Does taking the feat Shatter Defenses require a character to select only one weapon that can be used with the feat itself?
Prerequisites: Weapon Focus, Dazzling Display, base attack bonus +6, proficiency with weapon.
Benefit: Any shaken, frightened, or panicked opponent hit by you this round is flat-footed to your attacks until the end of your next turn. This includes any additional attacks you make this round.
The first line in the feat starts with “Your skill with your chosen weapon” and “chosen weapon” is not referenced in the benefit section of the feat. Is the beginning part of the feat’s text just for narrative purposes or is it a rule that is meant to be obeyed?
If that quote is just for narrative purposes, how does that work for characters that have taken the feat? Can they only use weapons with which they have taken weapon focus to Shatter Defenses or can they use any weapon with the feat?
Also, does this work the same for Rangers/Slayers that take the feat using the Ranger Combat Style (Menacing) class feature? They do not need to meet the prerequisites for the feat (and may not have any of them), so can a Ranger/Slayer use any weapon with Shatter Defenses acquired this way or do they have to choose only one weapon when the feat is taken?
it mean the weapon you picked for the weapon focus feat that is in the feat's requirements. ("Prerequisites: Weapon Focus, Dazzling Display, base attack bonus +6, proficiency with weapon.")
if you bypass the requirement (like a scale fist monk getting it from his bonus feats) then i guess you need to pick a weapon as if you had weapon focus when you take this feat or something. ask your GM in that case.
shatter defenses is a feat that follow up dazzling display (and as such has it as a requirement) if you read that feat you'll see:
Prerequisite: Weapon Focus, proficiency with the selected weapon. Benefit: While wielding the weapon in which you have Weapon Focus, you can perform a bewildering show of prowess as a full-round action. Make an Intimidate check to demoralize all foes within 30 feet who can see your display.
Your skill with your favored weapon can frighten enemies.
the writer probably didn't think you can pick one before the other, so in the later he didn't bother explaining about the weapon which is explained in the previous feat.
That 'first line' is what the CRB calls "a basic description of what the feat does." For almost all feats, it has absolutely no bearing on what the feat does, and is pure fluff. For some CRB feats copy-pasted from 3.5 there is important instructions in that line, because 3.x was written on drugs.
Weapon Focus is such a feat, you can see that the benefits section says "the selected weapon", and it's the descriptive text (or as 3.5 put it "Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language.") that tells you to "Choose one type of weapon."
Dazzling Display is not such a feat - it's not from 3.x, and its benefits section doesn't reference anything else. And unlike e.g. Weapon Focus, the descriptive text does not contain a call to action.
Using the descriptive text as rule text is the exception and not the norm in how the game is written, and thus we should treat it as a non-default, too. Which emans unless unless something makes us look for missing rule text, we should treat the descriptive text as fluff.
That 'first line' is what the CRB calls "a basic description of what the feat does." For almost all feats, it has absolutely no bearing on what the feat does, and is pure fluff. For some CRB feats copy-pasted from 3.5 there is important instructions in that line, because 3.x was written on drugs.
Weapon Focus is such a feat, you can see that the benefits section says "the selected weapon", and it's the descriptive text (or as 3.5 put it "Description of what the feat does or represents in plain language.") that tells you to "Choose one type of weapon."
Dazzling Display is not such a feat - it's not from 3.x, and its benefits section doesn't reference anything else. And unlike e.g. Weapon Focus, the descriptive text does not contain a call to action.Using the descriptive text as rule text is the exception and not the norm in how the game is written, and thus we should treat it as a non-default, too. Which emans unless unless something makes us look for missing rule text, we should treat the descriptive text as fluff.
which is why i posted the feat earlier down the line that explain in the non fluff part what IS the chosen weapon. i even made that part bold.
Maybe instead of trying to sound smart, you should have more carefully read what others are writing. Purple Worm already understood that the "chosen weapon" refered to Weapon Focus' selection, that's not at all what the opening post was about. Your first paragraph didn't answer any of the OP's questions, and the second one was a guess that self-admittedly had nothing to do with any written rule.
Also, it's funny that you act all smug about formatting the text, all the while you're apparently too lazy to use capitalization. Every post you make without even trying to use proper capitalization is basically a big sing saying "I want others to look in awe at how much I know, but I'm not interested enough to actually help people that I care about making my posts readable".
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
@ Purple Worm I'd say yes as a GM, but the feat does seem to make it open to interpretation. Sadly we're getting no more FAQ or rules clarifications from Paizo proper. (please correct me if I'm wrong)
@ zza ni I understand (and agree) with the logic that Shatter defenses should be one weapon only. The argument could be made, however, that the Shatter Defenses feat applies to all weapons since it doesn't mention a particular weapon.
@Derklord I'm not understanding what you are trying to communicate. Ironic since zza ni's argument is clear, and a reasonable decision of RAI.
Thank you everyone for your responses. Let me see if I can sum this all up:
1. The basic description of a feat is not meant to be used as rule for how a feat functions.
2. Acquiring the Shatter Defenses feat normally (i.e., obtaining all prerequisites first) would then allow only weapons with which a character has Weapon Focus to be used to Shatter Defenses. This is determined by considering the whole feat chain and the Shatter Defenses feat prerequisites and not just the feat benefit itself.
3. This leaves procuring the Shatter Defenses feat without first gaining all of the prerequisites (like a Ranger/Slayer/Scaled Fist Monk/etc. is able to do). If a character doesn’t have Weapon Focus with any weapons, and/or Dazzling Display, then how many weapons can be used to Shatter Defenses? If #1 above is true, then reading only the benefit section of the Shatter Defenses feat would seem to indicate that any weapon could be used with this feat. That would be a RAW reading of the Shatter Defenses feat benefit itself without considering any of the prerequisites or feat chains involved with this feat.
Does all of this sound like a proper interpretation of the rules and this feat?
this happen when you skip requirements. some feats. mainly style feats have things in the follow up feats like "when in x style you can do\get this and that" but if you get the following feat without the base style feat then they are meaningless since you can not enter the style and thus gain no benefit from the feat.
here you need a chosen weapon. which is explained in a previous feat exactly what it is. without dazzling display you have no way to pick a 'chosen weapon' (at least not for this feat) and thus make this feat unusable. at least by raw, which is why i explained that i would let you pick a weapon as if you had weapon focus and dazzling display and use that as the chosen weapon. after all you DID had an ability to skip the requirements meaning that in some way it should cover for it. but that is just my personal opinion. other GM might just rule in favor of the raw saying the reason this is a feat chain is that the previous feats are a tax to get the awesome power of the last tier feat and skipping it would just not be the same as getting it the way it was supposed to go.
There are two interpretations.
Interpretation A has the descriptive text as non-rule text, in which case it doesn't do anything, and you can use Shatter Defenses with all weapons no matter what.
Interpretation B has the descriptive text as rule text, in which case Shatter Defenses only ever works with some previously selected feat, and if you've never done that because you've skiped the prereqs, you can't use the feat.
To quote myself: I usually apply somethat similar to Occam's Razor in those situations: If you have two interpretations, one of which has everything nicely governed by rules and in line with other options, and the other has a ton of unclear or nonsensical interactions, or otherwise breaks the game, the first interpretation should always be considered the correct one.