Slashing Grace and "otherwise occupied"


Rules Questions

201 to 224 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

I don't understand why everyone keeps saying that Slashing Grace COSTS 3 feats. It TAKES 3 feats - but the other two are already useful in their own right.

People took Weapon Finesse before Slashing Grace existed.

Weapon Focus is a very solid feat which virtually every martial I've every played takes by 5ish.

Slashing Grace COSTS 1 feat.

I have taken Focus on virtually EVERY character I have made that uses weapons...

Sure, it's only +1 to hit, but it is most useful at level one, and is a prereq for LOTS of stuff.


Oh wow. A FAQ hit. Well, at least we have some clarification.

...what if you take Slashing Grace for more than one natural weapon? Like if you take it for Claw and for Bite?


You can't take a feat more than once unless the wording of the feat specifies that you can. Take a look at Weapon Focus as an example.

Slashing Grace does not have that caveat.

But if you take it for claws, you should be able to use it with both claws. Assuming you have two and not one (I'm not sure there is an option that gives only 1 claw but there might be).


Hm. What if you have Feral Combat Training for your claws then?

Scarab Sages

No but you can be a human or human enough to take feats, take Martial Versatility for Weapon Focus in one natural weapon, and then Martial Versatility for Slashing Grace in the same natural weapon, and now you have slashing grace on all natural weapons.

I'm pretty sure it doesn't work if you attack with more than one of them, but you can have slashing grace on multiple weapons this way.

Scarab Sages

Lune wrote:
Hm. What if you have Feral Combat Training for your claws then?

Feral Combat Training doesn't actually give you the ability to take normal iterative attacks with a natural weapon. It give you the ability to use a natural weapon in a flurry of blows only. Normally this wouldn't matter, but because a flurry is specifically excluded from slashing grace, this shuts down iterative attacks.

Designer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I can confirm, through my conversation with the PDT about natural weapons in the wording of the FAQ, that the FAQ's use of the singular "weapon" in "Attacking with natural weapons beyond the weapon you chose for Slashing Grace also does not work" means that you pick one claw, even if you are an eidolon with eight claws, etc, as Imbicatus surmises. If you use something to make iteratives all with the same claw, as Lune suggested, then that works, though FCT doesn't seem to work for that.


Crap. Your right.

edit: Wait, ninja'd by a designer. Grim.
So what?... you only pick a single claw? Like if you have claws on both your left hand and your right hand you have to pick "right hand claw"?

Well, I guess that is good news for those who want to use Feral Combat Training but bad news for those who just want to use their two claws from say a natural attacking Ranger.


Claxon wrote:

You can't take a feat more than once unless the wording of the feat specifies that you can. Take a look at Weapon Focus as an example.

Slashing Grace does not have that caveat.

But if you take it for claws, you should be able to use it with both claws. Assuming you have two and not one (I'm not sure there is an option that gives only 1 claw but there might be).

By reading a certain part of the rules it seems that a character can take any feat multiple times but it is useless unless specified otherwise by the feat


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

I don't think i'll ever use slashing grace again, i'm sorry, but i'm not interested in characters with light weapons or ones that need to waste a hand to get below decent damage.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Lune wrote:

Crap. Your right.

edit: Wait, ninja'd by a designer. Grim.
So what?... you only pick a single claw? Like if you have claws on both your left hand and your right hand you have to pick "right hand claw"?

Well, I guess that is good news for those who want to use Feral Combat Training but bad news for those who just want to use their two claws from say a natural attacking Ranger.

Feral combat training doesn't allow you to make iterative, it allows you to flurry, which is specifically called out as no good.

Scarab Sages

The only ways I can think of to use Slashing Grace with a natural weapon more than once in a full attack action is to have a Haste effect up, be a ninja and use a ki point for an extra attack, or be a ninth level Animal Companion/Eidolon with with only 1 natural weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.


Slashing Grace has been out what, 6 months maybe? And it wasn't that great from the start. I mean seriously are we really upset because a bad feat is still bad?

Dervish Dance has always been a ridiculously good choice, go back a couple of years and you'll see I was saying the same thing then. DEX to hit and Damage is POWERFUL and should be costly, but to see that you have to look at more than just damage. No builds are invalidated by this change, it will just cost more to make the build. There is still Agile that you can out on a weapon or an AoMF. We haven't lost anything we had 6 months ago (or however long ago Slashing Grace came out).

Scarab Sages

Actually, there is a specific natural weapon build that this kills. The Kitsune ball of fluffy death/Songbird of Doom. With only being able to take one natural weapon, and the inability to use flurry of blows, it stops the killer rabbit builds that go tiny from being as effective (although they can still use unarmed strike with tiger/boar style or weapon versatility.


Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber
Lune wrote:
I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.

there's always Urogues... *shrug*

Scarab Sages

Bandw2 wrote:
Lune wrote:
I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.
there's always Urogues... *shrug*

Even Urogues have a hard time with natural weapons, as finesse training only lets you choose one type of natural weapon at 3rd. You can multiclass monk and take FCT, but it's still a lot of effort to make it work.


Imbicatus: Mine uses a +0 Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists and still works just fine. ;)


Imbicatus wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Lune wrote:
I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.
there's always Urogues... *shrug*

Even Urogues have a hard time with natural weapons, as finesse training only lets you choose one type of natural weapon at 3rd. You can multiclass monk and take FCT, but it's still a lot of effort to make it work.

If you're a multiclass Urogue/Picaroon and you Quick Draw a pistol during a melee full attack in your offhand, would that disqualify your main-hand weapon from being finessed under SG and thus disqualified from the Urogue Dex-to-damage bonus as well?

Scarab Sages

Finesse Training doesn't care what other weapons you are wielding or if you have claws, a bite, or four butts. You have one weapon with which you can do dex to damage. Period.


Totes McScrotes wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Lune wrote:
I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.
there's always Urogues... *shrug*

Even Urogues have a hard time with natural weapons, as finesse training only lets you choose one type of natural weapon at 3rd. You can multiclass monk and take FCT, but it's still a lot of effort to make it work.

If you're a multiclass Urogue/Picaroon and you Quick Draw a pistol during a melee full attack in your offhand, would that disqualify your main-hand weapon from being finessed under SG and thus disqualified from the Urogue Dex-to-damage bonus as well?

Are you talking about combining Finesse Training and Slashing Grace?


Imbicatus wrote:
Finesse Training doesn't care what other weapons you are wielding or if you have claws, a bite, or four butts. You have one weapon with which you can do dex to damage. Period.

I now must make this character.

Grand Lodge

Man, this really kills my Sibat and Shield Dex build.


Gisher wrote:
Totes McScrotes wrote:
Imbicatus wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:
Lune wrote:
I agree with Imbicatus. And it seems that is intentional. ...and too bad for the natural attacking rangers who want to be Dex focused which seems like it would be a pretty common concept. In fact, there are a lot of natural attacking concept that this ruling pretty much kills.
there's always Urogues... *shrug*

Even Urogues have a hard time with natural weapons, as finesse training only lets you choose one type of natural weapon at 3rd. You can multiclass monk and take FCT, but it's still a lot of effort to make it work.

If you're a multiclass Urogue/Picaroon and you Quick Draw a pistol during a melee full attack in your offhand, would that disqualify your main-hand weapon from being finessed under SG and thus disqualified from the Urogue Dex-to-damage bonus as well?
Are you talking about combining Finesse Training and Slashing Grace?

That was indeed the idea, and pre-errata it was redundant. I was wondering if the weapon loses finnessability altogether if the other hand is occupied.

201 to 224 of 224 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Slashing Grace and "otherwise occupied" All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.