Versatile Performance ambiguity


Classes


Versatile Performance seems ambiguous in a couple of regards.

Can it be used outside of "social situations"? If not, then is the Demoralize function not rather limited? Let us set aside the balance point of Demoralize for another thread.

Does Virtuosic Performer apply to Versatile Performance, or does it not? What about Virtuosic Performer (acting) specifically?

Silver Crusade

Colette Brunel wrote:

Versatile Performance seems ambiguous in a couple of regards.

Can it be used outside of "social situations"? If not, then is the Demoralize function not rather limited? Let us set aside the balance point of Demoralize for another thread.

Does Virtuosic Performer apply to Versatile Performance, or does it not? What about Virtuosic Performer (acting) specifically?

Demoralize is actually very useful in social situations (at least, it was in PF1). Lots and lots of modules, PFS scenarios, etc let you "win" via demoralize


I believe the whole "In social situations, you can rely on the grandeur of your performances rather than ordinary social skills" is just vanilla text. I'm assuming this for two reasons= 1) I made a thread on Versatile Performance mentioning demoralize in battle, and no one corrected me but more importantly 2) this thread Optimization tools and tricks for assorted classes

Xenocrat mentions using both items and Virtuosic Performance in tandem with Versatile Performance to max out Demoralize, including in what would be considered non-social situations. Particularly Mark Seifter {Designer} responded to the comment, pointing out a small error in how creatures DC's worked, but otherwise stated everything else was accurate.

As for how Virtuosic Performer actually applies Versatile Performance, I do believe you get the bonus, as long using the particular Performance you choose with the feat. For example with Performance [Acting] you may be able to get the bonus with Demoralize if you start reciting a Dramatic monolog about the emptiness of death, and that nothing awaits for you after you go, but you would not get the bonus if you simply yelled at the creature.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Combat, as an interaction between human beings, is always a social situation.

Silver Crusade

I know that I'm in the minority but I believe that the current rules aren't actually ambiguous. "In social situations" doesn't mean "in combat". It really doesn't.

I think that Paizo should take out totally meaningless phrases (if the majority is correct, that phrase has absolutely NO meaning). I know that it is quaint and naive but some of us think that Paizo may, just may, actually be using the English language correctly (examples like Bolstered and Inflammable notwithstanding). Or, at least, believe that it would make things easier to understand if they DID use the English language correctly :-) :-).


I don't mind the vanilla text in things. It can add guidance and visualization to these abilities, and point of refences of how it works from a RP view.

What I do mind is there is no separation between the vanilla text and what it actually does. {not just for this but or other things as well}, which causes the confusion. I would love to have a format where the you have a small vanilla text to help with RP followed by Effect= what it actually does. Just a small and clear separation between the two to avoid confusions like this.

Silver Crusade

Siro wrote:
Just a small and clear separation between the two to avoid confusions like this.

4th Edition had this. IIRC it wasn't well received in general. The problem being, of course, that the flavour and rules often didn't match all that well (Especially after the inevitable errata changed half the Core rulebook).

My solution is simpler. All the words mean what they actually say, or at least try really hard to. And phrases that have NO meaning should be dropped.

Not in some "you must carefully parse everything really, really carefully way" but in the exact opposite sense. The words mean what they obviously mean on a quick reading. Just about any native English speaker is going to read "In social situations" as meaning that it does not apply to combat.

Note - this problem is hardly isolated to PF2. See thousands of PF1 threads arguing over which words are flavour text and which aren't.


pauljathome wrote:
Siro wrote:
Just a small and clear separation between the two to avoid confusions like this.

4th Edition had this. IIRC it wasn't well received in general. The problem being, of course, that the flavour and rules often didn't match all that well (Especially after the inevitable errata changed half the Core rulebook).

My solution is simpler. All the words mean what they actually say, or at least try really hard to. And phrases that have NO meaning should be dropped.

Not in some "you must carefully parse everything really, really carefully way" but in the exact opposite sense. The words mean what they obviously mean on a quick reading. Just about any native English speaker is going to read "In social situations" as meaning that it does not apply to combat.

Anyone who has ever witnessed a high school fight or read any Clausewitz, on the other hand, knows that combat at both extremes of the spectrum is always a social situation.


I'd be happy with italicized flavor text on its own line, like a magic card. No question whatsoever about what is flavor and what is actual rules.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree, the CLEAREST anwser is no text that isn't relavant to the ability. However, like Fuzzypaws, I will absolutely accept "italicized text" or some other clear indicator that something is not rules text. This is an issue we have in PF1 so I'd really like it to be resolved in this version if at all possible.

And if we're using some type of indicator, the book MUST IDENTIFY THAT INDICATOR AS "THIS IS THE RULES, ANYTHING NOT THIS IS NOT THE RULES"!

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / Versatile Performance ambiguity All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Classes