Would Bladed Brush allow a Swashbuckler to use the Swordmaster's Flair that increases melee reach by 5 feet with the glaive?That depends if the feats actually lets you wield the glaive with one hand or not. 'Considered one-handed' type wording could lead to table variation.
So, by that argument, the feat that specifically allows you to treat a glaive as a one-handed weapon does...not actually allow you to treat it as a one-handed weapon.
Not to target your comment specifically, because you don't argue for that, but the one thing that this feat is NOT vague on, and that could be under scrutiny? Does this feat actually do anything beyond just being a feat tax for Dex to Hit on top of the actual feat tax for that same thing? And the rest of the text might as well not exist?
I'm getting extremely mixed signals from many of the arguments here, and I think it goes:
1. "Not Spell Combat because it occupies the hand for attacking (fair, I agree, works with the Two-weapon Fighting rules and none of these are a class feature or feat so doesn't fall within Bladed Brush's rules)"
2."No Slashing Grace because 'considered' is not the same as 'empty' and it still occupies the hand (too harsh for me, because Slashing Grace is a feat, the new feat allows the glaive to be considered one-handed, why then place a restriction on something that is clearly supposed to be expanding options and alleviating restrictions? You are four feats in at this point for crying out loud)"
3."'Considered' is not actually one-handed and this is too vague to have any meaning whatsoever, thus you basically have another Monkey Lunge situation"
How harsh you rule either makes this feat still provide tangible benefits and expands options, or does literally nothing worthwhile, and I would want a feat to be worthwhile.
|
Would Bladed Brush allow a Swashbuckler to use the Swordmaster's Flair that increases melee reach by 5 feet with the glaive?That depends if the feats actually lets you wield the glaive with one hand or not. 'Considered one-handed' type wording could lead to table variation.So, by that argument, the feat that specifically allows you to treat a glaive as a one-handed weapon does...not actually allow you to treat it as a one-handed weapon.
Not to target your comment specifically, because you don't argue for that, but the one thing that this feat is NOT vague on, and that could be under scrutiny? Does this feat actually do anything beyond just being a feat tax for Dex to Hit on top of the actual feat tax for that same thing? And the rest of the text might as well not exist?
I'm getting extremely mixed signals from many of the arguments here, and I think it goes:
1. "Not Spell Combat because it occupies the hand for attacking (fair, I agree, works with the Two-weapon Fighting rules and none of these are a class feature or feat so doesn't fall within Bladed Brush's rules)"2."No Slashing Grace because 'considered' is not the same as 'empty' and it still occupies the hand (too harsh for me, because Slashing Grace is a feat, the new feat allows the glaive to be considered one-handed, why then place a restriction on something that is clearly supposed to be expanding options and alleviating restrictions? You are four feats in at this point for crying out loud)"
3."'Considered' is not actually one-handed and this is too vague to have any meaning whatsoever, thus you basically have another Monkey Lunge situation"
How harsh you rule either makes this feat still provide tangible benefits and expands options, or does literally nothing worthwhile, and I would want a feat to be worthwhile.
Well, even at the worst ruling, it should still function perfectly for a Swashbuckler. So not completely worthless. Especially since it shares a page with the Shelyn swashbuckler PrC.
I'll take that with some measure of consolidation. Swashbuckler's could do with a good weapon (although if the argument that Swashbuckler can't use their Weapon Finesse class feature for this, I will pull hairs, I swear)
|
|
I'll take that with some measure of consolidation. Swashbuckler's could do with a good weapon (although if the argument that Swashbuckler can't use their Weapon Finesse class feature for this, I will pull hairs, I swear)
"When wielding a glaive, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon and as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s or swashbuckler’s precise strike)."
So, it does work.
|
I'll take that with some measure of consolidation. Swashbuckler's could do with a good weapon (although if the argument that Swashbuckler can't use their Weapon Finesse class feature for this, I will pull hairs, I swear)"When wielding a glaive, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon and as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s or swashbuckler’s precise strike)."So, it does work.
They just forgot to add "and your other hand(s) is(are) not considered occupied" at the end to make it useable with slashing grace.
I don't think they forgot. "as if you were not making attacks with your off hand" is such specific and weird language I can't help but feel it was intentional that slashing grace and similar mechanics don't work.
The way I see this, the feat allows you to treat the glaive as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for feats and class features, such as several of the Swashbuckler's deeds and even Panache. Hey, none of them specifies that you NEED a hand free, right? However, you still have your hands full, so... if the ability requires to have a hand free, you still can't do it with a glaive.
You could be a bladebound magus with a glaive using the feat, but you won't be able to use Spell Combat since your off-hand for spells is taken to hold the glaive properly... unless you can hold and wield your glaive in one hand, similar to how you can wield a quarterstaff in one hand with the proper feats.
|
The way I see this, the feat allows you to treat the glaive as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for feats and class features, such as several of the Swashbuckler's deeds and even Panache. Hey, none of them specifies that you NEED a hand free, right? However, you still have your hands full, so... if the ability requires to have a hand free, you still can't do it with a glaive.
You could be a bladebound magus with a glaive using the feat, but you won't be able to use Spell Combat since your off-hand for spells is taken to hold the glaive properly... unless you can hold and wield your glaive in one hand, similar to how you can wield a quarterstaff in one hand with the proper feats.
A black blade is always a one-handed slashing weapon, a rapier, or a sword cane.
"Treat as" don't make it "a one-handed slashing weapon". Especially as that happen only when you are wielding the weapon.
As the weapon isn't a one-handed slashing weapon, and is treated as one only when you wield it, you can't chose it as your bounded weapon.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would Bladed Brush allow a Swashbuckler to use the Swordmaster's Flair that increases melee reach by 5 feet with the glaive?That depends if the feats actually lets you wield the glaive with one hand or not. 'Considered one-handed' type wording could lead to table variation.So, by that argument, the feat that specifically allows you to treat a glaive as a one-handed weapon does...not actually allow you to treat it as a one-handed weapon.
Not to target your comment specifically, because you don't argue for that, but the one thing that this feat is NOT vague on, and that could be under scrutiny? Does this feat actually do anything beyond just being a feat tax for Dex to Hit on top of the actual feat tax for that same thing? And the rest of the text might as well not exist?
I'm getting extremely mixed signals from many of the arguments here, and I think it goes:
1. "Not Spell Combat because it occupies the hand for attacking (fair, I agree, works with the Two-weapon Fighting rules and none of these are a class feature or feat so doesn't fall within Bladed Brush's rules)"2."No Slashing Grace because 'considered' is not the same as 'empty' and it still occupies the hand (too harsh for me, because Slashing Grace is a feat, the new feat allows the glaive to be considered one-handed, why then place a restriction on something that is clearly supposed to be expanding options and alleviating restrictions? You are four feats in at this point for crying out loud)"
3."'Considered' is not actually one-handed and this is too vague to have any meaning whatsoever, thus you basically have another Monkey Lunge situation"
How harsh you rule either makes this feat still provide tangible benefits and expands options, or does literally nothing worthwhile, and I would want a feat to be worthwhile.
It would be very difficult to argue the feat works with Slashing Grace but not Spell Combat.
Spell Combat has, more or less, the same restrictions as Slashing Grace.
@graystone: That is intended, because that's how it works right now (no AC before you make an attack roll). I merely integrated the FAQ and fixed the stacking thing.
Not what the item says. "As a free action, the wielder chooses how to allocate the weapon's enhancement bonus at the start of his turn before using the weapon, and the bonus to AC lasts until his next turn." "Start of turn" - "until his next turn". The AC bonus happens BEFORE the trigger 'attack roll'. Start of turn is before your attack after all and your to hit bonus is already lowered at that time. The FAQ doesn't alter activation, only adding the trigger "make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn".
LOL If you guys wanted to stop talking about Defending you should actually stop talking about it. :P
On slashing grace/spell combat, I think it was meant to work with them. However "as if you were not making attacks with your off hand" makes it questionable with RAW as a non-attacking hand doesn't mean a free hand...
Is anybody else annoyed with these needless restrictions?
The way I see this, the feat allows you to treat the glaive as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon for feats and class features, such as several of the Swashbuckler's deeds and even Panache. Hey, none of them specifies that you NEED a hand free, right? However, you still have your hands full, so... if the ability requires to have a hand free, you still can't do it with a glaive.
You could be a bladebound magus with a glaive using the feat, but you won't be able to use Spell Combat since your off-hand for spells is taken to hold the glaive properly... unless you can hold and wield your glaive in one hand, similar to how you can wield a quarterstaff in one hand with the proper feats.
A black blade is always a one-handed slashing weapon, a rapier, or a sword cane."Treat as" don't make it "a one-handed slashing weapon". Especially as that happen only when you are wielding the weapon.
As the weapon isn't a one-handed slashing weapon, and is treated as one only when you wield it, you can't chose it as your bounded weapon.
Oh... whoops...
But hey, still works for the Swashbuckler's deeds and panache though ;)
I must admire your dedication Snowlilly... when you want something, you attack on all fronts... ;)
It would be very difficult to argue the feat works with Slashing Grace but not Spell Combat.Spell Combat...
The only thing I want is consistency.
It would be very difficult to argue the feat works with Slashing Grace but not Spell Combat.
Spell Combat has, more or less, the same restrictions as Slashing Grace.
The rules seem to differentiate between full and occupied hands: "You can’t cast a [somatic] spell (...) with both your hands full or occupied."
Slashing grays says 'occupied', while Spell Combat says 'free'. So if we take 'occupied' as meaning 'otherwise used/busy' rather than 'has something in it', as seems to be intended by making it a seperate thing, there is indeed a significant difference between Spell Combat and Slashing Grace, and the later does work.
Compare Deflect Arrows, which requires a free hand and does not mention occupied - so you can use the feat with the hand you made an unarmed strike with, because while otherwise occupied, it's still free.
Not what the item says.
Not what the enchantment says, but what the FAQ says: "[I]f you don't make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn, you don't gain its defensive benefit." - until you make an attack, this condition is not fulfilled.
The rules seem to differentiate between full and occupied hands: "You can’t cast a [somatic] spell (...) with both your hands full or occupied."
Slashing grays says 'occupied', while Spell Combat says 'free'. So if we take 'occupied' as meaning 'otherwise used/busy' rather than 'has something in it', as seems to be intended by making it a seperate thing, there is indeed a significant difference between Spell Combat and Slashing Grace, and the later does work.
Compare Deflect Arrows, which requires a free hand and does not mention occupied - so you can use the feat with the hand you made an unarmed strike with, because while otherwise occupied, it's still free.
So, this then narrows the question somewhat. If we treat a weapon 'as though it was a one-handed weapon', which somewhere else in the thread this language is to tell you to basically treat it as being wielded in one hand, does this mean the off-hand is not 'occupied'? Given the distinction, I would probably say yes, because while not free, the weapon is considered to be in one hand for the purpose of Slashing Grace, and thus the other hand is not occupied.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "When wielding a glaive, you can treat it (...) as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand (...)" part is what's treating the off-hand as not occupied.
I mean, if we are attacking with the off-hand (as part of the 2H attack), but we treat it as not attacking, the hand is virtually doing nothing except holding a wooden stick. Since holding something is not an action, it is not not occupied (for the purpose of the listed things), but obviously not free.
Why spell combat doesn't work (in my reading), is because while the hand is treated as not occupied for feats and class features, it is very much occupied in regards to basic rules, including two-weapon fighting; and per the mataphorical hands-thingy, you can't attack with a 2H weapon and TWF on the same turn.
So while the fake ID allows you to buy booze, you still can't join the army because you're still listed as underage in the resident register.
I think this really highlights the unnecessarily convoluted way this feat was written. But I am glad the feat doesn't amount to 'Actually doesn't do what it is trying to say it does' and is more 'It's doing what you think it's doing and it is trying to say it does, but the language of how it is doing it is extremely dense and has to be meticulously unpacked to find the answer'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The "When wielding a glaive, you can treat it (...) as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand (...)" part is what's treating the off-hand as not occupied.
I mean, if we are attacking with the off-hand (as part of the 2H attack), but we treat it as not attacking, the hand is virtually doing nothing except holding a wooden stick. Since holding something is not an action, it is not not occupied (for the purpose of the listed things), but obviously not free.
Or we could accept that both in context and in the dictionary, "occupied" and "free" are antonyms.
Taken in context, "not occupied" is literally the same as saying "free."
Being good authors writing in a literary style instead of a legal style, Paizo authors bring a thesaurus and avoid word repetition.
Okay, but then I would ask as a different question, if we are conflating terms. Is the other hand being used to make an attack? Since that is what Precise Strike is asking for, which was used as an example of an ability that can be used with this feat.
Precise Strike (Ex): At 3rd level, while she has at least 1 panache point, a swashbuckler gains the ability to strike precisely with a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon (though not natural weapon attacks), adding her swashbuckler level to the damage dealt. To use this deed, a swashbuckler cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield other than a buckler. She can even use this ability with thrown light or one-handed piercing melee weapons, so long as the target is within 30 feet of her. Any creature that is immune to sneak attacks is immune to the additional damage granted by precise strike, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from the additional damage of a precise strike. This additional damage is precision damage, and isn't multiplied on a critical hit. As a swift action, a swashbuckler can spend 1 panache point to double her precise strike's damage bonus on the next attack. This benefit must be used before the end of her turn, or it is lost. This deed's cost cannot be reduced by any ability or effect that reduces the amount of panache points a deed costs (such as the Signature Deed feat).
How is this any different to effectively having that hand free? How is it, equally, being allowed if the hand is not actually free? Because if the hand is not free, according to the ability, it still doesn't work. Apparently, Bladed Brush would then be lying, and nothing within the feat past the rules on Weapon Finesse do anything.
Exactly how can these two things not work together, where one is apparently kosher and the other not, when they are checking for the same thing? This is hardly consistent.
Or we could accept that both in context and in the dictionary, "occupied" and "free" are antonyms.
Taken in context, "not occupied" is literally the same as saying "free."
Being good authors writing in a literary style instead of a legal style, Paizo authors bring a thesaurus and avoid word repetition.
Did you even read my posts? The spell rules say "both your hands full or occupied" - why did those good authors use both terms if they have the same meaning? Either it's ill-written (you don't use redundancy as a rhetoric device in permissive rule text), or the terms mean different things.
In any case, my other arguments (that basic rules don't fall under "feats and class features", and that the metaphorical hand-thingy prevents the whole thing) still stand.
Oh and hey.
Not sure if this is at all going to mean anything, but the feat does say the weapon counts as a one-handed slashing weapon as well as piercing, rather than just saying it works as a piercing weapon if they wanted to be restrictive.
That is literally only important for Slashing Grace, since that's the only feat or feature right now that is checking for slashing weapons while also checking for occupying the off-hand.
I'll go with a solid 'It was meant to do that'.
I still agree Spell Combat probably doesn't work since it does not interact at all with the basic rules, but I think Slashing Grace is fine since it's a feat.
Aside from Slashing Grace, are there any other feats that even meet the listed criteria? If not, then it's safe to say that the bolded portion is referring to Slashing Grace, is it not? Otherwise, why mention feats at all?
Paizo often tries to future proof their rules.
And the point is that Slashing Grace doesn't meet that listed criteria.
Either it's ill-written (you don't use redundancy as a rhetoric device in permissive rule text)
Or Pathfinder is a casually written document and not designed as a strict rules text.
|
|
Looking at this and having been on another thread trying to wedge Spell Combat into Whirlwind attack, I can see this working with Spell Combat.
Overall, the weapon is wielded one handed for effects that check on that sort of thing, like Power Attack and such. I believe it is a Dex build type of thing and makes since that casting the offhand spell would be possible.
Did you even read my posts? The spell rules say "both your hands full or occupied" - why did those good authors use both terms if they have the same meaning? Either it's ill-written (you don't use redundancy as a rhetoric device in permissive rule text), or the terms mean different things.Or we could accept that both in context and in the dictionary, "occupied" and "free" are antonyms.
Taken in context, "not occupied" is literally the same as saying "free."
Being good authors writing in a literary style instead of a legal style, Paizo authors bring a thesaurus and avoid word repetition.
Being good authors writing in a literary style instead of a legal style, Paizo authors bring a thesaurus and avoid word repetition.
|
|
Aside from Slashing Grace, are there any other feats that even meet the listed criteria? If not, then it's safe to say that the bolded portion is referring to Slashing Grace, is it not? Otherwise, why mention feats at all?
You're right, because slashing grace says this:
"Benefit: Choose one kind of light or 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.
You do not gain this benefit while fighting with two weapons or using flurry of blows, or any time another hand is otherwise occupied."
Therefore, one must take Weapon Focus, Weapon Finesse, Bladed Brush, and THEN Slashing Grace. (Bladed Brush becomes a prereq to Slashing Grace to make it work for the glaive..)
Alternatively, I'm starting to think about a Fabio-style STR-based swashbuckler, with long luxurious hair, billowing shirt and oiled muscles, and use glaive with: Weapon Focus (glaive), Power Attack, Weapon Specialization (glaive), Bladed Brush (for the sweet Precise Strike damage) THAT way, I can get: (not counting magical stuff)
FABIO STYLE: glaive dmg + STR*1.5 (two-handed weapon) + 9dmg from Power Attack at 8th + 8dmg from Precise Strike + 2dmg Weapon Specialization
= glaive dmg + STR*1.5 + 19
...not bad, considering you now also have some other feats to play with as you haven't gone the dex dmg tax way.
NOW, are there *any* ways to swap out the free weapon finesse from the first level of swashbuckler? (archetype? retraining?)
Paizo often tries to future proof their rules.
And the point is that Slashing Grace doesn't meet that listed criteria.
Either it's ill-written (you don't use redundancy as a rhetoric device in permissive rule text)Or Pathfinder is a casually written document and not designed as a strict rules text.
But wouldn't that mean that, if we take this as RAW, Slashing Grace should work? In fact, with that kind of approach, Spell Combat should even work.
You can't claim the rules to be not designed as strict rules text, then turn around and claim that the feat, as written without referring to rules minute, as not working with the vast majority of feats that care about one-handed weapons. Nothing within the feat itself actually prevents that. In fact, it is written very permissively.
Otherwise, the only thing this feat does with feats is...actively weaken Power Attack.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo often tries to future proof their rules.
And the point is that Slashing Grace doesn't meet that listed criteria.
Either it's ill-written (you don't use redundancy as a rhetoric device in permissive rule text)Or Pathfinder is a casually written document and not designed as a strict rules text.But wouldn't that mean that, if we take this as RAW, Slashing Grace should work? In fact, with that kind of approach, Spell Combat should even work.
You can't claim the rules to be not designed as strict rules text, then turn around and claim that the feat, as written without referring to rules minute, as not working with the vast majority of feats that care about one-handed weapons. Nothing within the feat itself actually prevents that. In fact, it is written very permissively.
Otherwise, the only thing this feat does with feats is...actively weaken Power Attack.
It has been clarified multiple times by multiple devs that the rules text is to be taken lightly and not to fret over specific verbiage. It's not written to be legal text, and Occam's Razor usually solves most disputes over linguistic articulation.
If it seems intended to work one way, then it's safer to assume that it is rather than assume the game has a whole hidden dimension to trying to understand specific word-usage in text. There are some rules not written by developers, since they hire freelancers often and it comes up where the writing styles don't line up.
|
|
If it seems intended to work one way, then it's safer to assume that it is rather than assume the game has a whole hidden dimension to trying to understand specific word-usage in text. There are some rules not written by developers, since they hire freelancers often and it comes up where the writing styles don't line up.
The problem is that we don't even agree on what it is intended to do.
I think it is intended to work with slashing grace and the swashbuckler abilities, but that the weapon still stay a two handed weapon for the benefits of power attack.
I am right? Maybe.
I would allow that? No.
I think that the author is trying to recreate something like the heroines of this anime.
An acceptable goal for a full archetype, not a single feat that can be asily bent to plenty of different purposes.
But wouldn't that mean that, if we take this as RAW, Slashing Grace should work? In fact, with that kind of approach, Spell Combat should even work.
Nope.
You can't claim the rules to be not designed as strict rules text, then turn around and claim that the feat, as written without referring to rules minute, as not working with the vast majority of feats that care about one-handed weapons. Nothing within the feat itself actually prevents that. In fact, it is written very permissively.
Actually I can, pretty easily, because this isn't a matter of nitpicking, minutiae or arguing that synonyms actually have completely different meanings. Bladed Brush uses some very unique, awkward and unnecessarily verbose language in order to specifically get around saying your hand is free and there's nothing contradictory about thinking that that probably means something.
But wouldn't that mean that, if we take this as RAW, Slashing Grace should work? In fact, with that kind of approach, Spell Combat should even work.Nope.
You can't claim the rules to be not designed as strict rules text, then turn around and claim that the feat, as written without referring to rules minute, as not working with the vast majority of feats that care about one-handed weapons. Nothing within the feat itself actually prevents that. In fact, it is written very permissively.Actually I can, pretty easily, because this isn't a matter of nitpicking, minutiae or arguing that synonyms actually have completely different meanings. Bladed Brush uses some very unique, awkward and unnecessarily verbose language in order to specifically get around saying your hand is free and there's nothing contradictory about thinking that that probably means something.
If your hand is not free, you cannot use Slashing Grace.
If your hand is free, you can use Spell Combat.Bladed Brush either works for both or neither.
If it seems intended to work one way, then it's safer to assume that it is rather than assume the game has a whole hidden dimension to trying to understand specific word-usage in text. There are some rules not written by developers, since they hire freelancers often and it comes up where the writing styles don't line up.The problem is that we don't even agree on what it is intended to do.
I think it is intended to work with slashing grace and the swashbuckler abilities, but that the weapon still stay a two handed weapon for the benefits of power attack.
I am right? Maybe.
I would allow that? No.I think that the author is trying to recreate something like the heroines of this anime.
An acceptable goal for a full archetype, not a single feat that can be asily bent to plenty of different purposes.
It must have been a dark day for you when they introduced Titan Mauler and Titan Fighter, aye? XP
Besides the inspiration being very anime, I think it's interaction with Power Attack is fairly simple. The glaive is being treated as a one-handed weapon in one hand, so it would be 2 per 4 BaB. It's strength bonus would maybe be x1.5 though because the feat doesn't touch basic rules.
The feat works with swashbuckler features, because it specifically states features that it works with using a particularly restrictive swashbuckler class feature, and they universally share language throughout the class. If the feat didn't work with swashbuckler class features, then why would state it did? Denying that is just simply putting on your grumpy old player hat and pouting about 'kids these days and their Gliavebucklers and Glaivemagi ruining Pathfinder'.
Anyway, once again, if swashbuckler's features don't work, then neither would Slashing Grace and Spell Combat (maybe, I still think Spell Combat is interacting with non-feat or combat feature related stuff, and that's why it is unable to work. But then one could interpret the feature to be a class feature using similar rules to two-weapon fighting and is it's own full-attack action, and thus a class feature that has it's own self-contained rules, and thus eligible for the feat to work with it,)
If it seems intended to work one way, then it's safer to assume that it is rather than assume the game has a whole hidden dimension to trying to understand specific word-usage in text. There are some rules not written by developers, since they hire freelancers often and it comes up where the writing styles don't line up.The problem is that we don't even agree on what it is intended to do.
I think it is intended to work with slashing grace and the swashbuckler abilities, but that the weapon still stay a two handed weapon for the benefits of power attack.
I am right? Maybe.
I would allow that? No.I think that the author is trying to recreate something like the heroines of this anime.
An acceptable goal for a full archetype, not a single feat that can be asily bent to plenty of different purposes.
Given that Two Weapon Grace came out, it seems safe to look at the devs slowly opening up more DEX to damage options.
It's no longer a sacred cow, and we can see that while it's an option, it's still taxed to hell in both feats and penalties.
If we're going to be technical, it doesn't seem to affect the handedness for damage at all. Since the subordinate clause "treated as a one-handed piercing or slacking weapon" is itself game language, referring to the weapons compatible with the duelist and swasbuckler, then it could easily be interpreted as "such weapons" only refers to whether or not the weapon qualifies for using the ability, and taking any feats that also interact with this "qualified weapon" for duelist/swashbuckler mechanic. If it can work with precise strike, it should work with anything that works with precise strike.
To me, since the action of holding the two handed weapon with the off hand is the same thing as attacking with it, it does seem to just say, "that thing that you count your hand as doing, you don't count it as doing that anymore" which means that the weapon is still being two handed, so the hand is still being used, it is no longer treated that way for feats and class features. It does make sense to see it as a "counts as free, but isn't actually free." RAI I would allow it to work with spell combat, and I'm pretty sure does 1.5 DEX because the feat doesn't limit that explicitly, and the general rule is attribute x1.5 for two handed weapons. (There are cases of adding in other attributes, like INT with Eleven Battle Focus or CON with Raging Brutality.)
|
|
It does make sense to see it as a "counts as free, but isn't actually free." RAI I would allow it to work with spell combat, and I'm pretty sure does 1.5 DEX because the feat doesn't limit that explicitly, and the general rule is attribute x1.5 for two handed weapons.
I would say yes to Spell Combat, provided you take Two-Weapon Grace because Spell Combat works like Two-Weapon Fighting, but not to Dex x1.5 (I agree it's worded that way, and could maybe one day work that way, but for the moment, Mark mentioned Precise Strike has never really been intended for anything outside one-handed combat i.e. it's a damage equalizer so not intended for two-weapon use...)
It does make sense to see it as a "counts as free, but isn't actually free." RAI I would allow it to work with spell combat, and I'm pretty sure does 1.5 DEX because the feat doesn't limit that explicitly, and the general rule is attribute x1.5 for two handed weapons.I would say yes to Spell Combat, provided you take Two-Weapon Grace because Spell Combat works like Two-Weapon Fighting, but not to Dex x1.5 (I agree it's worded that way, and could maybe one day work that way, but for the moment, Mark mentioned Precise Strike has never really been intended for anything outside one-handed combat i.e. it's a damage equalizer so not intended for two-weapon use...)
Even with the feat tax, it does open the magus up to at least one weapon option outside of the scimitar.
|
|
If it seems intended to work one way, then it's safer to assume that it is rather than assume the game has a whole hidden dimension to trying to understand specific word-usage in text. There are some rules not written by developers, since they hire freelancers often and it comes up where the writing styles don't line up.The problem is that we don't even agree on what it is intended to do.
I think it is intended to work with slashing grace and the swashbuckler abilities, but that the weapon still stay a two handed weapon for the benefits of power attack.
I am right? Maybe.
I would allow that? No.I think that the author is trying to recreate something like the heroines of this anime.
An acceptable goal for a full archetype, not a single feat that can be asily bent to plenty of different purposes.It must have been a dark day for you when they introduced Titan Mauler and Titan Fighter, aye? XP
Besides the inspiration being very anime, I think it's interaction with Power Attack is fairly simple. The glaive is being treated as a one-handed weapon in one hand, so it would be 2 per 4 BaB. It's strength bonus would maybe be x1.5 though because the feat doesn't touch basic rules.
The feat works with swashbuckler features, because it specifically states features that it works with using a particularly restrictive swashbuckler class feature, and they universally share language throughout the class. If the feat didn't work with swashbuckler class features, then why would state it did? Denying that is just simply putting on your grumpy old player hat and pouting about 'kids these days and their Gliavebucklers and Glaivemagi ruining Pathfinder'.
Anyway, once again, if swashbuckler's features don't work, then neither would Slashing Grace and Spell Combat (maybe, I still think Spell Combat is interacting with non-feat or combat feature related stuff, and that's why it is...
Read the FAQs about two handed weapons used in one hand and feats. Those are so confusing that is really hard to decide how what kind of benefit you will get with power attack.
Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.
Bastard Sword: Is this a one-handed weapon or a two-handed weapon?A bastard sword is a one-handed weapon (although for some rules it blurs the line between a one-handed and a two-handed weapon).
The physical properties of a bastard sword are that of a one-handed weapon. For example, its hardness, hit points, ability to be crafted out of special materials, category for using the Craft skill, effect of alchemical silver, and so on, are all that of a one-handed weapon.
For class abilities, feats, and other rule elements that vary based on or specifically depend on wielding a one-handed weapon, a two-handed weapon, or a one-handed weapon with two hands, the bastard sword counts as however many hands you are using to wield it.
For example, if you are wielding it one-handed (which normally requires the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat), it is treated as a one-handed weapon; Power Attack only gets the one-handed bonus, you cannot use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
If you are wielding it with two hands (whether or not you have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency to wield it with one hand), it is treated as a two-handed weapon; Power Attack gets the increased damage bonus, you can use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.
First FAQ: you use power attack as if it was a 2handed weapon, second FAQ, as a 1 handed weapon.
The difference? Wield in one hand against treat as a one-handed weapon.But then wield vs threat isn't used in same through all the written material.
Back to square 1.
|
|
Take away the Lance.
That is using Mounted combat and using it in a particular way. It is a specific situation and the FAQ should have mentioned/clarified this.
One Handed means all effects that are determined by how the weapon is wielded. The only thing that doesn't change is the actual designation of the weapon, so being able to one hand a Two Handed weapon wouldn't enable the character to wield a larger one or wield two of them at the same time to TWF with them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bladed Brush (Combat)
You know how to balance a polearm perfectly, striking with artful, yet deadly precision.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (glaive), must be a worshiper of Shelyn.
Benefit: You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a glaive sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon. When wielding a glaive, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon and as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s or swashbuckler’s precise strike).
As a move action, you can shorten your grip on the glaive, treating it as though it lacked the reach weapon property. You can adjust your grip to grant the weapon the reach property as a move action.
Slashing Grace (Combat)
You can stab your enemies with your sword or another slashing weapon.
Prerequisite(s): Dex 13, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus with chosen weapon.
Benefit: Choose one kind of light or 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.
You do not gain this benefit while fighting with two weapons or using flurry of blows, or any time another hand is otherwise occupied.
By re-reading them another time, you can combine them if you plan to play a glaive swashbuckler, but not a magus. Spell Combat requires an actual free hand to cast the spell, as opposed to a swashbuckler who just needs to hold nothing in his or her off-hand. Spellstrike can still be used with the glaive, but not Spell Combat.
Bladed Brush (Combat)
You know how to balance a polearm perfectly, striking with artful, yet deadly precision.
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus (glaive), must be a worshiper of Shelyn.
Benefit: You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a glaive sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon. When wielding a glaive, you can treat it as a one-handed piercing or slashing melee weapon and as if you were not making attacks with your off-hand for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s or swashbuckler’s precise strike).
As a move action, you can shorten your grip on the glaive, treating it as though it lacked the reach weapon property. You can adjust your grip to grant the weapon the reach property as a move action.
By re-reading them another time, you can combine them if you plan to play a glaive swashbuckler, but not a magus. Spell Combat requires an actual free hand to cast the spell, as opposed to a swashbuckler who just needs to hold nothing in his or her off-hand. Spellstrike can still be used with the glaive, but not Spell Combat.Slashing Grace (Combat)
You can stab your enemies with your sword or another slashing weapon.
Prerequisite(s): Dex 13, Weapon Finesse, Weapon Focus with chosen weapon.
Benefit: Choose one kind of light or 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.
You do not gain this benefit while fighting with two weapons or using flurry of blows, or any time another hand is otherwise occupied.
I think the concern is more"choose one kind of light or one-handed slashing weapon." Does the fight require the weapon to actually be a one-handed weapon or merely wielded as one?
|
|
Take away the Lance.
That is using Mounted combat and using it in a particular way. It is a specific situation and the FAQ should have mentioned/clarified this.
One Handed means all effects that are determined by how the weapon is wielded. The only thing that doesn't change is the actual designation of the weapon, so being able to one hand a Two Handed weapon wouldn't enable the character to wield a larger one or wield two of them at the same time to TWF with them.
Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (...), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.
The lance is an example, the answer isn't limited to it.
I think the concern is more"choose one kind of light or one-handed slashing weapon." Does the fight require the weapon to actually be a one-handed weapon or merely wielded as one?
Hmmm... Slashing Grace allows you to use a light or one-handed slashing weapon as a light or one-handed piercing weapon.
Bladed Brush does... the exact same thing, except that you can apply Weapon Finesse to a glaive and don't get to add your Dex modifier on damage like Slashing Grace.
|
|
Take away the Lance.
That is using Mounted combat and using it in a particular way. It is a specific situation and the FAQ should have mentioned/clarified this.
One Handed means all effects that are determined by how the weapon is wielded. The only thing that doesn't change is the actual designation of the weapon, so being able to one hand a Two Handed weapon wouldn't enable the character to wield a larger one or wield two of them at the same time to TWF with them.
The lance is an example, the answer isn't limited to it.Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (...), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.
The lance is a particularly weird case. It's a 2H weapon that continues to be treated as 2H even when wielded in one hand, and so continues to do damage as an 1H weapon.
As far as I can tell, it's the only example of that happening. All the other cases are weapons switching their treatment depending on how many hands are used to wield it.
And then Bladed Brush does the opposite thing: chance the handedness treatment (for some specific purposes) without actually changing the number of hands being used.
|
|
Take away the Lance.
That is using Mounted combat and using it in a particular way. It is a specific situation and the FAQ should have mentioned/clarified this.
One Handed means all effects that are determined by how the weapon is wielded. The only thing that doesn't change is the actual designation of the weapon, so being able to one hand a Two Handed weapon wouldn't enable the character to wield a larger one or wield two of them at the same time to TWF with them.
The lance is an example, the answer isn't limited to it.Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (...), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.
The lance is a particularly weird case. It's a 2H weapon that continues to be treated as 2H even when wielded in one hand, and so continues to do damage as an 1H weapon.
As far as I can tell, it's the only example of that happening. All the other cases are weapons switching their treatment depending on how many hands are used to wield it.
And then Bladed Brush does the opposite thing: chance the handedness treatment (for some specific purposes) without actually changing the number of hands being used.
You also have to take into account this FAQ:
Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?
If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.
|
|
Also, this, which may or may not apply depending on if Bladed Brush allows for wielding a glaive in one hand or not (remains to be clarified...)
Bastard Sword: Is this a one-handed weapon or a two-handed weapon?
A bastard sword is a one-handed weapon (although for some rules it blurs the line between a one-handed and a two-handed weapon).
The physical properties of a bastard sword are that of a one-handed weapon. For example, its hardness, hit points, ability to be crafted out of special materials, category for using the Craft skill, effect of alchemical silver, and so on, are all that of a one-handed weapon.
For class abilities, feats, and other rule elements that vary based on or specifically depend on wielding a one-handed weapon, a two-handed weapon, or a one-handed weapon with two hands, the bastard sword counts as however many hands you are using to wield it.
For example, if you are wielding it one-handed (which normally requires the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat), it is treated as a one-handed weapon; Power Attack only gets the one-handed bonus, you cannot use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
If you are wielding it with two hands (whether or not you have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency to wield it with one hand), it is treated as a two-handed weapon; Power Attack gets the increased damage bonus, you can use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Take away the Lance.
That is using Mounted combat and using it in a particular way. It is a specific situation and the FAQ should have mentioned/clarified this.
One Handed means all effects that are determined by how the weapon is wielded. The only thing that doesn't change is the actual designation of the weapon, so being able to one hand a Two Handed weapon wouldn't enable the character to wield a larger one or wield two of them at the same time to TWF with them.
The lance is an example, the answer isn't limited to it.Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (...), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.
The lance is a particularly weird case. It's a 2H weapon that continues to be treated as 2H even when wielded in one hand, and so continues to do damage as an 1H weapon.
As far as I can tell, it's the only example of that happening. All the other cases are weapons switching their treatment depending on how many hands are used to wield it.
And then Bladed Brush does the opposite thing: chance the handedness treatment (for some specific purposes) without actually changing the number of hands being used.
You also have to take into account this FAQ:
Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?
If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.
The thing is, that FAQ doesn't apply to anything here. The lance isn't actually treated as 1H, despite the fact that the cavalier is holding it in only one hand. And the bladed brush does not appear to be wielded in only one hand, despite you treating it as 1H for some purposes.
|
|
Also, this, which may or may not apply depending on if Bladed Brush allows for wielding a glaive in one hand or not (remains to be clarified...)
Bastard Sword: Is this a one-handed weapon or a two-handed weapon?
A bastard sword is a one-handed weapon (although for some rules it blurs the line between a one-handed and a two-handed weapon).
The physical properties of a bastard sword are that of a one-handed weapon. For example, its hardness, hit points, ability to be crafted out of special materials, category for using the Craft skill, effect of alchemical silver, and so on, are all that of a one-handed weapon.
For class abilities, feats, and other rule elements that vary based on or specifically depend on wielding a one-handed weapon, a two-handed weapon, or a one-handed weapon with two hands, the bastard sword counts as however many hands you are using to wield it.
For example, if you are wielding it one-handed (which normally requires the Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat), it is treated as a one-handed weapon; Power Attack only gets the one-handed bonus, you cannot use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
If you are wielding it with two hands (whether or not you have the Exotic Weapon Proficiency to wield it with one hand), it is treated as a two-handed weapon; Power Attack gets the increased damage bonus, you can use Pushing Assault or Shield of Swings (which require a two-handed weapon), and so on.
An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.
That FAQ also only discusses the case where you treat a weapon as 1H or 2H depending on how many hands you're currently using. Bladed Brush is a reverse case: first you start treating it as 1H (for some purposes), then you wonder if that means you can wield it in only one hand. So the FAQ doesn't really tell us how to handle this situation.