It's not that half elf isn't a good choice. It's good. It's just that the free feat isn't really free since it's part of the race balance. And a human could use their free feat for something better than exotic weapon's minuscule bonus such as weapon focus or power attack.
If you want to play helf for more than just exotic proficiency then great, but if you are going for just exotic then you are shorting yourself.
|
Here's the differences between going with Human and H-Elf
Slayer Favored Class Bonus -
Human get 1/6 of Slayer Talents VS H-Elf 1/2 bonus to Bluff checks to feint & Diplomacy checks to gather info.Takes the place of the standard +1 HP or +1 Skill point for favored class bonus.
Then you have all the standard racial bonuses H-Elf gets -
Low-Light vision, Elven Immunities, Keen Senses, etcVS
The Human Skilled (extra +1 skill rank every level)
this is more of a favor choice but in my opinion the Slay Favored Class bonus tips the balance (as it can count as a extra feat) into being better for Human. This is not true for a low level game as the Slayer Favored Class bonus does absolutely nothing for you till level 7.
The 1/2 elf gets the choice to take Human, 1/2 elf and Elf FCB. Human gains no advantage there.
The rest is a preference...and the preference for this build for my gf is to use 1/2 elf, and for what it is worth I agree with her. I would rather the 1/2 elf for this build due to the addition of the remaining racial traits the 1/2 elf gains over +1 skill point/level.
Two Weapon Fighting with Sawtooth Sabres might be an interesting way to build a slayer with a single dip in swashbuckler. (Probably not optimal mind as you'll need four feats to get it to work).sigh
;)
Sorry. I'm currently on secondment to a consultancy firm and obviously the desire to answer a completely different question to the one asked is rubbing off ;)
|
|
It's not that half elf isn't a good choice. It's good. It's just that the free feat isn't really free since it's part of the race balance. And a human could use their free feat for something better than exotic weapon's minuscule bonus such as weapon focus or power attack.
If you want to play helf for more than just exotic proficiency then great, but if you are going for just exotic then you are shorting yourself.
The 1/2 elf feat is as free as the human's, it is just more limited as to what it can be used on due to the balance you mentioned.
I would take all the other traits a 1/2 elf gains over +1 skill point all day every day, no question, but it is not a question posed in a vacuum like that.
If you want a build that uses an exotic weapon and your race choices were Human or 1/2 elf why would you not use 1/2 elf? If you took Human because their flexible feat at first is, well more flexible, but you were going to spend it on EWP anyway, isn't that shorting yourself?
That is all that is happening here. There is an exotic weapon being used in the build. That is the choice of the player. Now why lose out on all the rest of the stuff a 1/2 elf gives just so you could be a human and get +1 skill point?
|
|
Sorry. I'm currently on secondment to a consultancy firm and obviously the desire to answer a completely different question to the one asked is rubbing off ;)Two Weapon Fighting with Sawtooth Sabres might be an interesting way to build a slayer with a single dip in swashbuckler. (Probably not optimal mind as you'll need four feats to get it to work).sigh
;)
haha
she's all good man...just ribbing.
The argument is that if you want a build that uses an exotic weapon, it better be for flavor purposes because exotic is not "worth it" for most builds. And if you are picking a weapon for flavor, why wouldn't you be picking your race for flavor?
And exotic is even a little worse for slayers than most classes, because slayers get a chunk of their damage from sneak attack which completely ignores your weapon properties. Sneak attack also pushes you towards two weapon fighting, though not as strongly as it does the rogue. This is why you hear people mention the saw toothed sabers when going helf, as there aren't very many exotics good for two weapon fighting.
|
|
The argument is that if you want a build that uses an exotic weapon it better be for flavor purposes because exotic is not "worth it" for most builds. And if you are picking a weapon for flavor, why wouldn't you be picking your race for flavor?
And exotic is even a little worse for slayers than most classes, because slayers get a chunk of their damage from sneak attack which completely ignores your weapon properties. Sneak attack also pushes you towards two weapon fighting, though not as strongly as it does the rogue. This is why you hear people mention the saw toothed sabers when going helf, as there aren't very many exotics good for two weapon fighting.
If the main reason was to build the most optimal build possible...yeah maybe.
The fact here is that we are building what the player wants.
I am not having an issue chatting about the theory of what feats work best where. I am having an issue that I feel like you are trying to tell me that we are building this wrong. Such could not be further from the truth.
Could you build a better, more optimal slayer using other features and choices along the way? For sure, I do not argue that point.
Is this build exceptionally weak? Nope.
Slay2/Swsh3 at 5th. +12: d8+6+3precision 18-20/x2...can you squeeze more, very likely but this is a solid character in combat.
It has it's study target bonus, it can double the precision. There are panache for parry/riposte (and plenty of AoO to use) and a decent crit range to have a good flow of returning panache
This build does the most important function that a character is supposed to do...makes a player enjoy it. The player chose certain aspects she wanted in the build. I got them in there and strove to make a solid functional PC. I think I succeeded.
So, as I said, chatting theory is cool. Telling me I am Having BADWRONGFUN isn't, and I think you may just be on that line of the latter.
The name of this thread is "which weapon for a slashing grace slayer". You can't complain when people give you answers to that question.
|
|
The name of this thread is "which weapon for a slashing grace slayer". You can't complain when people give you answers to that question.
Ah. Ignore the actual first post where I basically say which 2 weapons I am looking at.
Plus the fact that we have chatted back and forth and I have explained the criteria for the build, you just chose to ignore it and keep debating how I am building it wrong.
Again. Wanna chat theory? Awesome.
Wanna tell me how I need to follow your guidelines on how to build this PC in a way that is not what I am looking to use? You are in the wrong thread.
So be nice please.
|
|
You could get TWF on any slashing grace weapon, you'd just eat the extra penalty. But you can remove that now with effortless lace.This is why you hear people mention the saw toothed sabers when going helf, as there aren't very many exotics good for two weapon fighting.Plus it's the only way to get slashing grace on both weapons when using TWF.
Technically yes - but I don't know of anyone who would actually use TWF with the additional penalty.
The name of this thread is "which weapon for a slashing grace slayer". You can't complain when people give you answers to that question.Ah. Ignore the actual first post where I basically say which 2 weapons I am looking at.
The problem is that you believe this thread belongs to you. This thread will be around for years and future new players will come in blind expecting an answer without your false dichotomy. Both audiences must be answered.
The answer to your question is easily that it doesn't matter. They are close enough that a slayer's dps won't be effected meaningfully either way.
|
|
I would note that you're not fully acknowledging the player's opportunity cost with insisting on an exotic weapon. Dual Minded is a really strong option, especially for a multiclass build that takes two classes with poor will saves. Will saves are often the difference between being able to participate in a combat and not, even at low levels. The build is almost going to have to pick up Iron Will as is, so something that stacks with that to make a respectable save score is worthwhile, and stacks with Swashbuckler's Charmed Life. I would really talk with the player to ensure they understand that they are giving up 10% better Will saves for 1 point of damage on average, 2 max. A choice some people make and I completely understand it (and made it on my own PFS swashbuckler), but it is a really hard choice to make.
Never really paid attention to that trait. Is interesting. Probably not enough to change the build but still something to keep in mind for future builds.
I have never, ever picked up Iron Will for any build I have made, unless it was a requirement for something else. Rarely would have made a difference that I can remember.
|
|
The name of this thread is "which weapon for a slashing grace slayer". You can't complain when people give you answers to that question.Ah. Ignore the actual first post where I basically say which 2 weapons I am looking at.The problem is that you believe this thread belongs to you. This thread will be around for years and future new players will come in blind expecting an answer without your false dichotomy. Both audiences must be answered.
The answer to your question is easily that it doesn't matter. They are close enough that a slayer's dps won't be effected either way.
lol
My oh my. Insults. Very well done.
Your problem is that you feel you are the be all end all authority on how I should build this PC.
Most have read what I have asked and stay with in the boundaries of the obvious question as a whole.
As such there is no fallacy presented here by me. I have agreed that other options are possible, and most likely even more optimal , but for this build we are working within a set parameter of only 2 weapons. Your continued assessment that this build NEEDS to be done in a different way is rude and insulting, even after I have asked you to stop...even after saying please stop, you continue.
So really the question is not just what is the best weapon for a slashing grace slayer, but what is the best weapon for a slashing grace slayer between katana or falcata. A question you really chose to not answer until the very end of this post I have quoted.
Well part of it is the skill focus is usually better than the exotic weapon for a martial character. The difference between a Katana and a scimitar/rapier is one point of average damage.
Skill focus will let you take eldritch heritage, which is usually worth far more than the EWP assuming you have the CHA for it, which as a swashbuckler you should.
Meh.
Rapier flat out isn't desired. The trade of Skill Focus to EWP is desired to gain better crit functionality or extra damage for the player, as minimal as it may seem for those who like to optimize every aspect.
Eldritch heritage is an interesting idea to present to her.
The reason I suggested not taking the EWP is because there are more options than EWP or skill focus.
Dual Minded (+2 will saves) [swashbucklers DO have crappy saves]
Mordant Envoy (4 SLA's)
Sociable (second try on diplomacy checks)
Also trade multitalented
Drow Magic (3 SLA's)
Water Child (lots of swim bonuses)
Since I rank ALL of these above EWP, I suggested a weapon that doesn't require it. For myself, I don't really get limiting a build to just two weapons. I'm not saying your wrong or anything, I just don't see anything in THOSE weapons that I'd spend a feat on. *shrug*
If I HAD to pick between the weapons (like I got EWP free), I'd pick the katana. While the other is a slightly better weapon overall, the katana crits more and that regains more panache. This is why I'd go rapier, scimitar or cutlass as the EWP (katana) only ups the die one and adds deadly. Even the visuals of the weapons are pretty close.
The name of this thread is "which weapon for a slashing grace slayer". You can't complain when people give you answers to that question.Ah. Ignore the actual first post where I basically say which 2 weapons I am looking at.The problem is that you believe this thread belongs to you. This thread will be around for years and future new players will come in blind expecting an answer without your false dichotomy. Both audiences must be answered.
The answer to your question is easily that it doesn't matter. They are close enough that a slayer's dps won't be effected either way.
lol
My oh my. Insults. Very well done.
What insult?
The problem is that you believe the only advice given in this thread should be catered to you. I believe that every thread should contain a balance of all possible options related to the discussion. If you disagree with any facts about the efficacy of exotic weapon then feel free to ignore them.
|
|
Back to original question, of those 2, I would go katana. Fine weapon, deadly ability, better chance to regain panache, which sounds like the real reason for the dip in the first place.
I'm with you except when you point out the deadly ability as a bonus. It's probably the most worthless weapon ability in existence - and the falcatta would actually still be better at the thing that deadly boosts.
(Deadly gives +2 to the fort DC on coup de graces, while the falcatta's larger crit range would add at least 8 points of damage and therefore increase the DC by at least 8.)
Deadly is purely a fluff ability to appease the people who want katanas to be the best weapons ever!!
At the risk of entering a fight thread, I think you should use a katana.
Katanas are cool. No I don't need a better reason than that, though I do have one. Panache is far more important to a swashbuckler than marginally more damage.
The other reason is that it would be a hideous misuse of a falcata. Falcatas should be used oversized in two hands eating the -2 penalty (or being a Titan Mauler) for a weapon that does 2d6 with a 19-20/x3 (really a 17-20/x3, because with a crit range like this keen or Improved Critical is mandatory) crit range and Power Attack for insane killshots on a regular basis.
|
|
I know there are formula for all this I never remember it, though it seems to the eye, at least for me that 18-20/x2 is better than 19-20/x3.As I said earlier: from a purely mathematical perspective, the 19-20/x3 is superior. Assuming the weapon does 5 damage per hit, you have one chance for zero damage, seventeen chances for five damage, and two chances for fifteen damage. The 18-20/x2 would have one chance for zero damage, sixteen chances for five damage, and three chances for ten damage.
The falcata averages 5.75 damage, the katana 5.5. That's the math. The falcata's average damage is 5% of base damage higher than the katana's.
That said, the girl prefers the katana, and if she's running a swashbuckler, the greater crit range provides a secondary benefit of extra panache. It's pretty easy to justify getting half again the panache from crits as being worth 5% of her damage. Have her run the katana, problem solved.
People have made this whole issue way more complex than it really is.
Thanks for the post. This was an appreciated break down.
It isn't very mathematical but the way I looked at it was:
the falcata crits on 2 numbers, but assume that you miss confirming a crit...so really the falcata does triple damage on its crits.
the katana crits on 3 numbers but assume you miss confirming a crit...so it does quadruple damage from its crits.
in my very simplistic way I felt the katana would do more damage via crits.
|
|
The problem is that you believe the only advice given in this thread should be catered to you. I believe that every thread should contain a balance of all possible options related to the discussion. If you disagree with any facts about the efficacy of exotic weapon then feel free to ignore them.
I am looking for advice in the thread I started to basically be about what I am looking to get an answer about.
Funny that.
If you were directing your advice to others then I could easily ignore the words you are using. Oddly you were always replying to me when giving the advice you claim I should ignore.
Seems strange you would give that advice.
You were simply the only poster offering non-optimized or non flavored advice. You may also notice that I never said it is wrong to do something non-optimal. Indeed the differences all around are quite small, so it doesn't really matter. Which is also the answer to your question in that "the differences are so small that it doesn't matter". Katana or falcata are essentially the same to a slayer. If you were playing a class that cared more about crit damage then you'd want a falcata every time. But slayer isn't really a crits class.
|
|
the falcata crits on 2 numbers, but assume that you miss confirming a crit...so really the falcata does triple damage on its crits.the katana crits on 3 numbers but assume you miss confirming a crit...so it does quadruple damage from its crits.
in my very simplistic way I felt the katana would do more damage via crits.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Bus kestral287 was right - the falcatta does approx 5% more of the base damage. (Technically 4.35% more once the crits themselves are taken into account - 7.69% more with keen or improved crit - and of course it's identical for any damage which isn't multiplied on a crit such as precision damage or against targets you can't crit etc.)
Of course you can't account for the chances of confirming as it's highly variable, but factoring that in seems like it should affect the numbers somehow. I'm not sure which way it helps though.
Triggering a crit on a 20 means you may or may not have had a high chance of hitting the target. Triggering a crit on a 15, would imply that your chances of hitting the target were at least decent.
|
|
Of course you can't account for the chances of confirming as it's highly variable, but factoring that in seems like it should affect the numbers somehow.
Yes - confirming crits is already taken into account as they're based upon the assumption of hitting in the first place. If you go back to 2nd edition where there was no confirmation roll, your chances of critting go way up as targets become harder to hit. If you can only hit on a 20, then in 2nd edition 100% of your hits were crits.
Could you expand on how you are taking them into account. It's probably just some math I'm missing. I'm thinking of an enemy that can only be hit on 20. Every weapon will threaten a crit when it hits, but it will only have a 5% chance of confirming. In this scenario a higher multiplier would seem to always be superior, as a wider threat weapon will never threaten more often.
|
|
Could you expand on how you are taking them into account. It's probably just some math I'm missing. I'm thinking of an enemy that can only be hit on 20. Every weapon will threaten a crit when it hits, but it will only have a 5% chance of confirming. In this scenario a higher multiplier would seem to always be superior, as a wider threat weapon will never threaten more often.
In 3rd edition yes - 5% of your hits would actually crit. On a hit, you'd average 1.05x base damage with a x2 crit weapon, and 1.15x base damage with a x4 crit weapon. I was giving an example of back in 2nd edition when there was no confirmation roll. In that case all hits would be at 2x base damage when you can only hit on a 20 (though in all of this paragraph's cases you'd only hit 5% of the time).
Basically - as long as you can hit for your entire crit range (not necessarily true for iterative attacks) you don't need to worry about how hard targets are to hit for weapon damage comparisons as the math is based upon the assupmtion of a hit.
It is true that the falcata does a bit more damage, but you can do more than just cause damage with a critical hit. If she plans to take any feats from the critical focus line, she will really notice the wider threat range of the katana. Even more when keen weapons or improved critical become options. Being able to more frequently impose conditions like blindness, exhaustion, and bleed damage can be worth a little less average damage.
|
|
the falcata crits on 2 numbers, but assume that you miss confirming a crit...so really the falcata does triple damage on its crits.the katana crits on 3 numbers but assume you miss confirming a crit...so it does quadruple damage from its crits.
in my very simplistic way I felt the katana would do more damage via crits.
I have no idea what you're trying to say here.
Bus kestral287 was right - the falcatta does approx 5% more of the base damage. (Technically 4.35% more once the crits themselves are taken into account - 7.69% more with keen or improved crit - and of course it's identical for any damage which isn't multiplied on a crit such as precision damage or against targets you can't crit etc.)
It comes out more fluid in my brain.
Where do you get the %s from. If the katana has a greater threat range, which gets even greater through range enhancement, then how does the grow even more.
I am just not understanding the formula where the numbers come from and that is where my skewed way of trying to reason out why I think the katana is a better crit weapon.
Not that it is really a deal breaker when talking about damages that will average out to 1 or 2 more damage...but I would like to know how to break it down.
Not answering the original question but Tengu with the Swordtrained racial would work for a race as well.
Carry on.
|
|
I can see your idea, but the math doesn't back it up.
Lol...yeah never presumed it was near accurate
Let's take the most extreme case that doesn't unfairly punish the katana: their AC is so high you miss on everything that's not an 18 (15% hit chance).
Your basic damage formula is: h(d+s)+tchd
h = hit rate, expressed as a decimal
d = damage that is multiplied on a crit
s = precision damage or damage that is otherwise not multiplied on a crit
t= crit chance
c= crit multiplier -1 (so c=1 for katana, c=2 for falcata)
Why (-1) for the crit multiplier? For simpler numbers? Everyone threats on a 20?
We're assuming h = .15, d = 5, s = 0 for simple math. Hence:
Katana: .15(5+0)+.15*1*.15*5 = .8625
Falcata: .15(5+0) + .1*2*.15*5 = .9Hence, even with a 15% chance to hit, the falcata does better damage. Note that the formula there does include your chance to confirm a crit-- that's the h in the tchd half of the formula.
Even if you add the Keen property and adjust things so you hit on a 15 or better (hence, the katana threatens a crit every time you hit):
Katana: .3(5+0) + .3*1*.3*5 = 1.95
Falcata: .3(5+0) + .2*2*.3*5 = 2.1So, as I said, if we're looking purely at damage and nothing else, falcata. If, however, she places any importance on panache regeneration, the katana is close enough in damage and far enough ahead in number of crits that one can easily argue it as the superior weapon on the whole-- just not in damage.
It is worth noting, I suppose, that the falcata's crit profile is spikier-- you're more likely to deliver a noticeable amount of overkill damage, and overkill is just a fun way of saying wasted. This, however, is difficult to gauge in raw math because it depends on a lot of variables-- it's also perfectly possible to crit on a lot of targets that wouldn't die to double damage but would die to triple (especially since we're involving the Swashbuckler and Slayer, two classes that derive at least some of their damage from sources that aren't multiplied on crits). Personally, if offered the choice between two otherwise equivalent crit ranges, I'll take the less spiky of the two (hence, 19-20/x2 is preferred to 20/x3, for me at least), but all else equal I'll definitely take the superior crit range over the inferior one (hence, 19-20/x3 over 18-20/x2, ignoring panache concerns).
Mathematically, the falcata's 19-20/x3 is the best crit profile in the game. It would be matched by either a 17-20/x2 weapon or a 20/x5 weapon, but neither of those exist*.
*Okay, if we really want to be technical than depending on the interpretation of how it stacks with Improved Critical, a 20th level Inspired Blade's rapier might have an equivalent crit profile to a Falcata.
Awesome write up kestral. I really appreciate the breakdown for me.
If I get it, it looks like there is really less than a 5% variation between the 2.
|
|
The -1 on the crit multiplier is because the second half of the formula is looking at damage [I]added[I] on a crit. The first half is your regular damage if you don't threaten a crit, simply your hit rate times your damage. The second half is how much over and above that damage your crit profile allows. Because you're summing the two, the katana (an x2 weapon) has d in the formula twice, while a falcata (x3) has it three times.
Yes. I get that now.
Again, thx.