I'm looking into building a dervish of dawn that is both good at casting and melee. I know it's not optimal, but I really like gish builds. Here's the idea:
- DEX/CHA as high as possible
- +DEX/+CHA Race (Dual talented human or Ifrit for example)
- Scaled Fist 1/Dervish of Dawn X to profit from the high CHA
- Piranha Strike, Spell Focus(?), Greater Spell Focus(?), [...], Improved Critical.
- Might be played in a lvl 3 to ~15ish campaign
What I would like to know is: How flawed is that build? Do you have any suggestions regarding feats/traits or anything else to make it better ?
I don't see what real benefit you get out of Scaled Fist when armour will suffice.
A pure Dervish of Dawn Bard is probably stronger.
If you're allowed to go Aasimar, I would go with an Azata for the +2Dex/Cha rather than going for a human. You're trading out all the benefits of being a human for dual talented, and Azata will give you all of that and Glitterdust as an SLA and +2 Perform/Diplomacy.
Since you're going Scaled Fist1, you could consider the Crane Style feats. You'll be wanting to fight with an empty hand so you can cast anyway, so this is a big boost to defense for small investment.
I would also consider Desperate Resolve for a Trait; losing spells at clutch times can = death or dismemberment, and as a melee-focused spellcaster, you will most certainly be casting spells in these circumstances.
Desperate ResolveYou are adept at casting spells even in the most precarious situations.
Benefit: You gain a +1 trait bonus on concentration checks. This trait bonus increases to + 4 when you are grappled, pinned, in violent weather, or entangled.
I don't see what real benefit you get out of Scaled Fist when armour will suffice.
A pure Dervish of Dawn Bard is probably stronger.
You're probably right, I tend to dip 1 lvl of monk in every widsom/charisma build I make without thinking. I'm open to suggestions for a pure dervish of dawn (armored) build.
Since you're going Scaled Fist1, you could consider the Crane Style feats. You'll be wanting to fight with an empty hand so you can cast anyway, so this is a big boost to defense for small investment.
I considered it, but i'm not a fan of the fact that you can't get the AC bonus unless you've attacked someone this round.
Also, what school would you recommend for this kind of build? From what I've seen the bard's strongest schools are enchantement and conjuration, but I dont know what to focus on...
Also, what school would you recommend for this kind of build? From what I've seen the bard's strongest schools are enchantement and conjuration, but I dont know what to focus on...
Bards aren't great at spells that you need the enemy to fail their save for. You are mainly going to be buffing up before a fight and going that way. Quicken Magic later on will be good for you.
Do you really want to use a Scimitar? I always thought some sort of AoO focused build will be good for them, to get even more benefit from their performance
Do you really want to use a Scimitar? I always thought some sort of AoO focused build will be good for them, to get even more benefit from their performance
The free Dervish Dance feat is what got me interested in the archetype so I need to used a scimitar
As your build seems to be based more around mechanics than flavor, may I suggest something with differently flavored, but mechanically very similar in actual play? Archaeologist Bard with the Divine Fighting Technique feat for Desna's Shooting Star allows you to fully focus on charisma, which is huge for your spellcasting. The Varisian Tattoo trait (the other trait should be Fate's Favored) could take care of proficiency, and you can even get bonus feats via Rogue Talents.
|
Halfling is the race you're looking for: small size has very little downside for +1 to hit and +1 AC.
I prefer pure Dawnflower Dervish, aiming eventually for Celestial Armor (+9 Armor Bonus, +8 max dex).
Halfling 20 point buy (after racials):
Str 8
Dex 18
Con 14
Int 12
Wis 8
Cha 16
Alternate racial trait: Fleet of Foot
Traits: Irrepressible, one other
Feats:
1. Toughness
3. Arcane Strike
5. Improved Initiative
|
As your build seems to be based more around mechanics than flavor, may I suggest something with differently flavored, but mechanically very similar in actual play? Archaeologist Bard with the Divine Fighting Technique feat for Desna's Shooting Star allows you to fully focus on charisma, which is huge for your spellcasting. The Varisian Tattoo trait (the other trait should be Fate's Favored) could take care of proficiency, and you can even get bonus feats via Rogue Talents.
Keep in mind that Desna's Shooting Star is pretty much the only divine fighting technique that was not PFS legal (it's just too good for it's low cost), so many tables won't allow it....
Since you're going Scaled Fist1, you could consider the Crane Style feats. You'll be wanting to fight with an empty hand so you can cast anyway, so this is a big boost to defense for small investment.I considered it, but i'm not a fan of the fact that you can't get the AC bonus unless you've attacked someone this round.
Also, what school would you recommend for this kind of build? From what I've seen the bard's strongest schools are enchantement and conjuration, but I dont know what to focus on...
Enchantment has all kinds of cool stuff, but Conjuration has Glitterdust and AoE blind pwns. So it's up to you.
As your build seems to be based more around mechanics than flavor, may I suggest something with differently flavored, but mechanically very similar in actual play? Archaeologist Bard with the Divine Fighting Technique feat for Desna's Shooting Star allows you to fully focus on charisma, which is huge for your spellcasting. The Varisian Tattoo trait (the other trait should be Fate's Favored) could take care of proficiency, and you can even get bonus feats via Rogue Talents.
Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).
I think the Bloodrager would probably be out-damaging him now at level 12 , but the Archaeologist is definitely a strong combat archetype.
Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).
I'm suprised to hear that. The main concern I have about my build is the lack of damage, which would only be 1d6+dex+piranha strike.
Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).I'm suprised to hear that. The main concern I have about my build is the lack of damage, which would only be 1d6+dex+piranha strike.
So a couple of things worth noting. Archaeologist works espeically well with the FATE'S FAVOURED trait, and with the LINGERING PERFORMANCE feat. This seems a bit power-game-y, but I've seen a post by the person who wrote the archetype saying they knew about these options and expected them to be used . This means he was spending a swift action every 3 rounds to get +3 to hit and damage, which is more than Rage gives at the same level .
Also, I think he was STR-based who was 2-handing his weapon and using Power Attack. Assuming a +4 in your attack stat, that's +4 damage per hit compared to your DEX-based Piranha Strike build.
It's also worth noting that we had a regular Bard in the party as well, so this guy was getting enough bonuses from Heroism, Inspire Courage and Archaeologist's Luck that he wasn't really having any trouble hitting. It's possible he would have struggled a bit more without the Bard, but my Bloodrager would have as well so I don't think that made the difference.
Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).I'm suprised to hear that. The main concern I have about my build is the lack of damage, which would only be 1d6+dex+piranha strike.
A bloodrager is supposed to be significantly better at damage. A Bard has significantly better casting and significantly better skills to offset that. If you want to compete with a Bloodrager for personal damage, you shouldn't play a Bard, least of all one that wants better casting than normal.
To be clear, Desna's Shooting Star actually makes the martial side worse (compared to a str-based build, not compared to dex-based), but it makes the casting a lot stronger. Indeed, it's pretty much the only way for a gish to use saving throw spells.
Keep in mind that Desna's Shooting Star is pretty much the only divine fighting technique that was not PFS legal (...), so many tables won't allow it....
I'd expect groups that slave themself to PFS legality to use AoN, not d20pfsrd.
it's just too good for it's low cost
Paladin can't stack Smite's attack roll bonus on top of it.
Skald wouldn't gain the Inspired Rage bonus on it.
Eldritch Scion Magus wants a high threat range weapon.
Sacred Fist Monk needs 5 feats to make it work.
The only Cha-Cleric archetype demands a different deity.
Bards and Oracles usually want a reach weapon.
Yes, it's nice on a Wyrm Singer Skald or Archaeologist Bard, but I don't really see those warping the game (action economy is a thing). It's even useful for a thrown build, but those suck enough already.
Yes, Oracles can get Charisma to Init, AC, Reflex save, attack roll, and damage roll. Yeah, that looks impressive... until you realize they're two to three feats down, have to use a low damage weapon without reach, are locked into a mystery with no support for a martial playstyle, don't have the feats for throwing, don't have the ability scores for TWF or even Power Attack, and have no class features apart from spells to boost their accuracy or damage.
Dex to damage is highly sought after because Dex already does so many good things for free. Sure, with Con it would be ridiculously OP. With Wis, it would be very strong, probably even with Int. But Charisma is everyone's favourite dump stat for a reason: Because it almost grant's nothing.
Seriously, one stat to attack and damage is already possible with low investment - and you can use weapons with higher base damage, easy two-handing, and other stuff like reach!
The same-stat-for-attack-and-damage thing is ok for strength because it only really affects a few skills. Hey look, that's true for Charisma as well - wow, almost as if the writer put some thought into this!
It's important to remember that we aren't talking about Cha-to-attack-and-damage with any weapon, but with a light non-reach weapon with low damage and crappy crit stats.
A bloodrager is supposed to be significantly better at damage. A Bard has significantly better casting and significantly better skills to offset that. If you want to compete with a Bloodrager for personal damage, you shouldn't play a Bard, least of all one that wants better casting than normal.Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).I'm suprised to hear that. The main concern I have about my build is the lack of damage, which would only be 1d6+dex+piranha strike.
Oh yeah I should probably point out that this Bloodrager has spent most of his wealth and feats on defensive items. He's been the only front-line character in the party for most of the campaign, and he's a Strength-based character in a campaign where most weapons target Touch-AC. At level 12 I've got a +1 weapon and a +2 STR belt, and that's basically it for my offensive items. I hit like a truck, but without the Bard I hit ~40% of my attacks . When fully buffed by the team my poorly-optimized Bloodrager is a murder machine, but without the buffs he's mostly just a damage sponge.
I don't think the Archaeologist would have kept up with the Bloodrager till level 12, but he has the advantage that he can throw on his own buffs a lot more easily. Archaeologists end up as fragile-but-pretty-good combatants, plus they have good spells and a ton of skill-points.
|
|
Just gonna put it out there, we had an Archaeologist in our Iron Gods game for a little bit and he was pretty easily out-damaging my Bloodrager (at level ~6 i think).I'm suprised to hear that. The main concern I have about my build is the lack of damage, which would only be 1d6+dex+piranha strike.A bloodrager is supposed to be significantly better at damage. A Bard has significantly better casting and significantly better skills to offset that. If you want to compete with a Bloodrager for personal damage, you shouldn't play a Bard, least of all one that wants better casting than normal.
To be clear, Desna's Shooting Star actually makes the martial side worse (compared to a str-based build, not compared to dex-based), but it makes the casting a lot stronger. Indeed, it's pretty much the only way for a gish to use saving throw spells.
Keep in mind that Desna's Shooting Star is pretty much the only divine fighting technique that was not PFS legal (...), so many tables won't allow it....I'd expect groups that slave themself to PFS legality to use AoN, not d20pfsrd.
it's just too good for it's low cost** spoiler omitted **...
I'm sorry, did you just say that 'it makes the casting a lot stronger' and then argue it's not that good?
The problem with this technique is that it takes a caster and makes them a decent melee combatant for the cost of a single feat (with basically no pre-req) - or - a single versatile performance: A 1d4 weapon might not be the most impressive, but the weapon die size tends to become insignificant over time as your damage bonuses increase.
For a baseline CG bard with an emphasis on casting, performance, and/or social skills, this technique is pretty much a 'no brainer' given their limited number of spell slots.
This isn't the technique you take if you want to dominate martial combat: It's the technique to take if you want to dominate casting and social encounters without sacrificing martial combat.
I think what Derklord was saying is that it won't make you an especially good combat character. It's a good way to get some combat abilities on a caster, but it's not great if you want to focus on combat as your main schtick.
One problem I see is that Piranha Strike does not work with a scimitar. Piranha Strike works with light weapons which the scimitar is not. You need Power Attack instead which requires a 13 STR.
The Archeologist Bard can be very effective in combat if built properly. The Key is Lingering performance, Heroism and understanding what your spells are supposed to accomplish. Since you are a combat focused character you don’t have the points to boost both DEX and CHA and have your other stats at the level they need to be. If you accept that your spell casting is going to focus on buff and utility spells you can be a very effective character. If you try and be a strong at both combat and offensive spell casting you will not be good at either.
What makes the build effective is the synergy between the archeologist luck, and Heroism. Fates favored gives boost the archeologist luck up and when combined with Heroism you have a large bonus to just about everything. Combine this with Fencing Grace and a good DEX and you have a better chance to hit than just about any character. Those same bonuses also apply to saving throws and skills. Lingering Performance is basically a feat tax for the archetype. At higher level you may want to spend a feat on extra performance. Keep in mind that you are effectively getting 18 extra rounds for the feat not 6.
Don’t try and max out both your CHA and DEX you simply cannot do it. If you want to focus on casting offensive spells than accept that you are not going to be a strong in combat without spells. If you want to be strong in combat you are not going to be good at offensive spells. If you avoid spells that allow a saving throw and focus on spells that boost you or utility spells your CHA only needs to be high enough to cast the spells. I am not saying to ignore CHA, but rather to prioritize DEX. In all honesty this is where the bards spell list really shines. Being a 6th level caster they get early access to some spells which seems good, but it also lowers the DC of the saving throw making them easier to resist.
For spells pick those that boost your abilities or allow you do something you normally can’t do. So now you are not just a DEX based combatant. You are a DEX based combatant who can turn invisible, teleport and become mists and dispels the magical traps you cannot disarm.
I'm sorry, did you just say that 'it makes the casting a lot stronger' and then argue it's not that good?
No, I said that 'it makes the casting a lot stronger' and then argued it's not too good.
The problem with this technique is that it takes a caster and makes them a decent melee combatant for the cost of a single feat (with basically no pre-req
You say this was a problem... but you don't say why.
Casters are already better than melees. You seem to think that adding martial prowess to that makes them even more likely to outshine martials, but it doesn't work that way. As you said, DSS makes you decent at melee. Any caster who wants to be good at it has to invest into it, and that means spending recources (money, spell slots, etc.) on something other than dominating encounters with their spells. And every turn spend in melee is a turn not spend casting a spell.
In practise, a caster with DSS has weaker casting than a caster build without it, and spends less time dominating with spells. This means the caster-martial disparity actually lessens with DSS.
For a baseline CG bard with an emphasis on casting, performance, and/or social skills, this technique is pretty much a 'no brainer' given their limited number of spell slots.
True. But another statement where you don't say why that's supposed to be a problem. Indeed, I say it's a good thing - since such a build is very weak without DSS, the feat increases build diversity.
In order for a feat (or other rule option) to be "too good", it needs to have a negative impact. Where is this negative impact? I don't see it. Pathfinder isn't a competitive game, so you don't have to use it even on the few builds that do really profit from it (e.g. a caster-focussed Bard). I don't see any characters being outclassed by it that wouldn't have been outclassed regardlessly (for example a skill-focussed Rogue would be outclassed by a DSS Bard... but they would be outclassed by a dex- or str-based Bard just as well). It's a rather niche feat as I've shown in my last post, so nothing that reduces build diversity by taking up space on every other build (unlike for example Leadership or Sacred Geometry).
Oh yeah I should probably point out that this Bloodrager has spent most of his wealth and feats on defensive items.
That's pretty much off-set by the presence of the second Bard, which boosts the Bloodrager more than the Archaeologist. The defensive focus even strengthens this effect, as it prevents being overhitcapped.