| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If someone asks you to pass them the blue ball, but the only balls you see are a red ball and a ball that is blue with polka dots, do you call back that there is no blue ball? I can not stand with such reasoning as it eliminates common sense.
In such a case you are not working with specifically defined categories. A conversation doesn't consist of a set of rules. The rules of the game do. In the game a Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed are precisely defined terms. Just like an Tiefling and a Human are both "humanoid" in real world terms but in the rules the term humanoid is a specifically defined and an Aasimar is not one. Likewise by real world standards a dagger is indeed a one-handed weapon but in the specifically defined terms of the game it is not.
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
My point in posting this question was to hope to get a REAL ruling on do you use 1 hand with a light weapon. By my reading, a light weapon IS a one handed weapon that can be used in a grapple. However, as had been made obvious by many posters, simple logic like this is rare.
Here's the source of the confusion:
Does the phrase "one-handed slashing weapon" refer to "a slashing weapon wielded in one hand" (your reading) or "a slashing weapon from the pre-defined category One-Handed Weapons"?If you go with the second reading, whether you use a light weapon in one hand is completely irrelevant: light weapons are not listed in the tables titled "One-Handed Weapons", nor do they appear in the fighter weapon groups with other one-handed weapons (the "Heavy Blades" group, in this case).
Unfortunately, there is significant evidence that the second reading is the correct one (numerous examples of the phrasing "a light or one-handed weapon" in the various rule books, threads discussing the playtest of the Advanced Class Guide where the feat was introduced, and threads discussing the feat after the Advanced Class Guide was released).
When deciding rules questions (kind of like law questions), you start with the exact wording of the rules. If that's not clear, you can consider similar wording used elsewhere (precedent). If that's still not clear, you can search for discussion threads where the developers of the rule talk about what they meant (legislative intent). "Logic" is the absolute last thing to rely on because "logic" or "what makes sense" can be very subjective). If it's still not clear or if you disagree with the rule, you can always ask for an FAQ (take it to court).
Fortunately, with RPG rules (unlike with laws), if you disagree with the rule as written or as intended, you are always free to change it or just ignore it as a house rule. (While you're at it, I recommend house-ruling Piranha Strike to be usable with any finessable weapon instead of just "light weapons"--that's the other side of this whole discussion.)
Those of us who play in organized campaigns, however, don't have the luxury of making house rules, so we'll diligently search for precedent and intent. Since we rely on precedent and need to come to a consensus among multiple GMs, we often lurk around the rules sections of the message boards. And we sometimes end up with rulings that are not logical or that we disagree with (which sucks), but it's the price we pay for playing in an organized campaign.
So what to you is "illogical nit-picking" is, to us, just "due diligence". If you ask the question "What do you want the rule to be" or "How do you think this rule should have been written", you'll get a very different discussion.
Noting that the rule is not logical does not automatically change it (in this case, all the discussions to date about the rule already point out how illogical it is). If you don't like the rule, house rule it.
Devs obviously wanted to force swash dips on people. I think Swash may turn into the most dipped class. I expect to see a lot of level 1 swashbucklers (especially inspired blades)/level x something else.
Devs obviously wanted to force swash dips on people. I think Swash may turn into the most dipped class. I expect to see a lot of level 1 swashbucklers (especially inspired blades)/level x something else.
outside of PFS my money is on swash (for functional finesse) and MoMS (for pummeling charge) will be the most-dipped classes.
because we all know they're not gonna fix pummeling style. they'll either ignore it or make it go the way of the crane wing.
MOMS is going to highly depend on what the FAQ says. I suspect it goes to unarmed strikes only which means it won't be so abused as not everyone can utilize it. If it goes the other way, well then yeah, every non barbarian warrior is pretty much a MOMS. The fact it boosts all saves as well is a nice bonus.
They may just get rid of the crit multiplier part and make it all weapons too, in which case every warrior is still a MOMS. Probably MOMS with Sohei or Monk of the Sacred Mountain.
honestly i would be alright with a pounce-type option for people not named barbarian and alchemist, and yeah the crit this is dumb.
though if they make it unarmed only (which would be acceptable) i can see that raising a few threads of "but what about brass knuckles/gauntlets/cestus/punching daggers/etc.? you can punch with those."
So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
|
So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
It also works for a small subset of other weapons should someone want to focus on one of those. (as in the only one I can think of is an Aldori Dueling Sword) And by works I mean as in you can get both dex to hit and dex to damage.
|
There is a mixed message when in the same book a single feat allow Oracles to add his cha bonus to all saves.Paladins also add CHA to all saves as a class ability. There is precedent there.
A mithril full-plate fighter could get up to a +7 dex bonus from armor training and mithril. With feats like these, he can also be having the +7 to hit and +7 for damage as well. Strength effectively becomes irrelevant.
How heavy was that full plate?
For an investment of 9,000 gp, it still weighs 25lbs. Even a fighter is not dumping strength if he intends to wear heavy armor. At higher level play, where 9k is no big deal, +7 to hit & damage is not a very large bonus compared to what a strength focused character would have.
It also works for a small subset of other weapons should someone want to focus on one of those. (as in the only one I can think of is an Aldori Dueling Sword) And by works I mean as in you can get both dex to hit and dex to damage.So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
theres also the sawtooth saber for people wanting TWF without stupid-high penalties, and the whip (and dwarven waraxe, oddly enough) for people who want reach.
I'm sure by now we've all realized that Nice Things are usually bugs, rather than features.
theres also the sawtooth saber for people wanting TWF without stupid-high penalties, and the whip (and dwarven waraxe, oddly enough) for people who want reach.It also works for a small subset of other weapons should someone want to focus on one of those. (as in the only one I can think of is an Aldori Dueling Sword) And by works I mean as in you can get both dex to hit and dex to damage.So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
Of those, only the whip is actually affected by Weapon Finesse...
|
Devs obviously wanted to force swash dips on people. I think Swash may turn into the most dipped class. I expect to see a lot of level 1 swashbucklers (especially inspired blades)/level x something else.outside of PFS my money is on swash (for functional finesse) and MoMS (for pummeling charge) will be the most-dipped classes.
because we all know they're not gonna fix pummeling style. they'll either ignore it or make it go the way of the crane wing.
I think they already ruled that you can't take pummeling charge in PFS. (Not the whole tree - just pummeling charge.)
|
|
Of those, only the whip is actually affected by Weapon Finesse...theres also the sawtooth saber for people wanting TWF without stupid-high penalties, and the whip (and dwarven waraxe, oddly enough) for people who want reach.It also works for a small subset of other weapons should someone want to focus on one of those. (as in the only one I can think of is an Aldori Dueling Sword) And by works I mean as in you can get both dex to hit and dex to damage.So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
The Aldori Dueling Sword is also affected by Weapon Finesse (hence me listing it (and only it) as the whip is kinda a nigh-unusable corner case)
The Aldori Dueling Sword is also affected by Weapon Finesse (hence me listing it (and only it) as the whip is kinda a nigh-unusable corner case)theres also the sawtooth saber for people wanting TWF without stupid-high penalties, and the whip (and dwarven waraxe, oddly enough) for people who want reach.It also works for a small subset of other weapons should someone want to focus on one of those. (as in the only one I can think of is an Aldori Dueling Sword) And by works I mean as in you can get both dex to hit and dex to damage.So Slashing Grace is a feat that allows you to add you Dex modifier to damage, instead of Str.
This is where your making your mistake. This feat was never intended as a Dex to damage feat for all characters. The primary purpose of this feat was to allow Swashbucklers to use use their class abilities with slashing weapons. The Devs felt that the feat was too weak so they added Dex to damage as an after thought.
This feat allows the Swashbuckler (for whom this feat was intended) to use Weapon Finesse with all one-handed slashing weapons. The feat works exactly as intended.
Of those, only the whip is actually affected by Weapon Finesse...
Yeah, I guess I could have cut out the previous stuff, but I was only referring to AndIMustMask's list of weapons. Aldori is definitely finessable, sorry for the confusion.
There is a mixed message when in the same book a single feat allow Oracles to add his cha bonus to all saves.Paladins also add CHA to all saves as a class ability. There is precedent there.
A mithril full-plate fighter could get up to a +7 dex bonus from armor training and mithril. With feats like these, he can also be having the +7 to hit and +7 for damage as well. Strength effectively becomes irrelevant.
I wouldn't say STR is irrelevant, mitheral plate still weighs 25lbs. Encumbrance is going to be an issue you need to deal with. As well STR will still be used for two handed weapons for greater damage output. It's going to cost you 3 feats to get though weapon focus is one a fighter would be taking anyways but that's 3 feats you need to spend. The dex to damage only applies to the weapon you took slashing grace for. So with out that weapon you are back to using STR. The there is the STR check, that does come into play though very situational. STR also applies to CMB and CMD but you want DEX on those that's another 2 feats. It doesn't seem that bad.
How heavy was that full plate?
For an investment of 9,000 gp, it still weighs 25lbs. Even a fighter is not dumping strength if he intends to wear heavy armor. At higher level play, where 9k is no big deal, +7 to hit & damage is not a very large bonus compared to what a strength focused character would have.
25lbs? Or 12.5 for a small character. Give him a mithral heavy steel shield at 7.5(3.75) too while you're at it.
Scimitar weighs 4(2).
This leaves you a medium creature at 36.5lbs worn or a small at 18.25.
Throw in a handy haversack at 5lbs brings these to 41.5 and 23.25.
Small characters can get by with a str of 8 and medium with a strength of 12 for no encumbrance penalties.
Or make a deal with your arcane caster to cast ant haul on you. Then you can have a strength of 5 and still be unencumbered. 2hrs/level duration too, so once you're level 12, you have that up 24/7.
There is a mixed message when in the same book a single feat allow Oracles to add his cha bonus to all saves.Paladins also add CHA to all saves as a class ability. There is precedent there.
A mithril full-plate fighter could get up to a +7 dex bonus from armor training and mithril. With feats like these, he can also be having the +7 to hit and +7 for damage as well. Strength effectively becomes irrelevant.
I wouldn't say STR is irrelevant, mitheral plate still weighs 25lbs. Encumbrance is going to be an issue you need to deal with. As well STR will still be used for two handed weapons for greater damage output. It's going to cost you 3 feats to get though weapon focus is one a fighter would be taking anyways but that's 3 feats you need to spend. The dex to damage only applies to the weapon you took slashing grace for. So with out that weapon you are back to using STR. The there is the STR check, that does come into play though very situational. STR also applies to CMB and CMD but you want DEX on those that's another 2 feats. It doesn't seem that bad.
currently thinking about making a 3 str kobold with 20 dex... will need magic/helpers to carry my stuff.
So can a phalanx fighter one-handing a monk's spade use TWF feats and get the attacks one handed? Add to that its a slashing one-handed weapon and a level dip of swashbuckler for finesse and slashing grace and you've got quite a setup.
I'm sure by now we've all realized that Nice Things are usually bugs, rather than features.
Only if they are for martials, spellcasters keep all their nice things usually.
Small characters can get by with a str of 8 and medium with a strength of 12 for no encumbrance penalties.
Or make a deal with your arcane caster to cast ant haul on you. Then you can have a strength of 5 and still be unencumbered. 2hrs/level duration too, so once you're level 12, you have that up 24/7.
Ant haul solves most encumbrance problems by level 3-4. Since most casters (at least ones I play, even ones with strength like melee druids) are memorizing it anyway, 1 or 2 pearls of power and he'll be happy to hit you with it too. 2000k gold for 4-7 attribute points is a tiny exchange, and one I've never found not to be worth it, and I use it a lot. The first few levels encumbrance balancing can be a little tricky, but after that your golden.
|
|
So...
Inspired Blade Swashbuckler 1/Kensai Magus 19, how does that work?
Once Fencing Grace comes out it works if you want a rapier instead of a scimitar, but your giving up Weapon Mastery and your x3 crit.
It is debatable if giving up your capstone is worth the extra panache. In games not going to 20 (most games) it is probably a good deal.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. People are nitpicking when it is obvious they meant a "weapon used in one hand." They use longsword in the example in the feat.
I would allow it with any slashing weapon useable in one hand whether finessable or not.
A longsword is specifically a one-handed weapon, which is verbatim defined in the rules as not a light weapon and verbatim called out in this feat.
edit: if they had used a sickle as an example then it would matter. However they did not, so the rules are clear.
Longsword is not a finessable weapon.
I think it is pretty ridiculous that a feat would allow a weapon to do dexterity damage with a one-handed slashing weapon, but somehow the same character couldn't use a dagger or sickle. The typical ridiculous non-specific rule design that makes no sense whatsoever.
Run it as you wish. I rewrite rules engineering like this. It is not sensible and does not serve the characters that need it most.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. People are nitpicking when it is obvious they meant a "weapon used in one hand." They use longsword in the example in the feat.
I would allow it with any slashing weapon useable in one hand whether finessable or not.
Why would the game make a distinction between light and one-handed weapons if it just intended to ignore that distinction (and the language of that distinction) as a matter-of- course? More likely that the designers meant what they wrote, exactly as they wrote it.
Even if they didn't, those are the rules. The rules if pathfinder are steeped in pedantry.
Gee, they've never done that before have they? They've never written a rule in a manner that doesn't provide a clear idea of what the feat is intended to do. Just never...what an impossible idea.
We've spent countless hours arguing about ambiguously worded feats because of how poorly some are written. The entire reason we have RAI and RAW is because we spend a ton of time dealing with people that attempt to use RAW to gain any advantage because the rules designers used ambiguous wording, while some try to figure out RAI to determine what a feat was intended to do.
Get real. These arguments occur all the time. They could easily use a word that means something specific, while intending something more general. It isn't like it hasn't happened before.
Longsword is not a finessable weapon.
Not with the weapon finesse feat no. But with Swashbuckler finesse and Slashing Grace it is.
"Benefit: Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon (such as the longsword). When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a swashbuckler's or a duelist's precise strike) and you can add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to that weapon's damage. The weapon must be one appropriate for your size."Slashing grace lets you treat it as a piercing weapon.
"Swashbuckler Finesse (Ex): At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of Intelligence as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
Swashbuckler finesse lets you get weapon finesse on all light/one handed piercing weapons.
Longsword is not a finessable weapon.Not with the weapon finesse feat no. But with Swashbuckler finesse and Slashing Grace it is.
"Benefit: Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon (such as the longsword). When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a swashbuckler's or a duelist's precise strike) and you can add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to that weapon's damage. The weapon must be one appropriate for your size."
Slashing grace lets you treat it as a piercing weapon."Swashbuckler Finesse (Ex): At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of Intelligence as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
Swashbuckler finesse lets you get weapon finesse on all light/one handed piercing weapons.
Fortunately this isn't a concern in our campaigns as we long ago made weapon finesse allow a dex-based fighter to use his dex for any weapon. Strength has always made no sense as an attack roll stat. Of all the games I've played, Pathfinder/D&D is the only game system I've played that uses strength as a primary attack roll stat. It's one of the mechanics I've been hoping they would change for a decade or more.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fortunately this isn't a concern in our campaigns as we long ago made weapon finesse allow a dex-based fighter to use his dex for any weapon. Strength has always made no sense as an attack roll stat. Of all the games I've played, Pathfinder/D&D is the only game system I've played that uses strength as a primary attack roll stat. It's one of the mechanics I've been hoping they would change for a decade or more.Longsword is not a finessable weapon.Not with the weapon finesse feat no. But with Swashbuckler finesse and Slashing Grace it is.
"Benefit: Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon (such as the longsword). When wielding your chosen weapon one-handed, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a swashbuckler's or a duelist's precise strike) and you can add your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to that weapon's damage. The weapon must be one appropriate for your size."
Slashing grace lets you treat it as a piercing weapon."Swashbuckler Finesse (Ex): At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, and she can use her Charisma score in place of Intelligence as a prerequisite for combat feats. This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
Swashbuckler finesse lets you get weapon finesse on all light/one handed piercing weapons.
strength makes so much more sense, you're able to keep your weapon ready easier, you can accelerate it faster, you can just hammer on the enemies parry til he gives, you can deflect someones sword easier to press yours in. strength is must more important if your swords are actually meeting each other. oh and lets not forget pushing through "soft" armor.
remember, combat is abstracted out.
|
|
Virtually every game I have played used strength for melee, dexterity/agility being the exception in most cases. Think only places I have seen dex used for melee, it ended up being more a problem than a solution to anything (WoD is an example of how messy it can get).
But anyway, is it useless? Heh I wouldn't say that it is useless but well strength characters with two handed weapon are still the best at melee...and that's pretty much all there is to it. There is no epiphany or big revelation...yeah the barbarian with the big sword is still dropping bodies faster than the guy dancing with a sword.
So, to make a pair of daggers more graceful, you have to strap rocks to them?
Got it.
They are graceful. They just can't deal loads of damage with it. Because to deal damage with a fighting style depending on agility the weapon needs to have some weight. When using brawn you can simply force the weapon in to deal damage. With a graceful weapon you only use the weapon's momentum to deal damage.
Seems the devs thought about it before making the rule. Sadly most posters here do not seem to understand the physics well enough. It's just not: dagger graceful, graceful good, big damage.
When I am chopping wood I can do it with a light or with a heavy axe. Someone with less muscles would find it more exercising but at the same time more effective to use the heavy axe because he only has to raise it and then let its weight do the chopping. With the light axe he'll just get it stuck in the wood with little effect.
|
So, to make a pair of daggers more graceful, you have to strap rocks to them?
Got it.
They are graceful. They just can't deal loads of damage with it. Because to deal damage with a fighting style depending on agility the weapon needs to have some weight. When using brawn you can simply force the weapon in to deal damage. With a graceful weapon you only use the weapon's momentum to deal damage.
Seems the devs thought about it before making the rule. Sadly most posters here do not seem to understand the physics well enough. It's just not: dagger graceful, graceful good, big damage.
When I am chopping wood I can do it with a light or with a heavy axe. Someone with less muscles would find it more exercising but at the same time more effective to use the heavy axe because he only has to raise it and then let its weight do the chopping. With the light axe he'll just get it stuck in the wood with little effect.
are you calling physics? because in the game a 7 str character moving a dagger require the same time to swing a Warhammer and has exactly the same hit chancen.
Calling for selective realism is dumb, else why is not the Warhamer targetting touch ac?
Virtually every game I have played used strength for melee, dexterity/agility being the exception in most cases. Think only places I have seen dex used for melee, it ended up being more a problem than a solution to anything (WoD is an example of how messy it can get).
Off the top of my head:*
Games with strength to hit in melee: D&D, ShadowrunGames with agility to hit in melee: legend of the five rings, Palladium, WoD
Games with separate stats: Midgard, The warhammer games by FFG
In most games you need more than just strength to be good in melee. Even in shadowrun you really need more because of the combat pool. D&D and PF are an exception in that high strength alone gives you a good offence in melee.
*I did not list the separate games for lines with similar rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
are you calling physics? because in the game a 7 str character moving a dagger require the same time to swing a Warhammer and has exactly the same hit chancen.So, to make a pair of daggers more graceful, you have to strap rocks to them?
Got it.
They are graceful. They just can't deal loads of damage with it. Because to deal damage with a fighting style depending on agility the weapon needs to have some weight. When using brawn you can simply force the weapon in to deal damage. With a graceful weapon you only use the weapon's momentum to deal damage.
Seems the devs thought about it before making the rule. Sadly most posters here do not seem to understand the physics well enough. It's just not: dagger graceful, graceful good, big damage.
When I am chopping wood I can do it with a light or with a heavy axe. Someone with less muscles would find it more exercising but at the same time more effective to use the heavy axe because he only has to raise it and then let its weight do the chopping. With the light axe he'll just get it stuck in the wood with little effect.
I call it because posters here keep saying how the rule is stupid where in fact it is not. I don't say rules should incorporate physics. But if people don't understand physics and then yell at a sensible rule I feel inclined to tell them that they are wrong.
|
|
Virtually every game I have played used strength for melee, dexterity/agility being the exception in most cases. Think only places I have seen dex used for melee, it ended up being more a problem than a solution to anything (WoD is an example of how messy it can get).
Off the top of my head:*
Games with strength to hit in melee: D&D, Shadowrun
Games with agility to hit in melee: legend of the five rings, Palladium, WoD
Games with separate stats: Midgard, The warhammer games by FFGIn most games you need more than just strength to be good in melee. Even in shadowrun you really need more because of the combat pool. D&D and PF are an exception in that high strength alone gives you a good offence in melee.
*I did not list the separate games for lines with similar rules.
Remember - in Pathfinder your BAB has more to do with hand-eye coordination than dex does. (I've played systems where neither strength nor agility affect how easy it is to hit your opponent - just your melee/ranged skill. Strength for melee damage, agility for defense.)
Also - in a system where armor makes you harder to hit, it only makes sense for strength to make it easier to hit them. As part of what the strength represents is punching through their armor.
If you play a system where armor gives damage reduction instead of making you harder to hit, there's more of an argument to use only dexterity to hit in melee. (I like this idea in theory - but I've yet to see it done very well.)
It seems a little odd that the feat should mostly only benefit a specific class, but honestly there are lots of feats which can only be taken by a single class, and other classes can sneak into this one with Aldori Dueling swords. Maybe it was intentional.
Anyhow, the feat seems fine for Swashbucklers. If it was intentionally limited to one-handed weapons maybe the devs felt that while Dex to damage is OK combining it with TWF would be a bit much. This would match up with the existing Dervish Dance feat as well as the Swashbuckler's restrictions on using one weapon to get certain benefits.
The sawtooth sabres trick is one I hadn't noticed yet. Most players don't visit these boards much or sit combing through materials for hours looking for the perfect combo though, so there really is a bit of balance in obscurity.
|
|
The sawtooth sabres trick is one I hadn't noticed yet. Most players don't visit these boards much or sit combing through materials for hours looking for the perfect combo though, so there really is a bit of balance in obscurity.
I was working with sawtooth sabres before Slashing Grace came out. A one level dip and my fighter can go back to his normal progression.
Wow. People are nitpicking when it is obvious they meant a "weapon used in one hand." They use longsword in the example in the feat.
I would allow it with any slashing weapon useable in one hand whether finessable or not.
Why would the game make a distinction between light and one-handed weapons if it just intended to ignore that distinction (and the language of that distinction) as a matter-of- course? More likely that the designers meant what they wrote, exactly as they wrote it.
Even if they didn't, those are the rules. The rules if pathfinder are steeped in pedantry.
Gee, they've never done that before have they? They've never written a rule in a manner that doesn't provide a clear idea of what the feat is intended to do. Just never...what an impossible idea.
We've spent countless hours arguing about ambiguously worded feats because of how poorly some are written. The entire reason we have RAI and RAW is because we spend a ton of time dealing with people that attempt to use RAW to gain any advantage because the rules designers used ambiguous wording, while some try to figure out RAI to determine what a feat was intended to do.
Get real. These arguments occur all the time. They could easily use a word that means something specific, while intending something more general. It isn't like it hasn't happened before.
This is not a case of unclear language or intent. Both are crystal clear in this case, that doesn't change just because you don't like the result.
What if you had a sunblade? If I had weapon finesse, slashing grace, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bastard Sword), could slashing grace work without having to dip Swashbuckler?
EWP gives me a one-handed slashing weapon to use slashing grace. But as it also counts as a shortsword, weapon finesse would apply. It's three feats, but I get dex to hit and damage, with bastard sword damage to boot. Is this allowed?
... do you even need to be proficient with bastard sword to use that weapon one handed? it says "either".
You would need weapon focus, too.