So what are we doing about Dervish Dance?


Pathfinder Society

251 to 300 of 593 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Quintin Verassi wrote:
Scimitars are not light weapons, nor do they state that they can be used with weapon finesse. Without Slashing Grace or Dervish Dance, you can't Dex to hit with a scimitar. Nor can you use agile on a weapon that cannot be finessed.

So don't use a scimitar?

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Agile rapier work to get you delicious dex to damage on top of the crit range?

5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Agile rapier work to get you delicious dex to damage on top of the crit range?

Yes I believe so, its what my magus uses.

2/5

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
andreww wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Agile rapier work to get you delicious dex to damage on top of the crit range?
Yes I believe so, its what my magus uses.

You have to enchant a weapon to +1 before you can make it agile, correct?

An adamantine +1 Agile Rapier is 11,020 gp and a non-adamantine one is 8,320 gp. Either way, a PFS player couldn't purchase one until he/she had 27 fame. That's not too crazy, horrible, I guess.

If I decide to create a magus, I could aim for such a weapon with the following initial build - elf, Str 10, Dex 18, Con 13 (up to 14 at level 4 and get Toughness as a feat at lvl 3), Int 16, Wis 10, Cha 8.


'Agile' probably doesn't have a very drastic benefit for the build. To get it, you have to sacrifice an increased enhancement bonus of +1 to hit and +1 to damage. For this you get, say, +5 to damage from your Dexterity bonus. Due to the decreased attack bonus, 5% of your attacks will miss that would have hit, and that means you'll also fail to deliver your spells. It'll also make it much harder to get a +3 weapon, which would allow you to bypass DR Cold Iron / Silver.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
'Agile' probably doesn't have a very drastic benefit for the build. To get it, you have to sacrifice an increased enhancement bonus of +1 to hit and +1 to damage. For this you get, say, +5 to damage from your Dexterity bonus. Due to the decreased attack bonus, 5% of your attacks will miss that would have hit, and that means you'll also fail to deliver your spells. It'll also make it much harder to get a +3 weapon, which would allow you to bypass DR Cold Iron / Silver.

That doesn't sound like a particularly unreasonable trade-off; I suspect a lot of kensai would be willing to make that trade, for example.

Might encourage a little more build diversity. ^_^

Scarab Sages 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Additionally, Magus often have the ability to bump up their enhancement bonuses with Arcana. So it isn't necessary to have a +3 weapon.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber
Tallow wrote:
Additionally, Magus often have the ability to bump up their enhancement bonuses with Arcana. So it isn't necessary to have a +3 weapon.

And then there's tricks like Arcane Accuracy. ^_^

Dark Archive 4/5

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Black blades who wanted to go the Dex route would still be SOL, though. Using a kukri or wakizashi(with EWP) but without agile. Missing a few damage, but there are worse things.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.

So is there a reason then, that this particular build wouldn't typically be a Strength-based build?

Some builds just don't work as well with Dex or with Str. And that's ok. Not every build should be able to be equally as awesome with either stat.

Sovereign Court

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

I suspect that the kensai's duelist aesthetic and lack of access to armor are major factors. ^_^

Sovereign Court 1/5

Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.

There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Looking at the Archetype Stacking FAQ again... that argument might actually be correct. (Nobody is ever really prepared for how strict that FAQ is.) I'd completely forgotten about that familiar-arcana line.

The text isn't as easily parsed as more recent books, which have made a stronger effort to delineate "altered" class features... but it's definitely something to think about.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).

That's a whole separate discussion.

Sovereign Court 1/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).
That's a whole separate discussion.

Kinda. I'm just pointing it out because if that combination IS in fact illegal, then points about whether or not that combination can get DEX to damage reliably if Dervish Dance gets nerfed are pretty much irrelevant.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).
That's a whole separate discussion.
Kinda. I'm just pointing it out because if that combination IS in fact illegal, then points about whether or not that combination can get DEX to damage reliably if Dervish Dance gets nerfed are pretty much irrelevant.

Yes and no. Regardless of whether the archtype combo is legal and regardless if using Dervish Dance with Spell Combat works; there appears to be a fair portion of the PFS population that built characters under the honest belief that these two things were legal. And, unfortunately, this is not as easy to fix as just picking a different feat.

Scarab Sages 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).
That's a whole separate discussion.
Kinda. I'm just pointing it out because if that combination IS in fact illegal, then points about whether or not that combination can get DEX to damage reliably if Dervish Dance gets nerfed are pretty much irrelevant.
Yes and no. Regardless of whether the archtype combo is legal and regardless if using Dervish Dance with Spell Combat works; there appears to be a fair portion of the PFS population that built characters under the honest belief that these two things were legal. And, unfortunately, this is not as easy to fix as just picking a different feat.

You know, that's all fine though. It should be quite easy enough, when you realize something was built illegally, to get the permission to just modify your character to not only make it legal, but viable.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Tallow wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).
That's a whole separate discussion.
Kinda. I'm just pointing it out because if that combination IS in fact illegal, then points about whether or not that combination can get DEX to damage reliably if Dervish Dance gets nerfed are pretty much irrelevant.
Yes and no. Regardless of whether the archtype combo is legal and regardless if using Dervish Dance with Spell Combat works; there appears to be a fair portion of the PFS population that built characters under the honest belief that these two things were legal. And, unfortunately, this is not as easy to fix as just picking a different feat.
You know, that's all fine though. It should be quite easy enough, when you realize something was built illegally, to get the permission to just modify your character to not only make it legal, but viable.

It's fine if they clarify the legality of both of those. But until such time as they do, then the character isn't technically illegal and you can only rebuild characters that are illegal. Which means we are still stuck with the table variation problem.

5/5 Venture-Agent, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East aka Pirate Rob

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Bill Baldwin wrote:


It's fine if they clarify the legality of both of those. But until such time as they do, then the character isn't technically illegal and you can only rebuild characters that are illegal. Which means we are still stuck with the table variation problem.

Which brings us back around to the whole point of the thread.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Disk Elemental wrote:
Tallow wrote:

Sure... hyperbole away if you like. Anecdotal evidence at the table has shown me, at all levels, that the Magus (dex, str, black blade, whatever) is extremely strong and competent. I've seen several, all of them slightly different across the gamut of types of magi you can make. I have never heard arguments such as you are making.

Therefore, I can only conclude that your supposition that Maguses struggle is just wrong.

Yes, please, flippantly dismiss my point without engaging with it.

The fact the vast majority of Magi gravitate toward one specific weapon, speaks to a fundamental flaw within the class.

No that's a flaw with dexterity being almost the most useful stat in the game. Strength based magi are no less scary and having built two variations of similar builds they are both tanky and damaging.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Canada—Alberta—Grand Prairie aka DM Livgin

Ya, the bonus to initiative, reflex saves and skills make dexterity builds very tempting any time you can. Magus or otherwise.

Scarab Sages 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Tallow wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
The biggest issue is the popular Bladebound/Kensai combo. Both archetypes reduce spell reliance on damage for a greater reliance on weapon attacks and the combo has no way of getting Agile.
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).
That's a whole separate discussion.
Kinda. I'm just pointing it out because if that combination IS in fact illegal, then points about whether or not that combination can get DEX to damage reliably if Dervish Dance gets nerfed are pretty much irrelevant.
Yes and no. Regardless of whether the archtype combo is legal and regardless if using Dervish Dance with Spell Combat works; there appears to be a fair portion of the PFS population that built characters under the honest belief that these two things were legal. And, unfortunately, this is not as easy to fix as just picking a different feat.
You know, that's all fine though. It should be quite easy enough, when you realize something was built illegally, to get the permission to just modify your character to not only make it legal, but viable.
It's fine if they clarify the legality of both of those. But until such time as they do, then the character isn't technically illegal and you can only rebuild characters that are illegal. Which means we are still stuck with the table variation problem.

I'm not in a position to make these calls anymore. But I know when I was VC, if someone came to me with an issue of serious table variation based on several GM's claiming their entire character was illegal, that I'd sign off on a rebuild. My only two stipulations would be the character would need to be roughly the same character (class, and general build). So no changing to a Sorcerer or changing weapon type. But changing primary stat from Dex to Str, and removing an Archetype of choice would be fine.

Sometimes people need to liberally use common sense and empathy, instead of being so hard-nosed to what the rules say that they alienate and disenfranchise people. I get the irony that some people feel that clarifications or nerfing does exactly that.

But my point is, the volunteer leadership should be willing to help a player make their character playable at every table they sit down to, instead of making them deal with table variation.

One caveat, I absolutely would not allow the same character to have two different character sheets based on what a GM would or would not allow. If you insist on playing in the gray area, you must deal with the consequences that sometimes you either will play that character as less effective or play a different character.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Ward Davis wrote:
Ya, the bonus to initiative, reflex saves and skills make dexterity builds very tempting any time you can. Magus or otherwise.

True, turning a class that is seriously MAD into less MAD or even SAD is certainly ideal when building for power.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tallow wrote:
If you insist on playing in the gray area, you must deal with the consequences that sometimes you either will play that character as less effective or play a different character.

And what if the character wasn't in a gray area when you built it but became gray area after updates and FAQs?

You are assuming that people are deliberately building gray area characters. My experience with most people who have gray area characters is that they had no idea they were gray area when they built them.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Bill Baldwin wrote:
Tallow wrote:
If you insist on playing in the gray area, you must deal with the consequences that sometimes you either will play that character as less effective or play a different character.

And what if the character wasn't in a gray area when you built it but became gray area after updates and FAQs?

You are assuming that people are deliberately building gray area characters. My experience with most people who have gray area characters is that they had no idea they were gray area when they built them.

Just because the player didn't know it was a gray area, doesn't mean it wasn't a gray area. Obviously, as a VO, when dealing with situations like this, you try and figure out what the situation is before making any decisions one way or another. Ultimately, you try to be fair to the player and consider all issues. And this is where you use all the rest of my post that you omitted to cherry-pick this one line out of context.

Keep in mind, that being fair to the player, does not mean you let them play an illegal character. You just do your best to mitigate the angst and difficulty of rebuilding the character so they are legal.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Venture-Agent, Florida—Melbourne aka trollbill

Tallow wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Tallow wrote:
If you insist on playing in the gray area, you must deal with the consequences that sometimes you either will play that character as less effective or play a different character.

And what if the character wasn't in a gray area when you built it but became gray area after updates and FAQs?

You are assuming that people are deliberately building gray area characters. My experience with most people who have gray area characters is that they had no idea they were gray area when they built them.

Just because the player didn't know it was a gray area, doesn't mean it wasn't a gray area. Obviously, as a VO, when dealing with situations like this, you try and figure out what the situation is before making any decisions one way or another. Ultimately, you try to be fair to the player and consider all issues. And this is where you use all the rest of my post that you omitted to cherry-pick this one line out of context.

Keep in mind, that being fair to the player, does not mean you let them play an illegal character. You just do your best to mitigate the angst and difficulty of rebuilding the character so they are legal.

I didn't post the rest of it because I pretty much agreed with the rest of it. I pulled that one line out because it was the one concept I disagreed with because it was based on a false general assumption about the nature of gray area players.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Bill Baldwin wrote:
Tallow wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
Tallow wrote:
If you insist on playing in the gray area, you must deal with the consequences that sometimes you either will play that character as less effective or play a different character.

And what if the character wasn't in a gray area when you built it but became gray area after updates and FAQs?

You are assuming that people are deliberately building gray area characters. My experience with most people who have gray area characters is that they had no idea they were gray area when they built them.

Just because the player didn't know it was a gray area, doesn't mean it wasn't a gray area. Obviously, as a VO, when dealing with situations like this, you try and figure out what the situation is before making any decisions one way or another. Ultimately, you try to be fair to the player and consider all issues. And this is where you use all the rest of my post that you omitted to cherry-pick this one line out of context.

Keep in mind, that being fair to the player, does not mean you let them play an illegal character. You just do your best to mitigate the angst and difficulty of rebuilding the character so they are legal.

I didn't post the rest of it because I pretty much agreed with the rest of it. I pulled that one line out because it was the one concept I disagreed with because it was based on a false general assumption about the nature of gray area players.

well hopefully I've cleared up the misconception then.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, Nefreets apparently been out there with "the end is near" sandwich board since the magi came out but i don't think I'd seen any opposition to dervish dancing until after the FAQ.

3/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Boston Metro aka MadScientistWorking

Tallow wrote:
Ward Davis wrote:
Ya, the bonus to initiative, reflex saves and skills make dexterity builds very tempting any time you can. Magus or otherwise.
True, turning a class that is seriously MAD into less MAD or even SAD is certainly ideal when building for power.

I mean when I say scary I mean SAD magi in full plate at mid low tier. I don't know how well it works because your making concessions unless you GM credit baby a normal magus to 7th level but it's probably no less effective than my other builds.

Sovereign Court 1/5

Bill Baldwin wrote:
It's fine if they clarify the legality of both of those. But until such time as they do, then the character isn't technically illegal and you can only rebuild characters that are illegal. Which means we are still stuck with the table variation problem.

Well, as far as the Bladebound + Kensai thing goes, if that FAQ and the archetypes are being read correctly then it has been illegal since that archetype stacking FAQ came out.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

Wayne Bradbury wrote:
Bill Baldwin wrote:
It's fine if they clarify the legality of both of those. But until such time as they do, then the character isn't technically illegal and you can only rebuild characters that are illegal. Which means we are still stuck with the table variation problem.
Well, as far as the Bladebound + Kensai thing goes, if that FAQ and the archetypes are being read correctly then it has been illegal since that archetype stacking FAQ came out.

For which features overlapping?

4/5 Venture-Agent, Massachusetts—Southcoast aka JDDyslexia

This thread just further cements my position on not making a Magus, at least until all this crud gets worked out.

In the meantime, my "Magus" arcane trickster will be happy to not get caught up in all this rules wizardry.

Sovereign Court 1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
For which features overlapping?

This:

Wayne Bradbury wrote:
There seems to be an argument saying that Bladebound + Kensai is actually an illegal archetype combination, because Bladebound says you can't take the Familiar Arcana (which supposedly counts as modifying the Arcana feature as a whole) and Kensai replaces the 9th level Arcana (which you apparently can't do when another archetype modifies the feature itself).

Lantern Lodge

Since this thread is still going...

Just to be clear Dervish Dance working with spell combat is legal. The debate is if it should be right? I see some comments here about table variation and don’t think that can be a case here. The only argument for dervish dance not working is “other dex to damage abiliti s don’t work therefore dervish should not”. For there to be table variation it needs to be “within the wording of dervish dance there is some obscurity as to whether or not it works”

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
kaisc006 wrote:

Since this thread is still going...

Just to be clear Dervish Dance working with spell combat is legal.

No. It is not.

It is Schrodinger's legal.

You cannot have a weapon in your off hand when you dervish dance.

A magus flurrying magus is two weapon fighting with the spell counting as a weapon in the off hand.

You have a weapon in your off hand

you cannot dervish dance.

You can argue against that if you want but a lot of people find the arguments less than convincing and will rule accordingly.

There seems to be a near even split on this one and denying that there is table variation or an argument other than slashing grace not only does not make it so, but makes it seem like either you're not paying attention or you're trying to avoid the debate entirely by declaring victory. The more people keep using that tactic the less point i think they have.

Lantern Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So when I use spell combat and have the two weapon defense feat, I gain +1 AC?

Two-weapon rend works with spell combat?

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

kaisc006 wrote:

So when I use spell combat and have the two weapon defense feat, I gain +1 AC?

Two-weapon rend works with spell combat?

You can try to find inconsistencies if you want it won't help. I have no problem with those two working. Having a little trouble visualizing how two weapon rend would work but the image of parrying someone's sword off an electrified hand seems pretty cool.

A protracted argument does nothing to invalidate the idea that there is an argument.

Lantern Lodge

Nowhere is spell combat reclassifying the spell as a weapon. It is saying it works like two weapon fighting except you replace the weapon with a spell. MeanIng there is no weapon, there is a spell.

5/5 ⦵⦵⦵

2 people marked this as a favorite.
kaisc006 wrote:
Nowhere is spell combat reclassifying the spell as a weapon. It is saying it works like two weapon fighting except you replace the weapon with a spell. MeanIng there is no weapon, there is a spell.

This functions much like two-weapon fighting, but the off-hand weapon is a spell that is being cast.

Thats an off hand weapon. Point blank. Using your meaning to write your own words which show your meaning is not an argument. the word replace does not appear on the magus page at all , so why are you bolding it?

You are not ending table variation with this line of reasoning. You can try to argue that it's like two weapon fighting but its not like two weapon fighting in this way but that is a level of subjectivity that breeds table variation.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
There seems to be a near even split on this one and denying that there is table variation or an argument other than slashing grace not only does not make it so, but makes it seem like either you're not paying attention or you're trying to avoid the debate entirely by declaring victory.

Near even? The votes in my quick poll in this thread are currently 22 to 1 that it is legal by RAW. Are there actually a lot of people who think it's illegal, or just three or four people who say it a lot?

Grand Lodge

Matthew Downie wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
There seems to be a near even split on this one and denying that there is table variation or an argument other than slashing grace not only does not make it so, but makes it seem like either you're not paying attention or you're trying to avoid the debate entirely by declaring victory.
Near even? The votes in my quick poll in this thread are currently 22 to 1 that it is legal by RAW. Are there actually a lot of people who think it's illegal, or just three or four people who say it a lot?

As much as I believe it's a small but vocal minority of people, you can't use a poll in a messageboard conducted by favoriting as proof of that. Not even close to valid stats.

As a sidenote, I've got a question for those of you claiming it doesn't work. Would you let feats such as Two-Weapon Defense and Two-Weapon Rend work with spellcombat at your table? If not it seems like the argument of "it works like TWFing and thus the spell counts as wielding a weapon" is be being applied spottily.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Nefreet and BNW definitely win for most biased arguments!

Sczarni 5/5 ⦵⦵

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
karlbadmannersV2 wrote:
Nefreet and BNW definitely win for most biased arguments!

*headscratch*

How so?

1/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

A huge majority of people either believe it should work or don't care either way. I feel as though the minority that adamantly object do so for reasons other than rules clarity or game design.

When you actually do the math, a Dex-to-damage build deals significantly less damage (as it should) than a Strength build as long as it does not reap the benefits of two-handing. I played several magi and ran a campaign at all levels of play with a mixture of Strength and Dexterity characters (including a magus I allowed to finesse a katana). Many discussions go into detail about this. It's not overpowering.

The only "problem" with Dervish Dance is that there's a large number of magi that use it. However, that's a symptom of the game severely lacking options for Dexterity-based characters.

Silver Crusade 5/5

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jurassic Pratt wrote:

As much as I believe it's a small but vocal minority of people, you can't use a poll in a messageboard conducted by favoriting as proof of that. Not even close to valid stats.

Yeah, the messageboard polls are pretty much totally irrelevant. To the extent that they measure ANYTHING they measure how much people care, not what their opinions are. For example, I didn't take the poll but I believe that the legality is unclear. I just don't actually CARE that much one way or the other.

Also, the argument is REALLY silly. One side is "it is totally clear that it is legal". The other side is "Its really not clear.".

The people saying that it is NOT clear ARE right. BNW and Nefreet are reasonable people, if reasonable people say that it is NOT clear then it IS NOT CLEAR.

Silver Crusade 3/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Online—PbP aka Redelia

No, actually, there are three main opinions.
A. It's clear this combination is legal
B. It's not clear if this combination is legal
C. It's clear this is not legal.

Personally, I believe that A is the correct answer, but from the fact that reasonable posters (Big Norse Wolf and Nefreet) are arguing for C, I can only conclude that the truth is B.

Scarab Sages 5/5

Christine Bussman wrote:

No, actually, there are three main opinions.

A. It's clear this combination is legal
B. It's not clear if this combination is legal
C. It's clear this is not legal.

Personally, I believe that A is the correct answer, but from the fact that reasonable posters (Big Norse Wolf and Nefreet) are arguing for C, I can only conclude that the truth is B.

Ooh, somewhere in the middle!

2/5

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I'm still playing around with various ideas for my potential GM-baby magus, and here's my latest:

Michael Flatley al Cheese, Lord of the Dervish Dance - He's an elf from the Mordant Spire (they're really Irish). Disgusted with the elven deities lack of support for dex-to-damage magus builds, MF moved to Qadira, started worshipping Sarenrae, picked up the Qadiran name "al Cheese," and become a dervish dancer, styling himself as the "Lord of the Dervish Dance." His dervish dance style is based on THIS.

251 to 300 of 593 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / So what are we doing about Dervish Dance? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.