RPG Superstar 2013 Top 8
|
Yeah, so arbitrarily deciding on rules changes a full year after a first printing is pretty terrible. Clearly they were thinking of TWF when they printed ACG (given that Slashing Grace didn't work with light weapons), and I'm guessing the nerf has more to do with Monks and consistency than it does Spell Combat. But we have to play under the rules as written. To this end, to any Inspired Blade Magi out there:
"you may replace the feat (and any of the old feat’s prerequisite feats) entirely with another feat for which you meet all the prerequisites":
It might not be much comfort, but now that you don't need that Weapon Focus bonus feat, you can replace it entirely with another feat for which you meet all the prerequisites. I'm going to assume this feat would go away if you do decide to retrain Inspired Blade though...
IMO that doesn't apply to bonus feats with no choice given, such as Weapon Focus from Inspired Blade.
|
It might not be much comfort, but now that you don't need that Weapon Focus bonus feat, you can replace it entirely with another feat for which you meet all the prerequisites. I'm going to assume this feat would go away if you do decide to retrain Inspired Blade though...
I'm not an inspired blade, I was just asking about what characters that took a 1 level dip to do that should do. I do have the Kensai magus archetype, though, and that's where my Weapon Focus is coming from. I'll probably just take Dervish Dance instead and put Weapon Focus there.
I mean, I gave up Spell Recall and the ability to wear armor. It's not like dex to damage is more broken than Spell Recall or a higher AC..
you can still use the grace feats with a magus, you just have to decide if you want to do spell combat or to have the dex bonus to damage in a given round
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks Paizo, for murdering my magus.It's been pretty obvious that it was coming since the slashing grace errata.
To be fair, the only thing that was obvious was that Paizo wasn't happy with the way slashing grace worked, and likely fencing grace as well. This all goes back to before the errata for the ACG though, when people were asking for clarifications on what wielding one handed means, and can you use dex to damage with two weapon fighting, and what are the other rules implications of this. Paizo for the most part stayed quiet, hinting that it wasn't intended for 2 weapon fighting, and that it was mostly meant as a feat for the swashbuckler. Then they released the errata and possibly the most restrictive language I've ever seen in a feat, to the point of ridiculousness.
So, at this point, I think it's fair to say that they weren't exactly happy with fencing grace, since they had already changed slashing grace, and fencing grace still used the old language. And it would be fair to say that we, as a player base knew about this, it's another leap altogether to say that you knew that Paizo was going to start reprinting player companion feats in a hard cover line just so that they could change how they worked. This is, to my knowledge, the first time they have ever reprinted a feat to change how the feat works. And considering how many feats that already exist in the player companion (or campaign setting) books that are already problematic (sacred geometry comes to mind) that have never been touched, it's a little surprising that they decided to do so specifically for fencing grace. Especially considering there are still similar options available, which really just push certain classes back into the "one true build" design space without ever affecting game balance.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its been done before. Butterfly Sting was changed to a Desna only Feat. The problem with Dex to Damage Feats/Abilities is, (I believe), is that folks at Paizo have different ideas on its overall power level. Some think its way too strong, and in general I agree, while others see it as strong, but needed.
Going all the way back to PF 3.5 days, when they allowed Dervish Dance to be a limited/restricted version. The impression I get from Fencing/Slashing Grace is that someone was trying to push them through despite the other Paizo staff being against it, and the various nerfs are ways to correct them getting in print anyway. Being that it came from the ACG, (and Adv Class Origins), which was filled with similar problems all around, to me suggests that they slipped through unintended.
Venture-Lieutenant, Netherlands—Leiden
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From what I remember from the ACG introduction, Slashing Grace got the dex to damage part tacked on to it as a sort of afterthought; the point of the feat was to open up scimitars and such to swashbucklers.
Then there was a huge outcry to the tune of "how can slashing weapons get this and not the rapier", and fencing grace was made.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Apologies if this has already been discussed, but I'm assuming there has been a change to language of the Fencing Grace in Ultimate Intrigue.
Until an FAQ or Errata is issued, or Ultimate Intrigue is added to the PRD, there are going to be groups out there that do not have access to Ultimate Intrigue and unaware of the change or not have visibility of the updated language.
Is the feat going to be added to the 'lets be clear' document, or is an update going to be included on additional resources under Advanced Class Origins to clarify that the feat has been updated in UI and to use that version?
In the mean time, how should groups without access to UI deal with the change to the way Fencing Grace works?
Now would be the time to set up a dancing school though, as I sense a great influx magi looking to learn such a valuable skill.
|
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
EDIT: With all the furor over magi, nobody thinks about how ninjas have been affected...They're not really affected, I'd say. They still get the majority of their damage from sneak attack dice. 1d4+dex+5d6 isn't all that much more than 1d4+5d6, after all.
It was a joke about Deadmanwalking beating me to the post by 24 seconds. ^_^
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This nerf is something that was discussed locally before it happened (when Ultimate Intrigue was first seen and when the Slashing Grace nerf happened). After a lot of discussion, local opinion came down to a couple of factors - the people that it hurt the most would be Magi, but it doesn't actually hurt their EDV (Expected Damage Value), that much. The Magus is getting far more damage out of their spells (there's a reason Shocking Grasp is so stereotypical) than they actually do out of the DEX damage, realistically it hurts them far more at low level than anywhere else. (And some other classes who generally make up damage in other ways like sneak attack)
Second, these nerfs show a disconnect between the authors and the PDT on the relative strengths of different stats or at least a disconnect on how to treat those differences. Dexterity is already an incredibly powerful stat (INIT, AC, Touch AC, a variety of skills, Ranged Attack, a single feat or level dip for Attack), so getting DEX to damage is hugely advantageous. It allows any class to become much less MAD, and leverages to a number of other advantageous categories. Obviously the nerfs hurt but overall I don't think they should actually kill a build, hurt certainly, but a Finesse magus is still pretty good even without DEX to Damage (which you can still get by dipping out for 3 levels of URogue or the Agile enchantment), and a strength magus is still doable. Consider that any time a singe feat becomes the go to feat for every build of X or Y, that feat is probably overpowered and not working as intended. (IMO at least feats are meant to increase options not decrease them, which the Grace lines really did.)
|
|
This nerf is something that was discussed locally before it happened (when Ultimate Intrigue was first seen and when the Slashing Grace nerf happened). After a lot of discussion, local opinion came down to a couple of factors - the people that it hurt the most would be Magi, but it doesn't actually hurt their EDV (Expected Damage Value), that much. The Magus is getting far more damage out of their spells (there's a reason Shocking Grasp is so stereotypical) than they actually do out of the DEX damage, realistically it hurts them far more at low level than anywhere else. (And some other classes who generally make up damage in other ways like sneak attack)
Second, these nerfs show a disconnect between the authors and the PDT on the relative strengths of different stats or at least a disconnect on how to treat those differences. Dexterity is already an incredibly powerful stat (INIT, AC, Touch AC, a variety of skills, Ranged Attack, a single feat or level dip for Attack), so getting DEX to damage is hugely advantageous. It allows any class to become much less MAD, and leverages to a number of other advantageous categories. Obviously the nerfs hurt but overall I don't think they should actually kill a build, hurt certainly, but a Finesse magus is still pretty good even without DEX to Damage (which you can still get by dipping out for 3 levels of URogue or the Agile enchantment), and a strength magus is still doable. Consider that any time a singe feat becomes the go to feat for every build of X or Y, that feat is probably overpowered and not working as intended. (IMO at least feats are meant to increase options not decrease them, which the Grace lines really did.)
Don't get me wrong, my magus isn't crippled or anything. My pain point is that I built the whole concept around getting dex to damage and made critical design decisions on what was available. I probably wouldn't have been a Kensai as I didn't need that free Weapon Focus feat if I didn't want it as a prereq. I probably wouldn't have been a bladebound magus as then I could have had the option of putting agile on my weapon. Maybe I would've been just like every other magus and taken Magical Lineage instead of the traits I had chosen. All this for only an extra ~4 points of damage (that personally I didn't get until level 5, though it could have been available sooner).
It's by no means broken to be able to do an extra ~4 damage on an attack--especially when it already cost two previous feats to get there--and even more especially when Dervish Dance exists and is easier to qualify for.
I designed my character and planned based off of the assumption that the feat does what it said it does (as in if I open my book and read it the current wording is still the same because it wasn't even errata'd)--a feat that as I've already pointed out is not in any way broken or overpowered considering its cost and alternatives.
So that's where my issue lies. They didn't just fix the feat. They changed it in such a way that a majority of builds that used it don't function with it anymore. And my specific build made several design choices based off of me having access to that feat.
|
|
This is probably my best option, though it means I can only spell strike and not spell combat. Still, it leaves my character at least functional. Still, I only have the one-time option to swap out the feat, so I'm paying for a respec later down the road.
Seems like this would only matter once you are capable of making multiple attacks per round, which would be right about when you can afford agile.
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Boston Metro
|
Paizo,
Thank you very much for fixing your latest trend of making characters need only one or at most two ability scores needed. I would be extremely pleased to see even more attention paid to editing class power balancing, and feat text wording.
What are you talking about? This didn't fix that at all and if anything there are more classes that became single stat classes like the Investigator.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Let us also not forget some characters besides magus were affected bty slashing nerf/fencing nerf. Florentine style fighters for one. (Yeah, I know a fencing grace feat not usable by fencers...) also my slayer was hit by slashing nerf. Fortunately I had enough gold for agile...
|
|
So a couple of points to make here:
1. The assumptions here shows something about what's *wrong* with Pathfinder/PFS. The statement that "it doesn't affect Magus much" makes very specific assumptions about the Magus you're building. You specifically mention Magus that use Shocking Grasp which, granted, is a typical build, but shouldn't be assumed to be the only build. It might not nerf most/typical Magus that much, but it might significantly hurt some of them.
While I did mention shocking grasp (for it's scaling damage), I'm actualy only making the assumption that DEX to Damage is only a part of their damage model, while spells will be more whether it's Frost bite at low level (which yes doesn't do nearly as much) or other spells later, those spells actually do the majority of the damage.
2. That's great it was discussed locally. Might it have made sense to also warn people this was coming? This isn't the case of grandfathering something in and it might be abused, it's fundamentally changing something that might impact people's characters, and they should have time to prepare for that/change their character as needed.
As no one locally or in the PFS team can predict PDT changes I'm not sure how anyone would have been warned. A group of us that saw the slashing grace change discussing whether we would see something similar happen to fencing grace might be something we'd mention locally but it didn't seem relevant at the time. Then some of us saw the change in Ultimate Intrigue, but had no way of predicting what change that would mean for PFS, whether both sources would be legal, onlly one, or a change in the clarification document. Though personally, I would prefer PFS look more at grandfathering than rebuiliding for such changes I understand that some past abuses may make that untenable
I don't want to argue whether the feat is overpowered or not, that's certainly Paizo's decision to make. But at least if you're going to change how something about our characters works, give us ample time to prepare for that. At least if it was a class feature, people can appropriately respec, but with it being a feat change, that's not really possible.EXAMPLE:
My Magus, now level 4, was putting out 1d6+9 (plus 1d6+4 via Frostbite), average 20. Not ridiculous, but respectable when I got a spell combat off. With the updates, I have no way to actually spell combat with dex to damage, and my output drops to 1d6-1 (plus 1d6+4 via Frostbite), average 10. That's pretty terrible, and it becomes abysmal if I can't actually spell combat.
My options include:
1. Swap out the feat chain and weapon to pick up Dervish Dance, except I don't have 2 ranks in perform(dance), so I don't qualify.
2. Purchase an agile rapier, except that's a purchase limit >8000 and I can't do that until level 6 or so.
3. Keep fencing grace, and pay myself to swap it out once I'm able to get an agile weapon. This is probably my best option, though it means I can only spell strike and not spell combat. Still, it leaves my character at least functional. Still, I only have the one-time option to swap out the feat, so I'm paying for a respec later down the road.At least one of these options is manageable, but it would have been nice to have some notice to be able to at least think about the other 2, or perhaps, not having gone Rapier at all...
4. Or spell combat with more damaging spells, ignoring the DEx to Damage that doesn't work in those cases and spell strike on less damaging spells - like orisons and frostbite while waiting on getting Agile up and running. Like I said this change is more painful for low level magi than higher level ones who inherently have more options (in gp and spell choices among others).
Personally, I'd probably keep fencing grace until I could afford agile and use it to get DEX to dmg on spell strikes and regular attacks in the interim and possibly re-train it later. (And I'd probably avoid Dervish Dance with the nerfs to Slashing and Fencing Grace it doesn't seem a huge step to reword Dervish Dance slightly (away from other hand may not have a weapon or shield to something like no TWF)). Sorry that your magus (and so many like it) was so affected, I hope you find a solution that you find acceptable.
|
|
This is probably my best option, though it means I can only spell strike and not spell combat. Still, it leaves my character at least functional. Still, I only have the one-time option to swap out the feat, so I'm paying for a respec later down the road.Seems like this would only matter once you are capable of making multiple attacks per round, which would be right about when you can afford agile.
The strength of a magus and their static bonus is from being able to make full attacks at level 2. The odd interaction of spell strike and spell combat is functonally magus flurry: You cast spell, get a free attack with your sword at -2, and whack again at -2. Likely one of those won't have the spell on it, so you need something to make the other hit really matter
|
|
Its been done before. Butterfly Sting was changed to a Desna only Feat.
Not the same thing as characters that had Butterfly's Sting already were allowed to Grandfather this in. So it didn't effect current builds, only new ones. That is a BIG difference.
I have been pondering the various effects this has so far been had on my characters as I tend to prefer DEX builds over STR builds. Fortunately for me they have been minor but it is worrisome none the less.
Magus: My Magus is a Bladebound/Kensai that took 1 level of Dawnflower Dervish to get Dervish Dance. So far the changes have not effected her, but since she is a Bladebound she cannot get Agile and since she is a Kensai, her damage relies more than standard magi on weapon damage rather than spell damage, so this would put a serious dent in the character if I lost this. In fact, I deliberately built her to rely more on weapon damage than spell damage as I did not want a run-of-the-mill Intensified Shocking Grasp Magus. So telling me the solution would be to become a run-of-the-mill Intensified Shocking Grasp Magus is rather insulting.
Ninja: He is a two-weapon fighter but I had always planned to get Agile on his wakizashis (Snicker & Snack). Since Slashing Grace didn't come out until he'd already put Agile on Snicker, I just went ahead and bought Agile for Snack. So this wasn't a problem. Interestingly enough, he is also my Butterfly Sting character.
Swashbuckler: My human Swashbuckler took Slashing Grace with a Cutlass at first level. He was briefly nerfed by the initial change to Slashing Grace which didn't have an exception for bucklers. I thought it was incredibly lame that by Swashbuckler couldn't swash with a buckler while using a feat designed for Swashbucklers. Fortunately, so did the designers and they fixed that.
Rogue: He is a Unchained Rogue so I dodged the bullet on this one.
Inquisitor: I took 1 level of Inspired Blade plus Fencing Grace so he didn't suck in combat at low levels. Since he only uses a buckler in the off had, this isn't a problem for him.
Bard: Had more money than feats and was never designed for melee anyway, so I just put Agile on his Whip.
Warpriest: This is the only character that has been majorly effected by this. She is a Warpriest of Jalaijatalee who uses a whip and took Slashing Grace at low levels to do okay whip damage. She could still use the feat but uses a +2 Large Shield in the off hand. Since I had just leveled up when the feat change came out, I retrained the feat and bought Agile for the whip.
|
|
Seems like this would only matter once you are capable of making multiple attacks per round, which would be right about when you can afford agile.Spell Combat gives you an extra attack each round... So I can currently make multiple attacks per round when using Spell Combat.
If you are using a range of touch spell, you can already attack with the spell and the weapon using spellstrike though. You don't need spell combat.
Spell combat only matters if you are casting a spell that's not a range of touch or not an attack spell like a buff.
|
|
Seems like this would only matter once you are capable of making multiple attacks per round, which would be right about when you can afford agile.Spell Combat gives you an extra attack each round... So I can currently make multiple attacks per round when using Spell Combat.If you are using a range of touch spell, you can already attack with the spell and the weapon using spellstrike though. You don't need spell combat.
Spell combat only matters if you are casting a spell that's not a range of touch or not an attack spell like a buff.
You are missing the point. Spell Combat plus Spell Strike allows a Magus to get TWO attacks with their weapon in 1 round starting at level 2.
|
Yep, the updated Fencing Grace uses the same wording as Slashing Grace, and the FAQ entry for that states that bucklers don't count as "occupying" the hand.Wait, Fencing Grace still allows for the use of bucklers even after the nerf?
Excuse me while I buy back my Swashbuckler's +2 buckler and go slap my local Venture-Agent.
Oy. So much wasted gold.
A good reminder to look these things up for myself, though, rather than taking others (even Venture-others) at face value.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Thanks Paizo, for murdering my magus.It's been pretty obvious that it was coming since the slashing grace errata.
Whether or not it was known to be coming, what is the time line?
Slashing Grace got Errata what? Jul 2015?
We knew Fencing Grace was basically designed to be "Slashing Grace for Rapier" feat
in Aug 2014.
So as of Jul 2015, anyone using Fencing Grace should know that it works the same as current Slashing Grace. But was that enough time to prevent someone from taking the option?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Even considering that, everyone thought it was safe in the player companion line as Paizo has a widely known policy of not errata'ing softcover material. Who would have actually put money on Paizo reprinting this feat in a hardcover book in addition to PFS also coming along and releasing a "campaign clarifications" doc that effectively erratas a softcover book. I think it's safe to say that no one saw this coming.
|
|
EDIT: With all the furor over magi, nobody thinks about how ninjas have been affected...They're not really affected, I'd say. They still get the majority of their damage from sneak attack dice. 1d4+dex+5d6 isn't all that much more than 1d4+5d6, after all.
They don't get to sneak attack nearly as often as magi get to BZZZT though