| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
This might have been made (or discussed) already.
Let's take a Human Fighter (for simplicity, let's use a Tactician or Free-Hand Fighter). He is going a Dexterity build route. He qualifies for the Dervish Dance feat, and takes it. He then takes Martial Versatility and applies it to the Dervish Dance feat (which is a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon).
Since the Scimitar falls under a Heavy Blades weapon group, would this mean that all Heavy Blades are allowed to substitute Dexterity for damage (assuming it fits the other qualifications of the Dervish Dance feat), and serve as a one-handed piercing weapon for feats and class abilities that require a weapon?
Also, does the Dervish Dance's "off-hand" restriction apply to wielding a Two-Handed Weapon?
The Martial Versatility and Dervish Dance thing is a RAW vs RAI thing as far as I can tell. My take on it is that it only applies to the scimitar, your GM may vary of course, as people often suggest just making a new feat with similar requirements to use DD on other weapons. As for two handing with Dervish Dance? No way, if you have two hands on one weapon, you have a weapon in your off-hand, so you lose access to the feat. Which is to bad because my Half-Orc Inquisitor of Sarenrae would have loved that.
Martial Versatility is designed for feats in which you choose a specific weapon, like Weapon Focus.
Interestingly, this works fine with things like Feral Combat Training, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
This particular combo, seems out of line with RAI, but I really can't tell if it's against RAW.
Not to be rude, but a correction of RAW:
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.
The Martial Versatility RAW says you choose a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. Is Dervish Dance a Combat Feat? Yes. Does it apply to a specific weapon (the Scimitar)? Yes. It then says you can use that feat with any weapon in the same weapon group (as the feat selected).
Since the Scimitar is a Heavy Blades weapon, all Heavy Blades weapons can be used with Dervish Dance. This also means that such characters can use Longswords and Bastard Swords and whatever one-handed Heavy Blades weapon they want with the Dervish Dance feat, and it counts as a One-Handed Piercing weapon for all other feats and abilities that are dependant upon such requirement.
@Dead Phoenix: I suppose in terms of intent it would go against it, though I do question (in terms of RAW) whether or not wielding a Two-Handed Weapon, while requiring usage of two hands, constitutes the use of an Off-Hand Weapon. The inability to use weapons inappropriately sized for you with the feat is quite obvious though.
Benefit: When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls.
You can go ahead and replace scimitar with greatsword, but it still requires you wield it with one hand only.
Since a 2 handed weapon is being carried in both hands, your off hand is technically carrying a weapon. I don't see it working on anything 2 handed. The real shame is that this trick won't get you to a rapier, so piranha strike becomes an option.
I never said it wasn't RAW, just that I wasn't sure.
I still believe it's out of line with RAI.
I suppose you could take a dip into Titan Mauler to help with the two-handed weapons.
What breaks the intent here? As far as I'm concerned, the intent works as it's written; a specific weapon style allowing extra benefits due to stylizing it. The Martial Versatility allows you more flexability with a given combat feat that applies to a specific weapon.
It seems pretty cut and dry to me.
Also, does the Dervish Dance's "off-hand" restriction apply to wielding a Two-Handed Weapon?
Yes, but you can still use a bastard sword or a Falcata :-)
Not to be rude, but a correction of RAW:
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.The Martial Versatility RAW says you choose a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. Is Dervish Dance a Combat Feat? Yes. Does it apply to a specific weapon (the Scimitar)? Yes. It then says you can use that feat with any weapon in the same weapon group (as the feat selected).
Your version of RAW does seem to ignore one important question:
- Does Martial Versatility allow you to ignore the limitations of the Combat Feat shared by MV?Nothing RAW suggest that you are able to do so, thus you might as well interprete, that it doesn't affect other weapons, since they are not scimitars.
If MV lets you ignore the actual feat text of combat feats, other issues is going to arise (such as double crossbows reloading as free actions, when you apply the hand cross bow version of rapid reload).
Not to be rude, but a correction of RAW:
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.The Martial Versatility RAW says you choose a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. Is Dervish Dance a Combat Feat? Yes. Does it apply to a specific weapon (the Scimitar)? Yes. It then says you can use that feat with any weapon in the same weapon group (as the feat selected).Your version of RAW does seem to ignore one important question:
- Does Martial Versatility allow you to ignore the limitations of the Combat Feat shared by MV?Nothing RAW suggest that you are able to do so, thus you might as well interprete, that it doesn't affect other weapons, since they are not scimitars.
If MV lets you ignore the actual feat text of combat feats, other issues is going to arise (such as double crossbows reloading as free actions, when you apply the hand cross bow version of rapid reload).
Not really.
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
If Martial Versatility says we "can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group," let's change all entries of Scimitar into another weapon of the same group (for example, Longsword), as the RAW says for it to.
With that said, the feat, as enhanced by Martial Versatility, would then work as written.
When wielding a longsword with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the longsword as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The longsword must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
The feat allows you to apply the laws of the feat to any other weapon in that weapon group. The weapon originally listed (Scimitar in this case) is interchangable with a variable X, where X is any other weapon in the same group that the weapon is originally listed.
At no point in time does this "ignore limitations" of the Dervish Dance feat. It simply changes the weapon for which it can be used. When the player fails to meet the conditions set by the Dervish Dance, the feat itself just fails to function. So let's review when we switch the Scimitar with the Longsword:
-Wielded in one hand? Check.
-Sized for you? Check.
-Not carrying weapons/shields in off-hand? (Variable) Check.
When these conditions are met, the feat functions. When these conditions are not met (as far as I'm concerned, wielding a Greatsword in two hands constitutes as not meeting the conditions), the feat fails to function. Again, cut and dry, and at no point does it "ignore the limitations" of Dervish Dance.
Edit: Re-worded the RAW to match the one cited for MV.
Bump.
Is there any other input on this subject as to whether this is legal or not?
Bump.
Is there any other input on this subject as to whether this is legal or not?
Black Blood Troll's got it right as far as I'm concerned.
Martial Versatility lets you take a feat that usually only lets you select one weapon, and select an entire weapon group with it.
The important part here is that the original feat has to be one that lets you select any weapon.
It doesn't give you access to feats that only work when you are wielding a certain weapon, when you aren't wielding that specific weapon.That is Absolutely the RAI, and as far as I can tell, you really have to stretch the RAW to make it say anything else.
"Prerequisites: Fighter level 4th, human.
Benefit: Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.
Special: You may take this feat more than once. Each time it applies to a different feat."
Where in the RAW does it say you only use feats you chooses a weapon for?
In my opinion, you have it backwards. It works with the RAW but stretches the RAI.
it looks to me like this has been fairly well answered, but since you bumped- i have to assume this will fall into the category of 'table variance' (some GMs will allow and others won't); my best reading/interpretation is that by RAW you can apply MV to Dervish Dance (allowing you to use it with any one handed heavy blade that is appropriately sized for you), but its most likely not RAI.
in terms of game impact (which I think is just as important to consider as RAW v. RAI)... scimitar is one of the best one handed heavy blades (usually rated on par with the longsword, just behind the falcata) and costs 1 less feat to use with DD (2 for exotic weapons), so i don't think it would be a problem to allow it. the only potential exploitation i can see would be using MV to allow a monk to use DD while flurrying with a temple sword- but even that would probably be more costly than picking up crusader's flurry for a scimitar (of course, in many builds a 4 level fighter dip may be less sacrifice than 1 level of cleric, i suppose).
Bump.
Is there any other input on this subject as to whether this is legal or not?
Black Blood Troll's got it right as far as I'm concerned.
Martial Versatility lets you take a feat that usually only lets you select one weapon, and select an entire weapon group with it.
The important part here is that the original feat has to be one that lets you select any weapon.
It doesn't give you access to feats that only work when you are wielding a certain weapon, when you aren't wielding that specific weapon.That is Absolutely the RAI, and as far as I can tell, you really have to stretch the RAW to make it say anything else.
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.
I already posted a link in one of my above posts as to where I got the RAW from.
Point at the part in the Benefit section that says the feat must make you select a weapon in order to utilize the feat. Because the bolded RAW says otherwise.
The conditions listed are that it's a combat feat and that it applies to a specific weapon. The italicized feat is listed as an example as to what it can be applied to. So let's review once again.
Dervish Dance is a combat feat, right? Yes.
Dervish Dance applies to a specific weapon, (the Scimitar,) right? Yes.
So Martial Versatility, by RAW, can be applied to Dervish Dance, and can be usable with any other Heavy Blades (assuming it fits the other requirements of Dervish Dance).
The question you then pose is should it be applicable to Dervish Dance?
I don't see why not. What's so broken about (at best) upping the damage dice from 1D6 Slashing to 1D8 Slashing (and adding the Deadly Property from a Katana, for example,) with the cost of 2 feats? The Dexterity Bonus you would normally apply to the Katana (or whatever other weapon) is still the same amount you would apply to your Scimitar, so it's not like the concept is really changed. So from a "overpowered mechanical loophole" standpoint, it doesn't break any boundaries that aren't already present, and anything that did change from Point A to Point B are tiny steps.
But what about the flavor? Humans are known for adapting different cultures/lifestyles and improvisation. They have other feats that support this. The Martial Versatility feat allows more flexibility and improvisation with the usage of manufactured (or even natural) weapons. Dervish Dance is a special style of swordplay usable with a trademark blade that was created from a unique civilization, which can only be taught to those who have earned the favor and trained for it.
In addition, the flavor text for Martial Versatility states that "You broaden your study of weapons to encompass multiple similar weapons." Studying weapons isn't just about how to use them, it's also about implementing them into a style of fighting that a character utilizes to combat enemies. Considering that the Dervish Dance style of fighting is keen on using a specific weapon, it's safe to say that the Martial Versatility feat has plenty of fair application.
So if it's not really because of the fact that it's too powerful, or because it goes against the flavor and intent of how the feats are to be used, then what exactly is the problem that makes such a combination impossible, other than your fear of what can be (but really isn't)?
You've left me confused, I don't know if I disagree with you or not.
What I said was intended to support that applying Martial Versatility to Dervish Dancer is spitting in the face of pretty plainly obvious RAI.
I believe it also stretches the RAW, because the RAW of Martial Versatility says absolutely nothing about changing the internal structure of the feat you select with it.
The only RAW support for what he is trying to do, is that this feat can be used to gain Weapon Focus in an exotic weapon you are not Proficient with. So the plainly stated RAW says that Martial Versatility can be used to change the prerequisites for a feat by a small amount. But it does not change the internal workings of that feat.
To me the RAW tells you that Martial Versatility lets you ignore the prerequisites for Dervish Dance with anything other than a scimitar.
You must not be reading the same RAW that we are.
I can only cite it so many times before it simply becomes irrelevant and pointless to keep doing so. That, and you are drawing outlandish conclusions from my statements. I have no idea as to how my explanation and interpretation of the MV+DD combination is "spitting in the face of pretty plainly obvious RAI." Tell me, if you seem to know so much about both abilities, why is that A. You can't seem to understand the RAW at all, and B. Everyone who argues that it goes against the RAI is extremely ambiguous as to how it does.
This is about debate. You want your side to make (more) sense in comparison to others? You make educated conclusions, you provide proof to back such claims. You don't just say "It spits in the face of RAI," simply because you feel it does. You need to explain how and why it does, and provide proof to win your case, like I have. Being ambiguous and not explaining your side at all only makes everyone befuddled and frustrated.
I already explained my case (several times) and provided my proof and insight as to why I think it should work. If Martial Versatility is only supposed to apply to Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, and their Greater versions, then it would say so, and in which case, why even have it as a feat, if, according to you, it does absolutely nothing?
Present your case. I won't bother posting anything else in this thread until somebody from the "anti" side provides proof to explain their interpretation, because then it turns into a vicious (and borderline violent) circle, and I'd rather not waste energy and rage on something so pointless (when I have other things to apply it toward).
Bump.
Is there any other input on this subject as to whether this is legal or not?
Black Blood Troll's got it right as far as I'm concerned.
Martial Versatility lets you take a feat that usually only lets you select one weapon, and select an entire weapon group with it.
The important part here is that the original feat has to be one that lets you select any weapon.
It doesn't give you access to feats that only work when you are wielding a certain weapon, when you aren't wielding that specific weapon.That is Absolutely the RAI, and as far as I can tell, you really have to stretch the RAW to make it say anything else.
"Prerequisites: Fighter level 4th, human.
Benefit: Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.
Special: You may take this feat more than once. Each time it applies to a different feat."
Where in the RAW does it say you only use feats you chooses a weapon for?
In my opinion, you have it backwards. It works with the RAW but stretches the RAI.
You've left me confused, I don't know if I disagree with you or not.
What I said was intended to support that applying Martial Versatility to Dervish Dancer is spitting in the face of pretty plainly obvious RAI.
I believe it also stretches the RAW, because the RAW of Martial Versatility says absolutely nothing about changing the internal structure of the feat you select with it.
The only RAW support for what he is trying to do, is that this feat can be used to gain Weapon Focus in an exotic weapon you are not Proficient with. So the plainly stated RAW says that Martial Versatility can be used to change the prerequisites for a feat by a small amount. But it does not change the internal workings of that feat.
To me the RAW tells you that Martial Versatility lets you ignore the prerequisites for Dervish...
Now I am confused...Why would Martial Versatility let you ignore the perquisites? It requires Weapon Finesse and 2 ranks of dance?
WE agree that the developers did not intend for theses to feats to work together, right?
The feat Martial Versatility would allow you to USE the feat with all weapon in the group. So Weapon Specialization (Longsword) and Martial Versatility give you +2 to damage with EVERY heavy blade, not just the longsword.
I'm pretty sure that that changes the inner working of weapon specialization. Also, Sidebar...Martial Versatility + Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard sword)= Proficiency in all exotic weapons?
@ Rapthorn2ndform: Yes and no. Remember, Martial Versatility allows you to simply apply that feat to other weapons of the same Fighter Weapon Category. So for example, the EWP (Bastard Sword) would essentially also grant you EWP (Katana), EWP (Falcata), etc. For all Exotic Heavy Blade Weapons.
Honestly, it saves a lot of feats (though if you need to have that many Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, there is a problem with how you play), and actually makes such a feat useful for unorthodox gameplay (and not really gamebreaking).
And Rapthorn explained exactly what I am talking about with the DD. I can use it with a Longsword, but not a Greatsword (since it invalidates the conditions set within that feat). I can use it with a Katana, but not with a Shield; nor can I use a Large Wakizashi or what have you. I never said MV allows you to ignore conditions or pre-requisites set within the feat.
All I said was it allows you to substitute the weapon the feat applies to any weapon within that group. Simply put, if you can use a Greatsword with one hand and it's sized for you, you can use Dexterity for Attack and Damage. But if you can't (i.e. not a Titan Mauler), then it won't work.
It's that simple. It's not complicated. It's not broken (because substituting the Scimitar with any other qualified weapon, 9 times out of 10 won't do you many favors, and any that do are either variants or are hardly gamebreaking additions). So what's the problem?
@ Rapthorn2ndform: Yes and no. Remember, Martial Versatility allows you to simply apply that feat to other weapons of the same Fighter Weapon Category. So for example, the EWP (Bastard Sword) would essentially also grant you EWP (Katana), EWP (Falcata), etc. For all Exotic Heavy Blade Weapons.
Honestly, it saves a lot of feats (though if you need to have that many Exotic Weapon Proficiencies, there is a problem with how you play), and actually makes such a feat useful for unorthodox gameplay (and not really gamebreaking).
And Rapthorn explained exactly what I am talking about with the DD. I can use it with a Longsword, but not a Greatsword (since it invalidates the conditions set within that feat). I can use it with a Katana, but not with a Shield; nor can I use a Large Wakizashi or what have you. I never said MV allows you to ignore conditions or pre-requisites set within the feat.
All I said was it allows you to substitute the weapon the feat applies to any weapon within that group. Simply put, if you can use a Greatsword with one hand and it's sized for you, you can use Dexterity for Attack and Damage. But if you can't (i.e. not a Titan Mauler), then it won't work.
It's that simple. It's not complicated. It's not broken (because substituting the Scimitar with any other qualified weapon, 9 times out of 10 won't do you many favors, and any that do are either variants or are hardly gamebreaking additions). So what's the problem?
First about EWP...yeah, that's what i meant, but it's 1 am so...my mid is going.
And second...OHHHHHH....oops...I was argueing with you when we hold the same view point...that i cannot blame on 1 am...happens more often than i care to admit.
Sorry for wasting your time
You have to remember that while MV allows me to substitute weapons of the same weapon group, it doesn't allow me to bypass the requirements of the feat that MV is being applied to.
The thread is specifically arguing MV + DD, which by RAW works, and RAI is applicable. The DD feat also specifically says that the feat itself fails to function for the character when wielding a weapon not of your size, weapons that take up the off-hand (a weapon wielded in two hands qualifies as this), etc. The feat itself sets the boundaries, not MV.
MV simply allows you basically substitute Weapon A with X, the variable X representing any other (applicable) weapon from the same weapon group that Weapon A is a part of.
I'm not going to be able to use a Greataxe for Quarterstaff Master, since it's not even of the same weapon type as a Quarterstaff. I can try to use a Kusarigama or something of that sort, though whether it works with the feat itself or not (based upon its language) depends on how the feat is written.
Also, remember that just because a feat cites an example doesn't limit the feat to that example. The feat in open-ended terms refers to any combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. After all, it must be ridiculous to allow Penetrating Strike (and its Greater version) to work with MV, now doesn't it? On its surface, yes. If we take Martial Mastery, on the other hand, which applies all of the cited types of feats to weapons of the same group. So if I have Weapon Focus (Greatsword) and use a Longsword, I can apply Penetrating Strike to my Longsword attacks because it's considered to have Weapon Focus, a pre-requisite to utilizing Penetrating Strike (Weapon Focus with a chosen weapon).
The thread is specifically arguing MV + DD, which by RAW works, and RAI is applicable. The DD feat also specifically says that the feat itself fails to function for the character when wielding a weapon not of your size, weapons that take up the off-hand (a weapon wielded in two hands qualifies as this), etc. The feat itself sets the boundaries, not MV.
MV simply allows you basically substitute Weapon A with X, the variable X representing any other (applicable) weapon from the same weapon group that Weapon A is a part of.
In your interpretation of RAW, you still haven't given any evidence that DD can actually be applied to other weapons.
MV allows you to "use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group".
Using that feat doesn't necessarily mean that the feat in question have an effect on the weapon.
It doesn't specify that you get to substitute any wording of the feat text.
Thus, while the the initial cause-effect of MV is applicable, this specific situation has some additional limitations that aren't present in feats like Weapon Focus or Specialization.
The thread is specifically arguing MV + DD, which by RAW works, and RAI is applicable. The DD feat also specifically says that the feat itself fails to function for the character when wielding a weapon not of your size, weapons that take up the off-hand (a weapon wielded in two hands qualifies as this), etc. The feat itself sets the boundaries, not MV.
MV simply allows you basically substitute Weapon A with X, the variable X representing any other (applicable) weapon from the same weapon group that Weapon A is a part of.
In your interpretation of RAW, you still haven't given any evidence that DD can actually be applied to other weapons.
MV allows you to "use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group".
Using that feat doesn't necessarily mean that the feat in question have an effect on the weapon.
It doesn't specify that you get to substitute any wording of the feat text.Thus, while the the initial cause-effect of MV is applicable, this specific situation has some additional limitations that aren't present in feats like Weapon Focus or Specialization.
You cut my quote short. You forgot this:
I'm not going to be able to use a Greataxe for Quarterstaff Master, since it's not even of the same weapon type as a Quarterstaff. I can try to use a Kusarigama or something of that sort, though whether it works with the feat itself or not (based upon its language) depends on how the feat is written.
Also, remember that just because a feat cites an example doesn't limit the feat to that example. The feat in open-ended terms refers to any combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. After all, it must be ridiculous to allow Penetrating Strike (and its Greater version) to work with MV, now doesn't it? On its surface, yes. If we take Martial Mastery, on the other hand, which applies all of the cited types of feats to weapons of the same group. So if I have Weapon Focus (Greatsword) and use a Longsword, I can apply Penetrating Strike to my Longsword attacks because it's considered to have Weapon Focus, a pre-requisite to utilizing Penetrating Strike (Weapon Focus with a chosen weapon).
Please read all of my post before you say things that I already clarified in the same post you quote.
The MV feat says we can use the feat in question with any other weapon in that same weapon group, provided the feat is one
There will obviously be some weapons that invalidate utilization of feats targeted, but it won't be because of MV, it'd be because the credentials listed in the feat itself (in the case of DD, if it's not a one-handed weapon sized for you, and/or you have your off-hand occupied, the feat fails to function). At no point in time have I said that MV allows you to ignore the targeted feat's description and credentials for utilization.
Also, @ Xenrac:
Let's entertain a couple other feats as to their utilization, such as Quarterstaff Master:
By employing a number of different stances and techniques, you can wield a quarterstaff as a one-handed weapon. At the start of your turn, you decide whether or not you are going to wield the quarterstaff as a one-handed or two-handed weapon. When you wield it as a one-handed weapon, your other hand is free, and you cannot use the staff as a double weapon. You can take the feat Weapon Specialization in the quarterstaff even if you have no levels in fighter.
Emphasis Mine. The bolded part practically rules out any other weapon you could try to change it with since that line cannot be changed (due that it's referencing the weapon without really saying what the weapon really is). Of course, one can argue that it should be applicable for change due that it still refers to the same weapon, and for debating purposes I will go with this argument (though it's not my ruling on the matter, it's the one I will take to humor the arguments of balance).
Now then, Quarterstaves are Double Weapons and Monk weapons, according to the Fighter Weapon Groups table. We can eliminate one-handed and light weapons being applicable, since they aren't Double Weapons, and the feat would have no real effect on them anyway. So we go to other Two-Handed Weapons in those categories. Many Double weapons are Exotic Two-Handed Weapons, and even with proficiency, would be pointless to take this feat with (unless you're using something like a Gnome Hooked Hammer for use with a single side, in which case going TWF feats for such usage is pointless), and those that you do take it with are doing about the same level of favors as you would subbing a Katana/Longsword with the Scimitar for DD, or worse. (Two-Bladed Sword usable as a one-handed weapon? Cool for flavor, but why not just settle for the much more common and more versatile Longsword?)
Fair enough, but what about Monk Weapons? Some are quite fitting (Bo Staff), but also not really plausible since it requires the weapon to be a Double Weapon in order to function (see the bolded line), because the clause states you cannot use the weapon as a Double type weapon. This implies that the weapon has to be a Double Weapon to begin with in order for the feat to function with the weapon in question.
So what exactly sort of benefit are we looking at here for the Quarterstaff Master feat being usable with other weapons? At best, a bump up of damage dice (which is squat by the endgame, and not worth much in the early game), or a couple of semi-useful weapon traits which affect garbage maneuvers or provides hardly any special benefit? Is it really worth the 3 or so feats just to be able to use the Quarterstaff Master with maybe a Bo Staff or even the "uber X4 Gnome Hooked Hammer"? Logic and Optimizers would laugh at such nonsense. (For the record, Staves are generally garbage unless you're a Wizard with a Magic Staff, and even then. Plus, Scythe > GHH for such intents and purposes.
And we're even going based off of the fact that such combinations are possible. Let's say they're not. It won't be because of MV itself, it's because of the feat that MV is being applied to that nullifies any criteria.
Close Quarters Thrower was mentioned. Let's break that down too and see what's so bad about it:
Choose a type of thrown weapon. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity for making ranged attacks using the selected weapon.
Emphasis Mine. The conditions for this feat to work is that we must choose a thrown weapon. This means the weapon chosen must be from the Thrown Weapon Group. There are weapons in the Thrown weapon group that are in other weapon groups (Halfling Sling Staff, Javelins, etc.) The thing is, the weapon must be a part of the Thrown Weapon group or the feat will not function for that weapon.
With that said, we cannot utilize a weapon such as a Bastard Sword with the feat due that it's not of the same weapon group. The feat simply allows us to not provoke attacks of opportunity, which, while useful, is only good for throwing builds, which are few and far between (and useless). So not only are the benefits minute (if you're using that many throwing weapons, chances are you're garbage in melee combat), if not actually benefits at all, they're also not worth the feats for it.
I know Blade Binding (or whatever it's called) was mentioned; I cannot find a link as to the RAW regarding that, so if anyone could give me a link so I can break it down, I'd appreciate it.
It all boils down as to the restrictions of the feat that MV is being applied to, not MV itself. The MV restrictions are cut and dry; if it's not a combat feat, and/or a feat that applies to a specific weapon, it can't be used for the feat in question. Once those two criteria are met, then the selected feat's restrictions take over.
IIRC, you stated that DD couldn't possibly be feasible with MV because it affected a single specific weapon, not one that you can choose, and you cited a couple other similar feats to back up such a claim. Acceptable, and honorable.
That post simply broke down how MV would work with those feats. When you get down to the bottom of things, "splitting hairs" is all it takes to go from Interpretation A to Interpretation B, and this is the rules question forum, not a happy fun-time forum, or a comedy forum. At no point have I used profantiy; I may have got frustrated here and there, but the mood remains serious, as it should be. While I try to be enjoyable with things, stuff like this makes little opportunity to do so without it being a joke. So it's either I be a silly funny man, or a serious guy who knows his stuff (or other people just call him crazy, as it always has been).
I mean, people were saying that MV working with DD was broken. I provided some example numbers that said otherwise, or the exact opposite. People were also saying that MV shouldn't work with DD. I provided a fair interpretation of the intent from both feats and explained how it would (and should) combine (and whether they accepted or rejected it is up to them, but it's not like they gave any sort of comprehensive rebuttal to explain why the intent I provided was wrong, other than "It's not supposed to work that way.")
If it's not gamebreaking, and it's not against the intent of how both feats function, then what is the issue for this discussion?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The combo sounds perfectly fine by RAW *and* RAI to me. Of course, scimitar is already one of the best 1H weapons, and Dervish Dance's restrictions on having the empty hand still apply, so MV seems like a waste of a feat here. But you can certainly do it!
You cut my quote short. You forgot this:
I'm not going to be able to use a Greataxe for Quarterstaff Master, since it's not even of the same weapon type as a Quarterstaff. I can try to use a Kusarigama or something of that sort, though whether it works with the feat itself or not (based upon its language) depends on how the feat is written.
Also, remember that just because a feat cites an example doesn't limit the feat to that example. The feat in open-ended terms refers to any combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. After all, it must be ridiculous to allow Penetrating Strike (and its Greater version) to work with MV, now doesn't it? On its surface, yes. If we take Martial Mastery, on the other hand, which applies all of the cited types of feats to weapons of the same group. So if I have Weapon Focus
Please read all of my post before you say things that I already clarified in the same post you quote.
The MV feat says we can use the feat in question with any other weapon in that same weapon group, provided the feat is one
I cut the quote short, because it wasn't relevant to my question.
I disagree with your interpretation that "use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group" automatically equals "substitute the name of a weapon in the feat with other weapons".
As I see it, it requires a very broad interpretation of the feat text. From a more restrictive point of view ("the feat doesn't do more than is specified") it is limited.
I ask, because I need a bit more that makes the above connection, to be able to agree with your interpretation.
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon
Would you not say Dervish Dance is a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon?
If people are going to use the "slippery slope" argument, I want at least ONE example where Martial Versatility would be broken. One. Go on...
And that's what it boils down to. Is MV a broken feat? Because MV + Dervish Dance isn't at all questionable by RAW. It's a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon. There's no "risk" of "interpreting it this way" for leading to some other combo that turns out to be broken; the OP is using MV correctly, and as it is written.
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon
Would you not say Dervish Dance is a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon?
If I really want to make a distinction here, I would say Dervish Dance is a feat that only works with a specific weapon.
Where as Weapon Focus is applied to a specific weapon.
Not exactly RAW, but RAW doesn't really give us anything to go off other than Weapon Focus. And to me it is pretty plain that Weapon Focus and Dervish Dance are not remotely similar feats.
The only difference you can make here is that,
Weapon Focus (Scimitar) = Dervish Dance
Weapon Focus (Pick!) =/= Dervish Dance
Though I hope you'll see that the end result is still the same. Perhaps if I elongate it it will be more clear.
Weapon Focus (Scimitar):
You gain a +1 bonus on all attack rolls you make using Scimitars.
Dervish Dance:
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
I substituted some wording in Weapon Focus, but the meaning is still the same after the choice is made.
Applied and Works with in the context of your words essentially mean the same thing. Weapon Focus only works with the specified weapon. Dervish Dance is exactly the same in that regard. The only difference Weapon Focus makes is that you get to choose the specified weapon.
Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon
Would you not say Dervish Dance is a combat feat that applies to a specific weapon?
If I really want to make a distinction here, I would say Dervish Dance is a feat that only works with a specific weapon.
Where as Weapon Focus is applied to a specific weapon.
Not exactly RAW, but RAW doesn't really give us anything to go off other than Weapon Focus. And to me it is pretty plain that Weapon Focus and Dervish Dance are not remotely similar feats.
How does RAW not really "give us anything to go off other than Weapon Focus"? It can be used on feats that are Combat Feats that apply to a specific weapon. That's what the RAW says, that's something that we can go off of. So on to the next, shall we?
Explain how Dervish Dance can "only work with" the Scimitar, even though the feat itself also "applies" to the Scimitar, which is a specific type of weapon, because I can tell you right now that's a bunch of horsepuckey.
RAW concludes that MV can apply to it since DD fits the conditions set by MV, and the RAI argument against isn't really strong, since the math proves that combining other weapons with DD can be fairly silly/unoptimal to do, if not an outright waste of feats as-is, and the intent of something that can "only work with" the Scimitar (a one-handed martial Heavy Blade weapon) is disproven by other similar weapons that have the same exact categorization (Longswords are one-handed martial Heavy Blade weapons too).
So not only can the DD feat "work with" more than just the Scimitar, it can work with other weapons that behave similarly to a Scimitar that don't invalidate the credentials and conditions of the feat (because doing so makes the feat no longer function); Longswords and Bastard Swords and Katanas being prime examples of such, and weapons that do invalidate the credentials can be done, but are invalidated for other reasons (Greatswords, Earth Breakers, Nodachis all take up the off-hand; doing so makes the feat fail to function).
The point is that the feat MV is used on invalidates the type of weapons that can be utilized (because of the conditions needed to fulfill for the feat to work), not MV itself.
What if I did that same exact interpretation with the example cited within the MV feat?
So going by my interpretation, you're saying that Weapon Focus (Greatsword) cannot be applicable to, oh say, a Longsword because the feat doesn't specify we can choose a weapon within same group as the weapon initially chosen for the feat?
RAW, MV does that sort of work for us, not the feat we select with it. Regardless of whether or not the selected feat works can't be based upon MV, since MV lacks any sort of restricting language (other than what is already set in MV's RAW, but if those criteria aren't met, then the selected feat in question is pointless to discuss). The restriction of ability to use weapons with the selected feat is based upon the conditions set.
DD specifically says that the weapon must be sized for you, be usable in one hand, and must have your off-hand free (not holding a weapon or shield). So what can we rule out for use, thanks to MV? All Non-Heavy Blade weapons, for starters, since the specified weapon (Scimitar) is a Heavy Blade, and MV can only substitute weapons that the weapon in question is part of a group with. Next, we can remove all weapons that take two hands to use (Titan Mauler Barbarian can ignore this, but still must use the weapons in a single hand). Finally, we can remove inappropriately sized weapons, since DD says we can only use weapons sized for our character.
Now, what is left after all of the conditions set by DD can be used without issue. After all, using the other types of weapons that we initially removed won't work with the feat because if we try, the feat would simply fail to function, meaning the benefits it provides won't be present.
|
Looks like it should work just fine. You still need a free off hand of course so that will limit you a bit as others have pointed out.
Given the amount of investment and how late you get Martial Versatility your probably going to be reasonably invested in using that Scimitar but there certainly isn't anything wrong with suddenly being good enough to do it with a different bladed weapon.
So long as your having fun and not breaking anything it should be just fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was remembering it as SKR weighing in, and maybe he did so somewhere (?), but Jason Nelson, the author of MV did weigh in, that it is meant to only apply to Feat where you SELECT a weapon to work with it, or where you would put the weapon "in parentheses" after the Feat name (e.g. Weapon Focus(Scimitar)) not other Feats which uniquely work with one weapon (e.g. Dervish Dance).
http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5ldcu&page=3?Versatility-is-a-Human -Virtue#121
http://paizo.com/paizo/blog/v5748dyo5ldcu&page=3?Versatility-is-a-Human -Virtue#134
EDIT: He in fact specificaly affirmed the usage of MV to use Exotic Proficiency (actual Feat) for all weapons of that Fighter Weapon Group (not to be confused with light/1h/2h weapon categories), and that includes ALL groups a weapon may be a member of. So MV and XWP: Bastard Sword, will also get you proficiency in Katana, Aldori Sword, Nodachi, and Falcata, but you can't use 'unique' weapon-linked Feats with other weapons of the same group. He did write that this only means you gain the actual functional benefit of the Feat, it doesn't allow you to count as having the actual XWP Feat for purposes of pre-requisites that specify the Feat itself rather than mere proficiency in said weapon. (for example, Aldori Swordlord)
Quandary provides proof that it's not the RAI for it to work that way. Finally, something productive from the other side.
It's fair enough to say it's not the intent, though it can still be proven that it would still work. It can be a headache, but it's not really that horrible to think it through.
Quandary provides proof that it's not the RAI for it to work that way. Finally, something productive from the other side.
Well, I always like productive rules discussions... When I saw the thread, I remembered the topic had already been discussed (I brought up the Dervish Dance issue myself when the Feat was first revealed) and had Paizo feedback, so I dug up the quotes.
EDIT: There's egg on my face for not the first time in this thread, but Exotic Weapon Proficiency(Dueling Sword) does seem to change the wording of Weapon Finesse by a small degree. Take what you will from that.
I don't think so... XWP Feat still does the exact same thing and doesn't itself change the rules for other Feats, the Dueling Sword quality just says that if you have XWP Feat in Dueling Sword you gain a special benefit.
Honestly, that might be worth getting separate clarification on, since re: Jason Nelson's ruling on allowing other tangential benefits (such as Pre-Reqs) one could easily argue that having XWP:Aldori and MV would not allow gaining the special benefit of Dueling Swords even though you have exotic proficiency in it, you don't actually have the XWP FEAT which it specifies. This is unlike Bastard Swords where they are just normally 1H Exotic Weapons so you gain the ability to use them 1H if you have proficiency in them, the Dueling Sword wording re: Finesse specifically has a Pre-Req of having the XWP(Dueling Sword) Feat. You could extend that issue to whether other sources of proficiency i.e. specific proficiency via Class or Race allows qualifying for things which have XWP Proficiency specified or listed under "Feat" Pre-Reqs.
Quandary provides proof that it's not the RAI for it to work that way. Finally, something productive from the other side.
It's fair enough to say it's not the intent, though it can still be proven that it would still work. It can be a headache, but it's not really that horrible to think it through.
My only proof is that expanding your interpretation to include other feats includes lots and lots of shaky possibilities, the big one being the problems I highlighted last night with EWP, which you can squirm with all you want, but it is simply proof that nothing in any known feat change their own wording, or the wording of any other feat. Not even Dervish Dance tries to make Weapon Finesse work with a Scimitar, it just gives you the benefits as if it did, and new benefits because you wasted a few feats and levels with a DEX build that does little damage before you get it.
The biggest point is that the RAI says there is a difference between applies to and works with. And things like EWP and Weapon Focus apply to, things like Dervish Dance, Quarterstaff Master, and Dueling Mastery work with. Nothing in the RAW supports your interpretation, even if nothing explicitly denies it.
Again, I made that adjustment to symbolize what MV would essentially do. It allows you to use other weapons within the same group for that feat, correct? Thusly, you could use Longswords with the feat instead of just Scimitars.
Taking your second point, it makes MV and MM absolutely worthless. MV and MM would be a waste of feats with the wording of Proficiency, Focus, and Specialization of weapons and to what it all entails. Working toward the endgame, taking all of those kinds of feats, you should have Penetrating Strike, and its Greater version, making having multiple weapons (outside of maybe Bows, but fighters who specialize in those weapons have no need for any other ones) a lot of non-valuable space and money to waste on; and we're not even talking about the character being able to fly or teleport, leaving ranged weapons pointless as well.
So going by the other interpretation, MV is about as nice as the Prone Shooter feat. At least the interpretation I argue makes it have some value.
Again, I made that adjustment to symbolize what MV would essentially do. It allows you to use other weapons within the same group for that feat, correct? Thusly, you could use Longswords with the feat instead of just Scimitars.
Taking your second point, it makes MV and MM absolutely worthless. MV and MM would be a waste of feats with the wording of Proficiency, Focus, and Specialization of weapons and to what it all entails. Working toward the endgame, taking all of those kinds of feats, you should have Penetrating Strike, and its Greater version, making having multiple weapons (outside of maybe Bows, but fighters who specialize in those weapons have no need for any other ones) a lot of non-valuable space and money to waste on; and we're not even talking about the character being able to fly or teleport, leaving ranged weapons pointless as well.
So going by the other interpretation, MV is about as nice as the Prone Shooter feat. At least the interpretation I argue makes it have some value.
My interpretation says you can use MM to expand your Penetrating Strike and your half a dozen other single weapon specific feats across an entire weapon group, and get EWP in an entire weapon group that includes the most powerful exotic weapons in the game, with two feats.
My interpretation says that these two feats make it NOT a waste of time to have multiple weapons. My interpretation says these two feats can save you half a dozen feats if you want to change your weaponry to fit the situation without losing loads of benefits from taking one weapon and dumping feats onto it. Martial Versatility. Pretty much exactly what it says on the tin.
Pick one exotic weapon, get EWP in it out of the gate, dump a lot of weapon selecting feats onto it, use MV to get EWP on that entire weapon group, then later on, use MM to expand ALL of the stuff you put on that weapon onto an entire weapon group.
With all the feats you can invest into a single weapon, Exotic Weapons become almost pointless to use unless you get such proficiency for free. In which case, spending feats for proficiency is suboptimal and a waste.
In addition, all the feats you spend on a single weapon (Focus, Specialization, Penetrating Strike, plus Greater versions) nullifies any need for MV or MM, since by that point you should only need your main weapon, since you should be able to Fly and/or Teleport on a regular basis, making ranged pointless, and being able to bypass B/P/S DR defeats the purpose of having a second weapon.
Now that I think about it, why did I even argue about whether or not these feats work with DD? Probably because I'm sick of seeing Scimitars all over the place, though it doesn't matter since the Scimitar is the best Dexterity weapon in the game thanks to DD.