And it's also interesting to realise your Craft skill checks will be through the roof - all of them.)
*headscratch*
So you sway your hips and all of a sudden you know who the third king of an osirion empire was 2,000 years ago....
whaaaaaat?
Why do you know that?
I'm sexy, that's why.
Also, magic.
Sexy magic.
This is one of my favorite posts ever.
|
So, it would be +14 to, for example, appraise something using Perform (act). Thanks.Or, +16 if it was a knowledge skill, because the bonus from Bardic Knowledge stacks, according to James J. Gotcha (and we're talking about bard4).
The next question is, when you're bluffing that you can, say, appraise and you don't have a single rank in appraise, are you considered untrained?
Yes, you'd still be untrained. So you'll have to take 1 rank.
This is way overpowered, of course. But I'm grabbing it:-). One more book to buy :-)
One thing to point out. James is NOT a rules guy so his postings do it have automatic influence on PFS. Expect some table variation.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've had a player ask me about taking this, and I've (as of yesterday!) played a module with a player who used it.
The way it was used in the module was very cool - it was effectively used by the player of the bard to commune with an entity to make crazy DC30-DC40 knowledge checks to accurately provide details on named NPCs and their cult (yes, like a poor man's commune). I believe the GM and player had an understanding it would be used this way in order to communicate more information that would otherwise never see the light of day by the players had it not been played in this way. This made the module more interesting, as it would've been quite boring without these tidbits. It created absolutely no mechanical advantage outside of us knowing the back-stories and reputations of certain villains/NPCs after they were already defeated.
However, my ruling on this as a GM is largely based on the first sentence. I don't think you can take the rest of the masterpieces description without the first sentence or you'd risk taking it out of context.
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.
It's clearly meant to indicate the bard using the ability is bluffing their way through knowing more about a certain topic than they should. It's meant to last for 10 minutes of conversation, which I believe means it is intended to be used at a dinner, ball or gala.
So, I agree with EricMcG that the bard is basically spouting out information, of which some part is accurate, and some parts are not - and everyone could actually make Sense Motive checks to see if they believe the facts or not. In this way, a bard could pass themselves off as an expert in engineering or an expert in the ways of the arcane or an expert in the noble courts. It's meant to be used for impersonation.
It's not meant to be used to identify monsters during combat. It could certainly be used in this way, with the bard acting all pomp and then telling everyone "yes yes, skeletons, I believe this kind has the ability to burrow underground and possess a deadly gaze attack that cause oneself to turn blue permanently..." After the battle, if nobody has turned blue, then the bard simply shrugs and suggests these skeletons must have failed to use their special powers, but it's likely folks could believe the bard.
Ultimately, the GM would decide what the control of information is to the bard, and it may or may not be valid.
|
|
I completely agree with Eric that this what it SHOULD be. But unfortunately, that really is NOT what the rules state. It says it can be used for into skill checks.
Its not as if I need permission or a magic ability to fake knowing things. My cleric character with no knowledge religion does this all the time.
If Eric was right it would just state that you get a +4 on bluff checks (which is powerful enough in its own right that I'd still be tempted to take the)
|
People are very up in arms about something that only makes a party better at knowledge checks. Is there a reason that GMs don't want to tell their players more about the world and its goings on?
I'm usually quite disappointed when someone flubs a knowledge check.
Powerful. Not overpowered because it's actually helpful for the entire group, GM included.
People are very up in arms about something that only makes a party better at knowledge checks. Is there a reason that GMs don't want to tell their players more about the world and its goings on?
I'm usually quite disappointed when someone flubs a knowledge check.
Powerful. Not overpowered because it's actually helpful for the entire group, GM included.
Its insanely overpowered.
bards have a (decent) class ability to turn 1 skill into 2 or 3 skills.
This turns 1 skill into TEN skills.
The flavor text of it makes it sound like talking out of your keister so you SOUND educated on the subject at hand but the actual rules give you actual knowledge : any checks based on your bluff skill.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
People are very up in arms about something that only makes a party better at knowledge checks. Is there a reason that GMs don't want to tell their players more about the world and its goings on?
I'm usually quite disappointed when someone flubs a knowledge check.
Powerful. Not overpowered because it's actually helpful for the entire group, GM included.
Its insanely overpowered.
bards have a (decent) class ability to turn 1 skill into 2 or 3 skills.
This turns 1 skill into TEN skills.
The flavor text of it makes it sound like talking out of your keister so you SOUND educated on the subject at hand but the actual rules give you actual knowledge : any checks based on your bluff skill.
It would be insanely overpowered if Knowledge checks allowed you to bypass most obstacles. Usually they only give you some form of advantage.
The flavour text of it is fine if you look at it broadly. You're not just convincing the person you're speaking to of truth. You are convincing reality. You are being so convincing, that the knowledge you gain is actually how it is because you said it.
That doesn't give extra power to the person with the Bluff check, but it does result in them having a pretty high Knowledge check.
Also obligatory IT'S MAGIC.
|
|
Sorry Adam, but suggesting that the flavor be that a 4th level bard rewrite reality isn't helping to convince me that this is reasonable.
The problem that I see is that bards already rock at knowledge skills, to the point of making most other characters hard won knowledgeable irrelevant.
And bards currently face choices. Do I want more int? Do I take an archetype that replaces bardic knowledge? Those choices just became a lot simpler.
This isn't overpowered from the point of view of closing down the scenario. It is overpowered because it gives one specific class an overwhelming advantage in doing something that MANY characters should be able to do well.
I know that I'd be seriously peeved if I was playing a wizard who invested lots in knowledge skills and the damn bard with his dance skill knew more about EVERYTHING than I did. All with nearly no effort or cost on his part
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know that I'd be seriously peeved if I was playing a wizard who invested lots in knowledge skills and the damn bard with his dance skill knew more about EVERYTHING than I did. All with nearly no effort or cost on his part
If I were the Wizard I'd get over it because I still had INFINITE COSMIC POWER (with limited daily uses)! This really does solidify the Bard as THE skill monkey over Rogue... as if anyone still harbored any thought that the Rogue did something best.
Also the Bard doesn't know more than you because of his awesome dance moves: he knows more than you because of his acting, comedic timing, singing, or epic guitar solo.
|
|
Sorry Adam, but suggesting that the flavor be that a 4th level bard rewrite reality isn't helping to convince me that this is reasonable.
The problem that I see is that bards already rock at knowledge skills, to the point of making most other characters hard won knowledgeable irrelevant.
And bards currently face choices. Do I want more int? Do I take an archetype that replaces bardic knowledge? Those choices just became a lot simpler.
This isn't overpowered from the point of view of closing down the scenario. It is overpowered because it gives one specific class an overwhelming advantage in doing something that MANY characters should be able to do well.
I know that I'd be seriously peeved if I was playing a wizard who invested lots in knowledge skills and the damn bard with his dance skill knew more about EVERYTHING than I did. All with nearly no effort or cost on his part
Bards already had an overwhelming advantage. Do people complain about Loremaster? Well okay, some do.
There is no way I would give away Bardic Knowledge if I was planning on taking this. Half my level to those Knowledge checks and not having to put a single rank into any of them? Okay! I don't think it's cut and dry that a character without a rank in a Knowledge and without Bardic Knowledge could roll a Knowledge check above 10, so there's still a requirement for investment.
If you were playing a wizard who had invested a lot into knowledge skills and then the bard beats you in knowledge, just cast fly. Bam, you've just done something he can't. Or limited wish. Or any of the other things that make the wizard awesome.
Bards are, and always have been the knowledge class. This ability cements that further, but I still don't find it overpowered.
|
|
| 13 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think the designer's intent is pretty clear with not just the name of the masterpiece, but the text, which I'll quote again.
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.
I don't think you can choose to ignore that first sentence, just like you can't selectively ignore sentences elsewhere in the rules that preface the rule you happen to be interested in.
In the spirit of understanding this masterpiece, I've wrapped the fluff sentence around the crunch sentence to "bookend" it:
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you ... gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check .. [for the purpose of convincing] others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement.
To me, both forms read as a bard that is effectively bluffing their way through high society and intellectuals and getting away with it. They aren't suddenly remembering obscure tidbits of Thassilonian lore as if they just cast a dozen Legend Lore spells, just because they have a +15 Bluff and a good number of bardic performance rounds each day...
The end result of this masterpiece is "convincing others", and it's still pretty amazing and comparable to the other masterpieces for just the +4 Bluff and +4 Disguise bonuses. If it's being read as more than this, it essentially becomes a "must-have" for every single bard, and I don't think it's likely that was the intention.
Of course, whoever designed it can step in and school us. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not ignoring that sentence, but the one after it simply doesn't limit the ways you can use the intelligence based check.
Poke the faq and pray.
I would so, so take that. I'm playing a two-character party with a Bard that doesn't have enough skill points to afford Spellcraft.
|
|
I think the designer's intent is pretty clear with not just the name of the masterpiece, but the text, which I'll quote again.
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.I don't think you can choose to ignore that first sentence, just like you can't selectively ignore sentences elsewhere in the rules that preface the rule you happen to be interested in.
In the spirit of understanding this masterpiece, I've wrapped the fluff sentence around the crunch sentence to "bookend" it:
By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you ... gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check .. [for the purpose of convincing] others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement.To me, both forms read as a bard that is effectively bluffing their way through high society and intellectuals and getting away with it. They aren't suddenly remembering obscure tidbits of Thassilonian lore as if they just cast a dozen Legend Lore spells, just because they have a +15 Bluff and a good number of bardic performance rounds each day...
The end result of this masterpiece is "convincing others", and it's still pretty amazing and comparable to the other masterpieces for just the +4 Bluff and +4 Disguise bonuses. If it's being read as more than this, it essentially becomes a "must-have" for every single bard, and I don't think it's likely that was the intention.
Of course, whoever designed it can step in and school us. :)
This was a lot of words to read and I didn't quite understand them all...all I know is that I hear voices and then stuff comes out of my mouth, not that I remember them however, this ability, which is supernatural is a bit overpowered
|
|
WAKEDOWN... YOU ARE OVERLY CONCERNED WITH INCONSEQUENTIAL ISSUES THAT CONCERN YOU NOT, THEY ARE BETWEEN BILLY IDOL AND I. YOURS IS NOT TO QUESTION WHY. SIMPLY KNOW THAT I HAVE CHOSEN HIM AS MY VESSEL.
LOL!!
I refer all other forumites to the case I mentioned where this resulted in only making a module more entertaining for everyone seated.
Yes, Baba Yaga took possession of Billy Idol and made him her b!*%$ as the entire table got to learn why the heck we were knee deep in the sewers of Katapesh.
No, nobody else can steal such nice things.
And... All Night. Every night.
|
The demands of Kurguss would normally force Billy Idol to defeat me in a feat of strength before I believed the insane echoing of a crone's voice, but Billy Idol is so handsome, I couldn't help but see the truth in those words.
After playing at this table, I will not be swayed by wakedown's use of logic.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
but it's an overpowered INT CHECK....not that gamebreaking. So I'll go back to being a b%!%*in' 80's rock star and let you guys figure out the smart stuff.Why did you make out with my girlfriend, and give her your cold?
Was she the fat one or the bucktooth one? Either way it was awesome!
|
|
The demands of Kurguss would normally force Billy Idol to defeat me in a feat of strength before I believed the insane echoing of a crone's voice, but Billy Idol is so handsome, I couldn't help but see the truth in those words.
After playing at this table, I will not be swayed by wakedown's use of logic.
Raccoons, that is all.
|
Was she the fat one or the bucktooth one? Either way it was awesome!but it's an overpowered INT CHECK....not that gamebreaking. So I'll go back to being a b%!%*in' 80's rock star and let you guys figure out the smart stuff.Why did you make out with my girlfriend, and give her your cold?
The Filipino one that looked underage.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Filipino one that looked underage.Was she the fat one or the bucktooth one? Either way it was awesome!but it's an overpowered INT CHECK....not that gamebreaking. So I'll go back to being a b%!%*in' 80's rock star and let you guys figure out the smart stuff.Why did you make out with my girlfriend, and give her your cold?
That must have been when I was in Bangkok. All I remember is that I got deported from the country strapped to a gurney. Best trip ever!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another neat thing about Pageant of the Peacock is that makes you the absolute best at INT checks, like those to get out of a Maze spell. You will be miles ahead of even the best stat boosting INT caster.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Adding link to other thread here as it's current and relevant:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ugh. That thread makes me a bit ill.Adding link to other thread here as it's current and relevant:
Ya, I hate when people try to twist a very straightforward thing into "I don't like it therefore it's unclear and there's lots of interpretations."
For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check.
Super straightforward. Zero need to interpret. And yet...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. It is very clear, if you cut off half the rule.
Effect: By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check. The subtle changes in your movements also confer a +4 circumstance bonus on Disguise checks to appear to be someone of a higher station (an aristocrat, merchant prince, or even a queen).
given that the whole ability starts and ends with "to convince someone you are of higher station" did you really need it spelled out on each and every line of the ability? This is how the effect line would read:
Effect: By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks to appear to be of higher station, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check to appear to be someone of higher station. The subtle changes in your movements also confer a +4 circumstance bonus on Disguise checks to appear to be someone of a higher station (an aristocrat, merchant prince, or even a queen).
In otherwords, the guy in charge of word count would be annoyed.
Also, it says you get to make a bluff check instead of an int-based check. It doesn't say, like Versatile Performance does, that you can substitute your Bluff bonus in place of, say, your knowledge bonus.
When you use Versatile Performance, the ability clearly says that you can substitute one bonus for another. So, when you're using Versatile Performance (Comedy) to do an Intimidate check, you are still, by the language of the ability, making an Intimidate check, which therefore does all the things an Intimidate check can do.
When you use PotP to substitute a Bluff check for a Knowledge check, you are no longer making a knowledge check. It doesn't say "use your Bluff bonus instead of your int-based skill bonus", like Versatile Performance does, it says "you may attempt a Bluff check". Therefore, you are not making a knowledge check anymore, and the check cannot do what a knowledge check can. It does what a Bluff check does.
I mean, it's pretty clear that the writing of this masterpiece in particular is sub-par in clarity, regardless of how you think it should function.
The clarity is fine. Lets break it down:
Effect: By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement.
Part 1 describes the benefit of this feat. By taking this feat you will be able to convince others of breeding, eloquence and refinement. this is purely descriptive, and has no rules effects.
For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check. The subtle changes in your movements also confer a +4 circumstance bonus on Disguise checks to appear to be someone of a higher station (an aristocrat, merchant prince, or even a queen).
Part 2 tells us what the feat actually does. Note that it starts with "For the duration of this effect..." before going to describe what it actually does.
Super clear. No need to interpret.
Until you address the distinction between substituting bonuses and substituting checks, I'm unimpressed by your RAW arguments.
|
|
Caedwyr, I refer you to the pistolerro archetype, which, because Paizo forgot one line of text, gives pistolerro gunslingers +2x dex to damage at level 5 in some people's opinion (they did eventually clarify that one)
Or the Improved familiar, which either requires an arcane caster level as a prereq, or levels in an arcane casting class as a prereq.
I wouldn't say incompetent, but they do occasionally make omissions. frequently in the name of word count.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes. It is very clear, if you cut off half the rule.
Effect: By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement. For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check. The subtle changes in your movements also confer a +4 circumstance bonus on Disguise checks to appear to be someone of a higher station (an aristocrat, merchant prince, or even a queen).
given that the whole ability starts and ends with "to convince someone you are of higher station" did you really need it spelled out on each and every line of the ability?
There's stuff in the middle, too. Like the word "also", which is the 7th word in the last sentence, indicating that everything thereafter () is something granted in addition to the things listed before it, rather than being a reiteration or clarification thereof.
Your suggested "spelled out" version actually means something materially different than what got printed, and in fact implodes on itself by stating "You get [X]. You also get [the same X]."
Next time you want to accuse someone of twisting meaning by leaving words out, try to make sure you don't leave any out yourself.
Until you address the distinction between substituting bonuses and substituting checks, I'm unimpressed by your RAW arguments.
Also simple: In place of an Intelligence check, say to know about Thassilonian Runes, you may make a Bluff check to know about Thassilonian Runes. See how easy that is?
|
|
The clarity is fine. Lets break it down:
Effect: By gracefully weaving your body through subtle forms and postures you can convince others of your breeding, eloquence, and refinement.
Part 1 describes the benefit of this feat. By taking this feat you will be able to convince others of breeding, eloquence and refinement. this is purely descriptive, and has no rules effects.
For the duration of the effect, you gain a +4 circumstance bonus on Bluff checks, and may attempt a Bluff check in place of an Intelligence check or Intelligence-based skill check. The subtle changes in your movements also confer a +4 circumstance bonus on Disguise checks to appear to be someone of a higher station (an aristocrat, merchant prince, or even a queen).
Part 2 tells us what the feat actually does. Note that it starts with "For the duration of this effect..." before going to describe what it actually does.
Super clear. No need to interpret.
No, the fluff tells you what the masterpiece does. That's the part that reads:
"Your elegant movements cause you to seem to be more than you are."
the stuff under effects is *all* part of the mechanics. That's why it is under "effects" not at the top under the description.
Deciding that the part you don't like is just fluff and can be ignored is just silly. It would be like saying that swarm suit describing itself as clothing is just fluff and has no mechanical effect on it's ability to be used with a Sleeves of Many Garments.
You dodged the actual issue. If it's supposed to work the way you claim it works, then it should be worded the way Versatile Performance is. "You may substitute your Bluff skill bonus for the bonus on intelligence-based checks", for example.
PotP says that you may make a bluff check, it does not say you may use your bluff bonus on other types of checks. Once you are no longer making an actual knowledge check, you can't do things that a knowledge check lets you do.
If I make a bluff check in place of Spellcraft, by definition, I am bluffing. I'm no longer making a Spellcraft check.