| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A question on the subject:
Slashing Grace
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.
Weapon Finesse
Benefit: With a light weapon, elven curve blade, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
So slashing grace specifically says that long sword works with this combination, while weapon finesse doesn't list long sword as a legal finesse weapon. Which one is right and which is heresy? This actually is an issue in my game right now, and my players are super autistic (they use hero lab and cannot use anything other than a literal interpretation of any rules. I hate hero lab).
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
Two things:
1) Slashing grace specifically works for one-handed slashing weapons for adding Dex to damage, but provides no clause to allow weapon finesse to apply to such weapons. So, in the case of a longsword with both feats you'd still use Strength for attacks but add Dexterity to damage.
2) Unless your players are legitimately diagnosed (is that the right term?) as autistic, don't use the term so flippantly to describe your players just because they like to follow the rules as closely as possible. If you must call them something, just call them rules lawyers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Both are correct: you can have dex to damage without having the ability to hit with dex.
The 'missing piece' is "Swashbuckler Finesse (Ex): At 1st level, a swashbuckler gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with light or one-handed piercing melee weapons". With the weapon from slashing grace being treated "as a one-handed piercing melee weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon", it allows the dex to hit with that longsword.
So to get the full effect with a weapon that normally doesn't allow weapon finesse, you need to be a swashbuckler.
Two things:
1) Slashing grace specifically works for one-handed slashing weapons for adding Dex to damage, but provides no clause to allow weapon finesse to apply to such weapons. So, in the case of a longsword with both feats you'd still use Strength for attacks but add Dexterity to damage.2) Unless your players are legitimately diagnosed (is that the right term?) as autistic, don't use the term so flippantly to describe your players just because they like to follow the rules as closely as possible. If you must call them something, just call them rules lawyers.
So it intentionally only does half the thing that the feat implies? Ok, fine.
I didn't mean to offend your delicate sensibilities. And wanting to follow the rules has nothing to do with it. They CANT not follow the rules because hero lab doesn't allow it. This can be a real pain when it comes to rare items, out of obscure books and custom items are just an impossibility.
But thanks, I'll tell him to go with the less efficient dervish dancer feat, after dumping a feat in proficiency: scimitar.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it intentionally only does half the thing that the feat implies? Ok, fine.
It's meant to be a feat for swashbucklers and in that sense it provides the whole thing: dex to hit and damage. It's only when a non-swashbuckler takes it that you're missing the hit if it's a non-finesse weapon.
Aldori dueling sword is good if you are going to drop a feat for proficiency anyway, or rapier and fencing grace.
Aldori dueling sword is good if you are going to drop a feat for proficiency anyway, or rapier and fencing grace.
Myself, if it's for a martial build, I'd take a level of Inspired Blade Swashbuckler to get the weapon finesse, rapier proficiency and weapon focus (rapier): that allows fencing grace for a single feat as all the prerequisites are out of the way with that single level dip.
My player (yes, technically he isn't autistic. He just has mild Aspergers and a program that makes him act autistic) ONLY plays bards. for 17 years now. Only bards. I was trying to find a way to give him his dex bonus to damage without having to flush a feat down the crapper, buying proficiency with a scimitar, since he's already proficient with rapiers and long swords.
For some historic context, back when the ACG was in playtested, the Swashbuckler worked only with piercing weapons. Some people observed that "what if my swashbuckler wants to use a cutlass or some other non-rapier iconic swashbuckling weapon" so the feat slashing grace was created to enable people to use slashing weapons with Swashbuckler class features.
However, a 1-feat tax that did nothing else except enable a different weapon for the Swashbuckler was deemed too weak for a feat, so the whole "dex-to-damage" clause was added fairly late in the process.
Of course, this meant that the rapier was now a strictly inferior weapon choice for Swashbucklers, even though it's the iconic swashbuckling weapon, so the "fencing grace" hotfix was printed in Advanced Class Origins.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Only bards. I was trying to find a way to give him his dex bonus to damage without having to flush a feat down the crapper, buying proficiency with a scimitar, since he's already proficient with rapiers and long swords.
Then use fencing grace? It does what you want with a weapon he can use.
Oh thanks. That's perfect. Never read the book it comes from. The problem of having 2000 feats to sift through.
For some historic context, back when the ACG was in playtested, the Swashbuckler worked only with piercing weapons. Some people observed that "what if my swashbuckler wants to use a cutlass or some other non-rapier iconic swashbuckling weapon" so the feat slashing grace was created to enable people to use slashing weapons with Swashbuckler class features.
However, a 1-feat tax that did nothing else except enable a different weapon for the Swashbuckler was deemed too weak for a feat, so the whole "dex-to-damage" clause was added fairly late in the process.
Of course, this meant that the rapier was now a strictly inferior weapon choice for Swashbucklers, even though it's the iconic swashbuckling weapon, so the "fencing grace" hotfix was printed in Advanced Class Origins.
The development of Slashing Grace is a long series of band-aids over awkward and/or bad decisions. It's why the feat is such a horrifically designed mess.
So slashing grace specifically says that long sword works with this combination, while weapon finesse doesn't list long sword as a legal finesse weapon. Which one is right and which is heresy? This actually is an issue in my game right now, and my players are super autistic (they use hero lab and cannot use anything other than a literal interpretation of any rules. I hate hero lab).
Slashing Grace specifically states that the longsword is treated as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities and that you can add dexterity to damage with the weapon.
Neither of these conflict with or affect weapon finesse, which allows the user to use DEX-to-hit with certain weapons.
Unless you have a way to get DEX to hit with the longsword, e.g. Swashbuckler's Finesse, Slashing Grace will only add damage.
Swashbuckler's Finesse fulfills the Weapon Finesse requirement and allow DEX-to-hit with all one-handed piercing weapons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
17 years of only bards is just good taste.
I remember the days when a bard was a human or half-elf with a Strength 15+, Wisdom 15+, Dexterity 15+ and Charisma 15+, Intelligence 12+ and Constitution 10+ with 5-7 levels of fighters and 5-8 levels of thief... ;)
Oh thanks. That's perfect. Never read the book it comes from. The problem of having 2000 feats to sift through.
You're welcome. If you don't check out the new stuff when the books come out, it's easy to miss options like that. ;)
I think they're afraid of making DEX a god-stat before which all others must bow. ALL HAIL THE GOD STAT!
It's already playing second fiddle to Cha! ;)
And I'm already on the 'they WAY overthink dex' bandwagon. I even get the newsletter. :)
I love Hero Lab and use it religiously. That said I am extremely flexible with rules/interpretations/etc. just because it's printed out doesn't make it gospel.
So it intentionally only does half the thing that the feat implies? Ok, fine.Um. No. Slashing Grace does exactly what it states it does and nothing else. To-hit rolls are not mentioned anywhere in the Feat, so no implication is made about that.
Well, look at it from my point of view, not knowing that Slashing Grace is a kludge specifically for swashbuckler's alone. The first part of the feat tree works for rapiers but not longswords. The second part works for longswords but not rapiers. Why would you do that? They both work for scimitars, but there's already a feat just for that.....It's like having Weapon Specialization: Longsword, but the prerequisite is Weapon Focus: Rapier. Seeing that it was from Advanced Class Guide, I thought an errata or rule clarification might be involved. Like how Spirit Talker gives a shaman a hex from a 3rd spirit for 24 hours, and by 24 hours, they meant 1 hour.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dex builds mean certain classes or taking feats. Strength is out of the box.
So it's give and take.
Plus, dex-over-str builds don't work with every weapon or every style of combat. So if you wanted to use a polearm and fight at reach, your dex-options are limited (and involve feat taxes and/or exotic weapons). If you want to use something like Thunder-and-Fang style, or get a Dorn-Dergar for your Dwarf Magus, or use anything involving all but a small set of melee weapons likewise.
Or just if your concept for a character involves them being "heavily armored" sort of precludes dex-builds.
For classes that are light on feats, spending 3 feats to get "dex-to-damage-and-attack" (particularly if you're not human) is kind of a pain. Like if I'm playing an occultist, I'm either going to go INT>STR>The Rest and pick up a polearm, or INT>DEX>The Rest and pick up a longbow.
Basically, Slashing Grace was deliberately designed to only work "properly" on Swashbucklers and things that get Swashbuckler Finesse-like abilities, which allow you to use Weapon Finesse with one-handed weapons that don't have the finesse special feature. (This is a part of why I feel Finesse should have been a weapon quality, not a feat, but there are other tangles there)
Weapons don't have a "finesse" feature.
A few weapons explicitly state they work with Weapon Finesse, but the vast majority of what can be finessed is defined by feats and class abilities.
This is what causes arguments with the Agile property. What can be used with Weapon Finesse is highly variable depending on who is holding the weapon; e.g. a character with Fighter's Finesse can use Weapon Finesse with entire categories of weapons that others cannot.
a character with Fighter's Finesse can use Weapon Finesse with entire categories of weapons that others cannot.
Wrong, and thus a very bad example. Fighter's Finesse doesn't allow you to use Weapon Finesse with those weapons - you get an effect that does the same, but don't use the actual feat. Fighter's Finesse doesn't help for anything Weapon Finesse-related.
a character with Fighter's Finesse can use Weapon Finesse with entire categories of weapons that others cannot.Wrong, and thus a very bad example. Fighter's Finesse doesn't allow you to use Weapon Finesse with those weapons - you get an effect that does the same, but don't use the actual feat. Fighter's Finesse doesn't help for anything Weapon Finesse-related.
The fighter gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with all melee weapons that belong to the associated fighter weapon group
Emphasis mine.
Looks to me like the fighter is able to use the Weapon Finesse feat with all weapons in the associated weapon group.
The fighter gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with all melee weapons that belong to the associated fighter weapon groupEmphasis mine.
Looks to me like the fighter is able to use the Weapon Finesse feat with all weapons in the associated weapon group.
No, it does not say that. It says you gain the benefits of the feat. The benefits of a feat is not the entire feat. The benefits of a feat is what's written in the "benefits" section.
Fighter's Finesse (FF) could say "the Fighter can use [or "apply"] the Weapon Finesse feat with (...)" - it does not. FF explicitly talks about gaining the benefits of Weapon Finesse (WF) with those weapons, not about altering WF.
Note that Swashbuckler Finesse uses the exact same language ("gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with (...)"), without requiring or granting the WF feat - if that language would only expand what WF can be applied to, every Swashbuckler would need to grab the actual feat for the class feature to function.
Though they won't qualify for any feats or prestige claases(if any) that require it.
Only if you retrain the feat after selecting the AWT (which you can RAW, but certainly not RAI).
Note that Swashbuckler Finesse uses the exact same language ("gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with (...)"), without requiring or granting the WF feat - if that language would only expand what WF can be applied to, every Swashbuckler would need to grab the actual feat for the class feature to function.
Swashbuckler Finesse: "This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
Swashbuckler Finesse: "This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."
I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me, or trying to disagree, because that line only makes it clearer that "the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat" does not include the entire feat.
|
Two things:
1) Slashing grace specifically works for one-handed slashing weapons for adding Dex to damage, but provides no clause to allow weapon finesse to apply to such weapons. So, in the case of a longsword with both feats you'd still use Strength for attacks but add Dexterity to damage.2) Unless your players are legitimately diagnosed (is that the right term?) as autistic, don't use the term so flippantly to describe your players just because they like to follow the rules as closely as possible. If you must call them something, just call them rules lawyers.
So it intentionally only does half the thing that the feat implies? Ok, fine.
I didn't mean to offend your delicate sensibilities. And wanting to follow the rules has nothing to do with it. They CANT not follow the rules because hero lab doesn't allow it. This can be a real pain when it comes to rare items, out of obscure books and custom items are just an impossibility.
But thanks, I'll tell him to go with the less efficient dervish dancer feat, after dumping a feat in proficiency: scimitar.
You need a bit a creativity and you can do a lot of stuff (look the in play and adjustment pages [lunch pause at work, so I can't check if those are the right names]). You can activate plenty of spell effects and add several modifier to simulate the effect of magic items.
Then you can learn how to develop it to add custom items, classes and so on.
Though they won't qualify for any feats or prestige claases(if any) that require it.
Weapon Finesse is a requirement for Fighter's Finesse.
They CANT not follow the rules because hero lab doesn't allow it. This can be a real pain when it comes to rare items, out of obscure books and custom items are just an impossibility.
This is not true.
You can create custom races, items, classes, feats, etc. The "Custom (whatever)" options are at the top of nearly every drop-down list. (For magic items, the custom options are at the top of every category--rings, scrolls, potions, wands, etc.)
You can enable house rules through the Portfolio > Configure Hero menu. From this menu, you can also add data packs and other sources. I have yet to find a Paizo source that is not already available in Hero Lab. (It will even tell you all the sources your character used and what source each aspect of the character comes from.)
The Adjustments tab allows players to manually alter the major aspects of their character. (If you want an adjustment that isn't already built in, the free Basic Pack add-on expands the available adjustments even further.)
And if you still can't find what you're looking for, you can also break any of Hero Labs rules regularly: just ignore the red text that indicates something is illegal and move on.
Hero Lab is not perfect. It does not count as an official rules source for organized play, and the developers have to make choices about how to interpret tricky rules and corner cases (just like every GM does). But it is a robust character-creation software with a ton of features. It is also constantly evolving, so whatever problem you had with a year ago might have been fixed by now.
The fighter gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat with all melee weapons that belong to the associated fighter weapon groupEmphasis mine.
Looks to me like the fighter is able to use the Weapon Finesse feat with all weapons in the associated weapon group.
No, it does not say that. It says you gain the benefits of the feat. The benefits of a feat is not the entire feat. The benefits of a feat is what's written in the "benefits" section.
Fighter's Finesse (FF) could say "the Fighter can use [or "apply"] the Weapon Finesse feat with (...)" - it does not. - it does not. FF explicitly talks about gaining the benefits of Weapon Finesse (WF) with those weapons, not about altering WF.
It says exactly that.
ˈbenəfit/Submit
noun
1.an advantage or profit gained from something.
Synonym: get
At this point it's just a game of semantics and parsing. We'll rewrite the sentence using synonyms (different words with the same meaning) to simplify the parsing without altering the semantics.
The fighter gains (syn of get) the benefits of (syn of get) the Weapon Finesse feat with all melee weapons that belong to the associated fighter weapon group
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
The fighter gets the Weapon Finesse feat with all melee weapons that belong to the associated fighter weapon group.
Swashbuckler Finesse: "This ability counts as having the Weapon Finesse feat for purposes of meeting feat prerequisites."I'm not sure if you're agreeing with me, or trying to disagree, because that line only makes it clearer that "the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat" does not include the entire feat.
Or it could be a restatement of something that you get anyway to make it clear much like a monk says you can make unarmed strikes with your hands full or with fist, elbows, knees, and feet [things EVERY character can do].
So I find it unclear if "gains the benefits of the Weapon Finesse feat" includes or excludes it. IMo it should include it, as counting for prerequisites seems like it's a benefit of the feat.
IMo it should include it, as counting for prerequisites seems like it's a benefit of the feat.
That's only if you don't use "benefit" as a game term. Seriously, the word is in every feat description, what makes you think when they use it, it's not meant to be the same thing?
Why didn't they wrote that Swashbucklers get WF as a bonus feat and can use piercing weapons with it if that's what they meant? Why all that text including redundant reminder instead?We'll rewrite the sentence using synonyms
Ah, the inevitable "let's ignore what's actually written and make up our own text" argument. In this case, "let's replace what's written with something pulled from some random dictionary." You're even trying to tell us that a verb is a synonym for a noun.
IMo it should include it, as counting for prerequisites seems like it's a benefit of the feat.That's only if you don't use "benefit" as a game term. Seriously, the word is in every feat description, what makes you think when they use it, it's not meant to be the same thing?
Then let me ask this: do you follow the special section of the finesse feat that calls out natural attacks as light weapons? The Special section is used and an expected part of the feat and yet isn't in the 'benefit' section'. Some feats are dramatically different is you ignore those not-benefit sections.
Why didn't they wrote that Swashbucklers get WF as a bonus feat and can use piercing weapons with it if that's what they meant? Why all that text including redundant reminder instead?
I ask the exact same thing with the monk: it's clear in several other places what a unarmed attacks are and how they are used but it's all repeated in the monk class. Maybe the class needed a sentence to pad out the section? Maybe they thought it was needed? Maybe it's just how that writer writes?
You have to explain away the sections of the monk that are clearly unneeded and are JUST redundant restatement before you can claim that the swashbuckler sections are clearly not. Monk is solid proof that reminder text exists.
I'mma piggyback on that one:
Derklord, what exactly are you claiming Fighter's Finesse doesn't do as a result of your parsing? (I.e., for practical purposes, what does your reading allow/disallow differently from that of your fellow posters?)