
chbgraphicarts |

PRD
Lv3 Rogue ability: Finesse Training
Feat: Slashing Grace (Slashing Only, effectively requires 1 level in Swashbuckler for anything greater than Light Weapons - is being errata'd to include Light Weapons as well)
Non-PRD
Feat: Fencing Grace (Rapier Only)
Feat: Dervish Dance (Scimitar Only)
Weapon Enhancement: Agile

![]() |

Feat: Slashing Grace (Slashing Only, effectively requires 1 level in Swashbuckler for anything greater than Light Weapons - is being errata'd to include Light Weapons as well)
Slashing Grace works also with a dueling sword without the Swash dip. As far as I know - it's the only one-handed slashing weapon which you can normally use finesse with.

chbgraphicarts |

chbgraphicarts wrote:Slashing Grace works also with a dueling sword without the Swash dip. As far as I know - it's the only one-handed slashing weapon which you can normally use finesse with.Feat: Slashing Grace (Slashing Only, effectively requires 1 level in Swashbuckler for anything greater than Light Weapons - is being errata'd to include Light Weapons as well)
The Devs have pretty explicitly stated that Slashing Grace is going to get an errata to be both One-Handed AND Light Weapons.
The Stamina ability of Slashing Grace in Pathfinder Unchained also points to this, as several devs have off-handedly said that its mention of "or light weapon" is NOT an error.
So, in PFS it doesn't help until the errata comes out, but for homegames, you can basically take that as gospel.

chbgraphicarts |

That seems... a little heavy on certainty. :)
Little, but Mark Seifter himself has said, almost word for word "if you like Rapiers and Shortswords but were unhappy that Slashing Grace didn't affect them, you'll probably be VERY happy with the errata".
This, combined with the aforementioned not-an-error in the Stamina entry for Slashing Grace is about as blatant that that's what's going to happen - still requires Slashing weapons, but it's Slashing Light OR One-Handeds.

kestral287 |
chbgraphicarts wrote:Slashing Grace works also with a dueling sword without the Swash dip. As far as I know - it's the only one-handed slashing weapon which you can normally use finesse with.Feat: Slashing Grace (Slashing Only, effectively requires 1 level in Swashbuckler for anything greater than Light Weapons - is being errata'd to include Light Weapons as well)
The whip would like to say hi.
And really, these days screw Swashbuckler, Effortless Lace + Slashing Grace = Dexterous Falcata Combat

Snowblind |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Charon's Little Helper wrote:chbgraphicarts wrote:Slashing Grace works also with a dueling sword without the Swash dip. As far as I know - it's the only one-handed slashing weapon which you can normally use finesse with.Feat: Slashing Grace (Slashing Only, effectively requires 1 level in Swashbuckler for anything greater than Light Weapons - is being errata'd to include Light Weapons as well)
The whip would like to say hi.
And really, these days screw Swashbuckler, Effortless Lace + Slashing Grace = Dexterous Falcata Combat
No effortless lace makes PFS players feel sad.
But screw those guys, right?

CraziFuzzy |

That seems... a little heavy on certainty. :)
Something to remember is that the devs write rules assuming some level of common sense in the reader that a certain percentage of the population doesn't quite possess. I believe when they wrote "Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon" they meant "Choose a slashing weapon that can be wielded in one hand." While anyone with a sense for grammar would read those sentences as being effectively equal, rules lawyers see them as very different things.

kestral287 |
Kalindlara wrote:That seems... a little heavy on certainty. :)Something to remember is that the devs write rules assuming some level of common sense in the reader that a certain percentage of the population doesn't quite possess. I believe when they wrote "Choose one kind of one-handed slashing weapon" they meant "Choose a slashing weapon that can be wielded in one hand." While anyone with a sense for grammar would read those sentences as being effectively equal, rules lawyers see them as very different things.
Well. That was a rather arrogant and loaded set of statements.
"One handed slashing weapon" is a set of specific rules terms, and reading a rules statement without rules terminology is somewhere between futile and intentionally misleading.
Here's a possible alternate timeline of reasoning for why Slashing Grace is changing, assuming that it actually does change:
1. "One handed slashing weapon" means what it means. Light weapons were excluded specifically. Presumably, this was to make TWF difficult.
2. Outcry and confusion over the one-handed/light issue rises to noticeable levels.
3. It becomes apparent that the proverbial cat is out of the bag, and Dex-based TWF is possible.
4. With Dex-based TWF already possible, mandating the limiters of "You have to play one of the top two Dex-based TWF classes in the game" or "You have to spend an extra 2500 gold per weapon" becomes pointless.
5. Since there's no longer value on the restrictions, and the restrictions are creating confusion and limiting both fun and verisimilitude, the restrictions are loosened or removed.
Not all that hard, is it?

CraziFuzzy |

Isn't it easier to surmise that the developers simply didn't write it in rulespeak? It makes no sense on any practical level why it would be possible to finesse a blade to do more damage only if the blade was heavier. A lighter blade should always be easier to position optimally, which is why all light weapons can be finessed. The thought that a longsword can be graceful but a shortsword cannot is ludicrous.
The only reason this wasn't fixed the day after the book was released is because of Paizo's policies on issuing errata (which are equally ludicrous) - waiting until all the flawed product is sold off first.

kestral287 |
Isn't it easier to surmise that the developers simply didn't write it in rulespeak?
No. That's a huge stretch; to assume that a piece of rules text that includes a statement with a defined game definition is being used outside of that definition is a much larger stretch.
If we were talking about a piece of fluff text in the Swashbuckler's class description and it said they favor "one handed" weapons, then okay. That's clear fluff text with no rules implications.
But there's no way to read that line of Slashing Grace as anything other than a piece of rules text, and thus it would take a very strong argument to contend that it should not be read in that light.
That you don't like it does not make it a strong argument.
It makes no sense on any practical level why it would be possible to finesse a blade to do more damage only if the blade was heavier. A lighter blade should always be easier to position optimally, which is why all light weapons can be finessed. The thought that a longsword can be graceful but a shortsword cannot is ludicrous.
Depends on how you define "practical". It might stretch your verisimilitude, but it's quite practical to place a mechanical limit on something that you think is powerful-- and we've known that the devs considered Dex-to-Damage to be very powerful for years (see: Mythic Weapon Finesse).
Making Dex-TWF (the next logical step from Dex-based combat) difficult when you already believe Dex-based combat to be strong is a very practical thing to do indeed.
The only reason this wasn't fixed the day after the book was released is because of Paizo's policies on issuing errata (which are equally ludicrous) - waiting until all the flawed product is sold off first.
That's a rather large assumption.

CraziFuzzy |

CraziFuzzy wrote:Isn't it easier to surmise that the developers simply didn't write it in rulespeak?No. That's a huge stretch; to assume that a piece of rules text that includes a statement with a defined game definition is being used outside of that definition is a much larger stretch.
If we were talking about a piece of fluff text in the Swashbuckler's class description and it said they favor "one handed" weapons, then okay. That's clear fluff text with no rules implications.
But there's no way to read that line of Slashing Grace as anything other than a piece of rules text, and thus it would take a very strong argument to contend that it should not be read in that light.
That you don't like it does not make it a strong argument.
CraziFuzzy wrote:It makes no sense on any practical level why it would be possible to finesse a blade to do more damage only if the blade was heavier. A lighter blade should always be easier to position optimally, which is why all light weapons can be finessed. The thought that a longsword can be graceful but a shortsword cannot is ludicrous.Depends on how you define "practical". It might stretch your verisimilitude, but it's quite practical to place a mechanical limit on something that you think is powerful-- and we've known that the devs considered Dex-to-Damage to be very powerful for years (see: Mythic Weapon Finesse).
Making Dex-TWF (the next logical step from Dex-based combat) difficult when you already believe Dex-based combat to be strong is a very practical thing to do indeed.
CraziFuzzy wrote:The only reason this wasn't fixed the day after the book was released is because of Paizo's policies on issuing errata (which are equally ludicrous) - waiting until all the flawed product is sold off first.That's a rather large assumption.
Except that every comment by the developers and even new publications state and/or imply that it was not intended as a restriction to only heavy one-handed weapons.
Slashing Grace (unchained combat trick) - You can spend 2 stamina points to select another light or one-handed slashing weapon. That weapon counts as a chosen weapon for Slashing Grace until the start of your next turn.
With this in mind, it does seem that the only reason it isn't errata'd is because there is no ACG errata document. I'd be fine with Paizo rushing products to release, if they did smaller printings, so the inevitable errors could be fixed - but the last few releases have had 2 years of sales on the first printing, meaning the customer gets stuck with shoddy work for an extended time. I've stated it elsewhere, but the game system would be better off if PDF became the primary product motivator, as it would allow much more timely fixes to broken material (and even allow greatly required fixes to the least proofread products in their lines, the splat books).

kestral287 |
Or, as I presented, the timeline outran the value of the restriction.
Until we get a crystal ball to peer into the developers' minds and meetings both, we won't know which is valid, if either of them.
But jumping to a conclusion that involves insulting the integrity developers and other players alike due to a shift in viewpoint is... unwarranted.

kestral287 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chris Lambertz wrote:Removed a baiting post, and a note: let's keep the threads in the Advice forum centered on advice, please.Aaaaand, as the TC, I want to ask. Someone mentioned Dex to dmg in third party, what and where?
Dreamscarred Press has a feat called Deadly Agility. Dex to Damage with anything finessable.