Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thorsbjorn 09-01-07, 06:39 AM	I'm recreating an old D&D module from the 1980s using high-level 3.5 rules, and I need to convert some dervishes. I'll probably go with base dervishes around 10th or 11th level, leader dervishes around 15th level, and a chief dervish at around 20th level. What is a good build for a dervish? Fighter? Ranger? Some combination of fighter/ranger? Is there really much advantage in fighting with two weapons, even the scimitar, as a dervish? I know that he goes with the feel of the historical dervish, but does it really offer much advantage? These dervishes are worshipers of Asterios, the Minotaur abomination son of Zeus (CR 25), who wields a great axe, so I was thinking of maybe giving them great axes instead. The great axe is, after all, a slashing weapon, and most of the benefits accrue while using a slashing weapon. Thanks! :) Edit: I just looked up the dervish in Wikipedia, and the article contains two drawings of 19th century dervishes--both of whom are holding axes! :)
imakuni67 09-01-07, 09:19 AM	You can't two weapon fight with two greataxes, though. You could fight with two Battleaxes though or if you are a dwarf, or have the exotic feat, you could fight with two Dwarven Waraxes which would deal more damage. You can never weild a two large size weapons as a medium character (well maybe with a -30 penalty). As a large character you could weild two large size weapons, like great axes, but not the greataxe that would be bigger than you. So, go for one great axe or two smaller ones! The dervish is like a cleric with monk abilities, right?
dman11235 09-01-07, 01:46 PM	The dervish class is the scimitar wielding battle dancer. The advantage of fighting with two scimitars (as a dervish) is that they deal nice damage for a "light" weapon, with a good crit range, and you get a lot of attacks a round. The benefit of fighting with one weapon is that you can have a higher str score. The TWF feats have really high dex requirements, so you need to be a ranger, samurai (with specific weapons), or a dex based fighter. You can wield (with monkey grip (and therefor a penalty)) a greataxe as a one handed weapon, but it's not a great axe, but a large battle axe. Take over-sized TWF and you don't take the penalties for a one handed weapon in your off-hand.
dman11235 09-01-07, 01:49 PM	Yeah, I just read that wiki article, D&D messed up another historical figure. Big time.
Thorsbjorn 09-01-07, 05:52 PM	Yeah, I just read that wiki article, D&D messed up another historical figure. Big time. Yes, I'm not sure where they got the notion of wielding scimitars. So far as I can tell, the only advantage of fighting with scimitars with the dervish PrC is that you get to treat them as light weapons so that you're attack penalties with two weapons go down. Read literally, however, you can no longer use Power Attack with them. I wasn't suggesting that I'd have these dervishes fight with two great axes! No, I was suggesting wielding a great axe in two hands as standard instead of using two weapons. Right now I'm leaning toward a straight fighter/dervish build to give then Weapon Specialization and and at least two other bonus fighter feats. The only monk-liek ability the dervish gets is a small boost to AC when wearing light armor or no armor; this does not, however, include a Wisdom bonus. Hey dman, I used to live in Iowa. I taught at the University of Iowa and lived next door in Coralville. How about you?
dman11235 09-02-07, 12:09 AM	If you're dex based, why are you using power attack anyway? There is the benifit of being the best damaging light weapon that you can use in a dance. Wielding a greataxe in two hands is perfectly fine. Just change the flavor of the class to suit your needs. That build is fine. It's almost what I did (I had 2 levels of rogue for evasion.) with mine. That wp. specialization could come in handy. Something you might try (if you want to be really evil) is scout 5/fighter 2/dervish x and take improved skirmish to deal (with scimitars TWF) 4x(5d6+str+enhancement) damage per round. Make it a thri-kreen to double (and then a bite) that. Where'd that monk thing come from? And ISU.
Thorsbjorn 09-02-07, 04:05 AM	If you're dex based, why are you using power attack anyway? There is the benifit of being the best damaging light weapon that you can use in a dance. Wielding a greataxe in two hands is perfectly fine. Just change the flavor of the class to suit your needs. That build is fine. It's almost what I did (I had 2 levels of rogue for evasion.) with mine. That wp. specialization could come in handy. Something you might try (if you want to be really evil) is scout 5/fighter 2/dervish x and take improved skirmish to deal (with scimitars TWF) 4x(5d6+str+enhancement) damage per round. Make it a thri-kreen to double (and then a bite) that. Where'd that monk thing come from? And ISU. The monk comment replied to imakuni67's post. The module that I'm updating calls for dervishes, so that's why I'm looking at the dervish PrC. I don't really have to make them dervishes, but for an aesthetic standpoint I just like keeping them as dervishes. Since they worship a being that uses a greataxe (and since it now turns out that real dervishes used axes), I'd like to go with them using the greataxe. Also from what I've seen, characters with light weapons actually do relatively little damage and really can't compete with two-handed weapons and Power Attack. (Remember that on the offhand weapon they two-weapon wielder gets only half the Strength bonus.) If the special scimitar rule of the dervish allowed him to still use Power Attack, now that would be a different story. The dervish would then get Power Attack on both weapons, which would be roughly as good as using Power Attack with a two-handed weapon. You know, I just had a thought. I could make those dervishes into frenzied berserkers instead. That would really give the PCs a headache! :D
imakuni67 09-02-07, 11:52 AM	I said monk from the mysticism side, and not the unarmed side. :)
dman11235 09-02-07, 01:29 PM	I have an encounter planned for later that features two owl bears, a winter wolf, and two humans. One is a frenzied berserker. The humans end up with 50 str. (When they're level 16). Well, acorcing to Wikipedia, yes, they are monkish clerics (not axe-wielders, but ascetics). Acording to D&D, however, they are scimitar wielding tornadoes of blades. Look at the old module. What do they wield, and how do they fight? If they move and fight, then you want the dervish (try the scout 5/fighter 2/dervish x combo for this, they'll do more damage than THF a greataxe) with battle axes. If they go up and smack, then the greataxe (and frenzied berserker) might be a more valid choice. When you TWF, you want some other source of damage, something that gets added on to every attack. Precision based damage is a common source for this. I see a lot of TWF rogue builds, thus optimizing their sneak attack. At level 20 that's 50d6 on a full attack. The scout dervish build works by combining the ability to move and make a full attack, and the scout's skirmish initiation of moving 10 feet (20 with improved skirmish) to get an extra boost to AC and some more damage dice. You may want to try scout 9/fighter 1 or 2 for the bonus feats/dervish x. That gets you another dice of damage.
Thorsbjorn 09-02-07, 09:05 PM	I have an encounter planned for later that features two owl bears, a winter wolf, and two humans. One is a frenzied berserker. The humans end up with 50 str. (When they're level 16). Wow! How do you get them to a Strength of 50? That seems a bit much for CR 16. Let's see: 18 starting +4 from 16th level +6 belt of giant strength +6 frenzy +6 greater rage = 40. Even with a +5 inherent bonus that still gets them up to only 45. What am I missing? Well, acorcing to Wikipedia, yes, they are monkish clerics (not axe-wielders, but ascetics). Acording to D&D, however, they are scimitar wielding tornadoes of blades. The Wikipedia article also contains two 19th-century drawings of dervishes, both of which depict the dervish as wielding an axe. The D&D dervish now is almost nothing like a monk, whatever the historical precedents. Look at the old module. What do they wield, and how do they fight? If they move and fight, then you want the dervish (try the scout 5/fighter 2/dervish x combo for this, they'll do more damage than THF a greataxe) with battle axes. If they go up and smack, then the greataxe (and frenzied berserker) might be a more valid choice. In the old module there's nothing about the how the dervishes fight. The base dervishes (1st level fighter) have one attack for 1-6, and the sergeant (3rd level fighter) and captain dervishes (5th level fighters) do 1-8. So there's really little information. I've written to Gary Gygax to see where he got them from and what his original conception of them was to see what he has to say. When it comes to answering questions about old D&D he's pretty good, but when he knows it relates to current D&D, he sometimes won't answer, or will just answer with a criticism of the d20 system, so I don't know what sort of reply I might get. When you TWF, you want some other source of damage, something that gets added on to every attack. Precision based damage is a common source for this. I see a lot of TWF rogue builds, thus optimizing their sneak attack. At level 20 that's 50d6 on a full attack. Yes, for the current adventure I created three epic-level NPCs who fight with two weapons. The expert treasure-hunter the party hired is a rogue 13/dungeon delver 8. He does +7d6 on a sneak attack, and I gave one of his weapons the deadly precision ability, which increases sneak attack damage by +2d6. The pirate captain is (or was, since the party killed him) a rogue3/fighter 2/swashbuckler 3/dread pirate 8/scarlet corsair 8. His sneak attack does +6d6 and I gave one of his weapons the deadly precision ability too. His first mate, 3 levels lower, had a similar set up. When they flanked the party's cleric they killed him in one round as I recall. The scout dervish build works by combining the ability to move and make a full attack, and the scout's skirmish initiation of moving 10 feet (20 with improved skirmish) to get an extra boost to AC and some more damage dice. You may want to try scout 9/fighter 1 or 2 for the bonus feats/dervish x. That gets you another dice of damage. Have you seen the errata for the Complete Adventurer? It adds to the description of skirmish a clause that enables the extra damage only after the scout has moved 10' from his starting square. That pretty much precludes getting skirmish damage while dancing around one medium-sized foe. So far as I can see, the only benefit that the dervish PrC offers to two-weapon fighting comes from the ability to treat the scimitar as a light weapon. It seems like all the other abilities would work just as well with a one-handed or two-handed weapon. Since these dervishes worship the Minotaur, who uses a great axe, the great axe has some appeal. They could dance around an opponent with the great axe to get the extra attack and damage bonus. The dance would provide a different flavor from the frenzied berserker, something new. In 5 years of the current campaign, the party has twice encountered a frenzied berserker before, so going with the dervish would provide new. A large group of frenzied berserkers, however, probably represent a more difficult challenge. It's one thing to use calm emotions when you're facing only one frenzied berserker, and a hold spell could work wonders against two or three of them, but against larger numbers the party might have a serious problem on their hands. So I'm really torn. :)
dman11235 09-02-07, 11:15 PM	You're missing the greater frenzy, and I'm not sure what else, hold on a second.......Okay, only str 46. or so. But still, that's a human. Oh, and one owl bear and 2 WW. Still going to be tough for them. I'll probably change the encounter a little for the varied numbers and who's there, but same basic concept. The errata actually makes it easier to dance and skirmish. It says that you meerly need to end up 10 feet away. So.... go around once and end up in the opposite corner, from x to y, with A being the target. x--.......x-- -A- or . -A- y--.......--y That gets you the skirmish and movement you need. Or start away from them, move up, full attack, and keep going.
Thorsbjorn 09-03-07, 07:51 AM	You're missing the greater frenzy, and I'm not sure what else, hold on a second.......Okay, only str 46. or so. But still, that's a human. Oh, and one owl bear and 2 WW. Still going to be tough for them. I'll probably change the encounter a little for the varied numbers and who's there, but same basic concept. The errata actually makes it easier to dance and skirmish. It says that you meerly need to end up 10 feet away. So.... go around once and end up in the opposite corner, from x to y, with A being the target. x--.......x-- -A- or . -A- y--.......--y That gets you the skirmish and movement you need. Or start away from them, move up, full attack, and keep going. It actually makes it harder to skirmish and to dance. Without the errata you could move 5 feet, then back 5 feet and get your skirmish damage and bonus to AC. You could also have moved 5 feet to the right, then 5 feet up, which is still only 5 feet from the square you left, but since you'd moved 10 feet, you could get your skirmish damage and bonus to AC, and your dance bonuses. You also could move around the opponent and end up in the square you started, or 5 feet short of where you started, and get both the skirmish damage and the dance bonuses. Now you have to move an actual 10 feet from where you started and remain at least 10 feet from where you started. It's not impossible since you only have to get and remain 10 feet away, not more than 10 feet away as I'd first thought, but it's more difficult than it was without the errata. Instead of looping all the way around the opponent, you can loop the other way around or through the square above the opponent, assuming other combatants don't block your way. (Even if they do, you might be able to Tumble through them if you have a sufficiently high Tumble bonus.) Edit: On the frenzy, if you add the greater frenzy you do get up to 49. But do you really give a 16th-level NPC a +5 enhancement bonus? A 16th-level NPC doesn't have enough treasure to have paid for it. I think, indeed, the highest inherent bonus I've given to an NPC was a +3 bonus for a 24th-level NPC. I also gave a 21st-level NPC a +1 inherent bonus. Also, even the elite array doesn't given an NPC a score of 18, although I confess that for special NPCs I'll often give them an 18 in one score. :D So if he (or she) is a special NPC, at 16th-level I'd limit the Strength score to 49 - 5 = 44 (i.e. no inherent bonus at all). Remember that a even a tarrasque has only a 45 Strength score! :D The scout dervish build works by combining the ability to move and make a full attack, and the scout's skirmish initiation of moving 10 feet (20 with improved skirmish) to get an extra boost to AC and some more damage dice. You may want to try scout 9/fighter 1 or 2 for the bonus feats/dervish x. That gets you another dice of damage. I don't see an improved skirmish ability, and in any case it wouldn't be much of an improvement if you had to move 20 feet (instead of only 10 feet) to get the skirmish benefits. (I'm guessing you just mean that the skirmish ability gets better, but that doesn't affect how far they have to move before they get the skirmish benefits. If I gave them 9 levels of scout and 1 level of fighter the base dervishes can have only one actual level of dervish. If I gave them 9 levels of scout and 2 levels of fighter they wouldn't have any dervish levels at all, unless I raised their overall level. I could just skip the fighter levels entirely and go with 9 scout/2 dervish. It seems, furthermore, that the dance really does little good with only a couple of levels. While dancing might have a appealing flavor, it doesn't really grant much benefit against a single strong opponent. You really need to have those extra dervish levels to get the extra bonuses on attack and damage rolls. (Against multiple weaker opponents the dance has more benefit because you can kill one opponent, move to another one, kill him, etc.) Getting +1 on attack and damage rolls with one level of dervish isn't too beneficial; getting +4 at 8th level is more so, although it still pales by comparison with the benefits of the frenzied berseker. Still I'm leaning against the frenzied berserker in part because of the great benefits it grants. I'm afraid that having to fight squads of frenzied berserkers might prove too challenging for the party. The party might, however, learn that the best tactic against a frenzied berserker is to flee for a minute or so and let the frenzy expire ("Run away! Run away!" :D) and then counter attack. Actually I just remembered that a disintegrate that brings a frenzied berserker to 0 hit points or less destroys him or her. The party has plenty of disintegrate spells, what with a sorceress who knows the spell, so maybe fighting squads of frenzied berserkers wouldn't be too challenging. :D
The_Shaman 09-03-07, 11:34 AM	BTW, would ToB be allowed? I've wondered how a multiclass swordsage would do as a dervish, and I think they can do quite well - I think there was even a stance that gave them concealment or other goodies if they moved enough in a round. Also, I think the swordsage focus could work as weapon focus, freeing up 1 feat from what is already a feat-intensive build. Greataxes... why not, I guess. A THW dervish would probably need strength and dex both to be high, but for NPCs this is not an issue. The Dance bonus to attack is nice for power attacking, sure. You don't get as much mileage from the lvl 10 ability, but it's not that big a deal.
dman11235 09-03-07, 01:38 PM	Improved Skirmish is a feat from Complete Scoundrel. It treats you as 8 levels higher for skirmish stuff. I don't think swordsage/dervish would work THAT well, because most manuevers are standard actions, and dervishes like full attacks. The frenzied berserkers I will have are part of a really wealthy organization, and as such are a part of a couple encounters where I gave them PC wealth of one level higher. But I gave these guys 15th or 16th level wealth with +2 tomes, and a +4 enhancement. Their strength is still insane. I could get it to 52 at level 20...18+5+5+6+18 (6 rage, 10 frenzy, 2 reckless rage). The dervish scout thing... you gain fast movement from both. So you start five feet away from your opponent (or more, if you have the speed.). You move five feet towards him, attack, move five feet to the side, attack, move five feet down, attack, move five more down, attack, move five more down, attack, move five feet to the side, attack, move five to the side, attack, move ten down. That's seven attacks, 45 feet, and you initiated improved skirmish. Human level 11 scout 9/dervish 2 that's 40 feet per round, add in boost of striding and springing, and that's 50.
Thorsbjorn 09-03-07, 08:16 PM	BTW, would ToB be allowed? I've wondered how a multiclass swordsage would do as a dervish, and I think they can do quite well - I think there was even a stance that gave them concealment or other goodies if they moved enough in a round. Also, I think the swordsage focus could work as weapon focus, freeing up 1 feat from what is already a feat-intensive build. Greataxes... why not, I guess. A THW dervish would probably need strength and dex both to be high, but for NPCs this is not an issue. The Dance bonus to attack is nice for power attacking, sure. You don't get as much mileage from the lvl 10 ability, but it's not that big a deal. We're not using ToB, but thanks for the suggestion. I agree that the lightly-armored dervish wielding a two-handed weapon would need good Strength and Dexterity. They're worshiping a minotaur abomination, however, so the Strength makes role-playing sense, just as the great axe does. I hadn't really noticed the 10th-level ability, as only the dervish leader would have all 10 levels I think. If the dervish could do more damage with a great axe and Power Attack in four attacks than the two-scimitar dervish could do in eight attacks, then the dervish with the great axe would be able to do more damage in 8 attacks than the two-scimitar dervish could do in 16 attacks. The lightly-armored, moderate-hit point dervish, whether using a great axe or two scimitars, isn't going to last as long in combat as a lightly-armored, high-hit-point frenzied berserker with deathless frenzy. So even if I can find a way for the dervish to do more damage per round, that doesn't guarantee that the dervish will do more damage before being killed. I might sit down and try to do a comparison. Of course maximizing damage isn't necessarily the primary goal. Edit: Improved Skirmish is a feat from Complete Scoundrel. It treats you as 8 levels higher for skirmish stuff. I don't think swordsage/dervish would work THAT well, because most manuevers are standard actions, and dervishes like full attacks. The frenzied berserkers I will have are part of a really wealthy organization, and as such are a part of a couple encounters where I gave them PC wealth of one level higher. But I gave these guys 15th or 16th level wealth with +2 tomes, and a +4 enhancement. Their strength is still insane. I could get it to 52 at level 20...18+5+5+6+18 (6 rage, 10 frenzy, 2 reckless rage). The dervish scout thing... you gain fast movement from both. So you start five feet away from your opponent (or more, if you have the speed.). You move five feet towards him, attack, move five feet to the side, attack, move five feet down, attack, move five more down, attack, move five more down, attack, move five feet to the side, attack, move five to the side, attack, move ten down. That's seven attacks, 45 feet, and you initiated improved skirmish. Human level 11 scout 9/dervish 2 that's 40 feet per round, add in boost of striding and springing, and that's 50. I stopped buying the Complete series when they started doubling up, so I don't have Complete Scoundrel. What sort or prerequisites does Improved Skirmish have? Does it have a maximum, as in 19th level skirmish, or does it contemplate epic skirmish bonuses? There's no guarantee that the dervish can start away from an opponent. Even if he dances away from her, she on her turn might move to him and attack. If he can move more than feet away from him after attacking, though, he would deny her a full attack action. I could see the party getting very frustrated being unable to take full attack actions, although they have a 5th-level spell called celerity which grants an extra action per round (works just like the 3rd Ed 3rd-level haste) so the party could overcome that problem. The other thing that occurs to me is that some if not most of the dervish encounters will take place in the Labyrinth, where there's little room to maneuver. I suppose the higher-level dervishes could try tumbling through party members, but it's going to be very tight quarters in there. Also I used the counter-tumble variant from one of the 3.0 splat books (Song and Silence I think) and the party's melee specialists are both excellent tumblers. Of course opponents don't need to be optimized to combat the party. They should have a feeling of verisimilitude for their role in the world. I looked up Reckless Rage and see that it comes from Races of Stone. I stopped after Races of Eberron and Races of Destiny. I might ask though why you want to the party at 16th level to face a frenzied berserker with a 50 Strength? Are the party members all similarly tricked out? If not then the frenzied berserker could prove too challenging for them.
dman11235 09-03-07, 08:30 PM	True, you don't want to activly try and kill your party. Also, you are forgetting the fact that PCs will not get full attacks on the dervishes, like, ever. The dervish stays 10 feet away, and then the PC can't full attack, therefor, will last longer.
Thorsbjorn 09-03-07, 09:10 PM	True, you don't want to activly try and kill your party. Also, you are forgetting the fact that PCs will not get full attacks on the dervishes, like, ever. The dervish stays 10 feet away, and then the PC can't full attack, therefor, will last longer. Heh. I was too slow with my edit above, but you can see from it that the party can overcome the problem of the dervishes dancing away to prevent the party's melee specialists from getting a full attack action. :) Despite all this analysis, I still haven't decided which way to go between dervish and frenzied berserker. :P
dman11235 09-04-07, 12:11 AM	Ah, see, they are gestalt, and this was one of the harder encounters I had planned. Also, they will be 18, not 16. And the m jority of the party will have high ACs.
Thorsbjorn 09-04-07, 12:21 AM	Ah, see, they are gestalt, and this was one of the harder encounters I had planned. Also, they will be 18, not 16. And the m jority of the party will have high ACs. I've only once played with gestalt characters, and they did seem more powerful than the level adjustment of +1 that I recall they get. So your PCs might be as powerful at 20th level standard characters, in which case the tricked out 16th-level frenzied berserker (combined with his allies) might prove a tough but not completely fatal challenge. Are you giving the frenzied berserker an upward adjustment in his CR to compensate for all his extra benefits? It sounds like maybe he warrants a CR 18. :)
dman11235 09-04-07, 01:39 AM	Yes, the frezied berserker is a tough opponent, but not anywhere near as tough as, say, a druid. Or a wizard. Especially not Crazy McDruid (druid 20//fighter 5/warshaper 5/ master of many forms 10). It will be a very painful encounter, but it will likely be their first one of the day, and they will have other resources. Oh, and the FB will be doing 8d6+3x strength on a bull rush.
Thorsbjorn 09-04-07, 01:47 AM	Yes, the frezied berserker is a tough opponent, but not anywhere near as tough as, say, a druid. Or a wizard. Especially not Crazy McDruid (druid 20//fighter 5/warshaper 5/ master of many forms 10). It will be a very painful encounter, but it will likely be their first one of the day, and they will have other resources. Oh, and the FB will be doing 8d6+3x strength on a bull rush. A druid or wizard on his own isn't likely to last very long, whereas a frenzied berserker might take out the whole party. Obviously old Crazy there, at 40th level, will present a much, much greater challenge than a 16th-level frenzied berserker, even one with a Strength score of 50. :D How does the frenzied berserker do 8d6+3x Strength on a bullrush? :confused:
dman11235 09-04-07, 01:57 AM	Gestalt level 20. He's even better than most gestalt combos if it's just druid 5/warshaper 5/MoMF 10. Dungeonscape fighter alternate class feature. It's painful. Very, very painful.
Thorsbjorn 09-04-07, 02:21 AM	Gestalt level 20. He's even better than most gestalt combos if it's just druid 5/warshaper 5/MoMF 10. Dungeonscape fighter alternate class feature. It's painful. Very, very painful. Another book I don't have! :P Hey, maybe I could make my dervishes into gestalt dervish/frenzied berserkers! :D (Yes, I know that you can't use the dervish dance during a rage or frenzy. :P)
dman11235 09-04-07, 02:33 AM	You know, to answer the original question: yes there is, but it depends on how you go about it. And the greataxes would be fine rules-wise.
Thorsbjorn 09-04-07, 02:43 AM	You know, to answer the original question: yes there is, but it depends on how you go about it. And the greataxes would be fine rules-wise. Thanks. I assume by my original question you mean, "Is there really much advantage in fighting with two weapons, even the scimitar, as a dervish?" and not my original original question, "What is a good build for a dervish? Fighter? Ranger? Some combination of fighter/ranger?" :P
dman11235 09-04-07, 02:56 AM	Okay, the original, original question: fighter. Or if you want the skirmish dervish of DOOM!!!! scout either 5 or 9, then fighter and dervish. Skirmish dervish of doom works well with bard accompaniment.
Thorsbjorn 09-04-07, 03:31 AM	Okay, the original, original question: fighter. Or if you want the skirmish dervish of DOOM!!!! scout either 5 or 9, then fighter and dervish. Skirmish dervish of doom works well with bard accompaniment. What feats would you use with the build?
dman11235 09-04-07, 01:52 PM	Which one? For the skirmish devish, take TWF tree, wp. focus scimitar, improved skirmish, and expeditious dodge (RotW). Other than that, it's up to you. For the greataxes, it's entirely up to you.
Thorsbjorn 09-05-07, 12:10 AM	Which one? For the skirmish devish, take TWF tree, wp. focus scimitar, improved skirmish, and expeditious dodge (RotW). Other than that, it's up to you. For the greataxes, it's entirely up to you. Thanks. Yes, I meant for the scout/dervish. I think I'm not going to allow Improved Skirmish, as it grants a bigger benefit that Improved Sneak Attack, which is an epic feat. Expeditious Dodge sounds decent though. :)
dman11235 09-05-07, 12:23 AM	Yeah, I thought the same thing about improved skirmish, but then I saw it in play: not game breaking at all. Also, that's a really, really weak epic feat.
Thorsbjorn 09-05-07, 12:31 AM	Yeah, I thought the same thing about improved skirmish, but then I saw it in play: not game breaking at all. Also, that's a really, really weak epic feat. A feat need not break the game to be too powerful. Is there any other feat that allows a character to use one of his class abilities as though he were 8 levels higher? Does Complete Scoundrel, for instance, have a non-epic Improved Sneak attack that allows the rogue to treat his sneak attack as though he were 8, or even just 4, levels higher? Improved Skirmish, from what you say, increases skirmish damage by 2d6 and AC by 2. Improved Sneak attack increases sneak attack damage by 2d6. 2d6 is an average of 7 points of damage per attack. Epic Weapon Specialization improves damage by only 4 points of damage per attack. So yes, it still seems to me that Improved Skirmish does too much for a non-epic feat. I'll put it to the epic revision thread and see what the posters there say. :)
dman11235 09-05-07, 01:18 AM	Ah, but epic weapon specialization applies to ALL attacks, and gets multiplied on a crit. Also, giving someone a total of 7d6 skirmish at level 20 is fine in my mind. A rogue's doing 10d6 percision. And they don't have to try as hard to get it on more than one attack. And they can augment it with a rogue's vest and deadly precision for a total of 12d6. And improved sneak attack stacks with itself, and improved skirmish has the 20 foot move requirement. Also, if you're immune to crits, you're immune to SA and skirmish.
Thorsbjorn 09-05-07, 09:40 AM	Ah, but epic weapon specialization applies to ALL attacks, and gets multiplied on a crit. Also, giving someone a total of 7d6 skirmish at level 20 is fine in my mind. A rogue's doing 10d6 percision. And they don't have to try as hard to get it on more than one attack. And they can augment it with a rogue's vest and deadly precision for a total of 12d6. And improved sneak attack stacks with itself, and improved skirmish has the 20 foot move requirement. Also, if you're immune to crits, you're immune to SA and skirmish. Improved Skirmish doesn't just automatically increase damage and AC, it alters your skirmish so that if you move 10 feet or 15 feet you get your normal bonus and if you move 20 feet or more you get the extra 2d6/2 AC (which is a flat bonus, rather than termed as being 8 levels higher as well. Same effect, but there is a slight difference.) For a rogue or other character with sneak attack, having a feat that does the same thing would likely require an opponent to have a couple of different sneak attack conditions applied. So the rogue would need to be invisible and have the opponent flanked for instance. Since I don't have the actual text of the feat, don't know the prerequisites or how it really works, I'm going to take a pass on using it.
Thorsbjorn 09-08-07, 05:03 AM	I've been putting together the dervish, and I find that with all the scout levels the only way to get to three iterative attacks per round, even at 12th level (which is already one level higher than I wanted to make them) I'd have to drop to 4 levels of scout and raise fighter to 5 (on top of 3 dervish levels). I might keep fighter 4/scout 5 to keep evasion, which would make the dervishes last much longer against many standard offensive spells, but then I lose the 3rd iterative attack. :(
EjoThims 09-08-07, 08:30 AM	Monk->Shou->Dervish can be good if you pick up the TWF feats on the way too. Lots of attacks, and a decent AC since you have to stay unarmored. Scout can also be good for the skirmish damage.
dman11235 09-08-07, 01:24 PM	You can't TWF with flurry. Your body does not count as more than one weapon. You can TWF scorpion kama/unarmed strike, though.
The_Shaman 09-08-07, 01:58 PM	Actually, I think the recent RotG that dealt with unarmed attacks said that it's okay. You can also TWF with unarmed strikes, but then you DO pay the TWF penalties. However, if you want to TWF unarmed strikes and another weapon, no problem as well.
dman11235 09-08-07, 02:08 PM	In the FAQ I believe it's stated that you can't, and that is backed up by the PHB stating that you have no offhand attack as an unarmed monk. But a non-monk can because his off-hand is his off-hand, and not off-foot/head/elbow/pelvis. It was something weird like that. Also, it can get cheesy with enchanting your body (amulet of natural attacks) as your body is one weapon, not a number of weapons equal to your limbs or your cells, but one. So for the price of one weapon being enchanted you get TWF benefits for two? What book is that?
EjoThims 09-08-07, 06:51 PM	You can't TWF with flurry. Your body does not count as more than one weapon. You can TWF scorpion kama/unarmed strike, though. So, so, so wrong. Not only could one flurry with two actual weapons, but unarmed strikes can be used as both off-hand and main-hand attacks in the same round, even one in which you us flurry with unarmed strikes.
dman11235 09-08-07, 07:48 PM	Yes you can flurry with TWF, but you can't use your body as both weapons. Just use a scorpion kama, same damage, and a weapon. Oh, and the BAB for a lv. 20 monk with greater TWF is 15/15/15/10/5 on hand, 15/10/5 off.
Thorsbjorn 09-09-07, 02:35 AM	Yes you can flurry with TWF, but you can't use your body as both weapons. Just use a scorpion kama, same damage, and a weapon. Oh, and the BAB for a lv. 20 monk with greater TWF is 15/15/15/10/5 on hand, 15/10/5 off. I recall reading The Sage in Dragon saying that a monk could use an "offhand" unarmed attack with an unarmed flurry. Prior to that I'd always thought of the extra attack in the flurry as the "offhand" attack. That ruling might, however, have applied to 3.0. I see on page 41 of the PHB that the text under "Unarmed Strike" says "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed." The FAQ from 12/21/05 (the latest version I have downloaded--I don't know if there's a later one) goes on to dismiss that line and detail the way to do an off-hand strike unarmed. I don't really see any loophole under the rule in the PHB, so I'd personally not allow the off-hand attack while fighting unarmed. Anyway, I've finished putting together the dervishes. The base dervish has fighter 4/scout 5/dervish 3. The dervish sergeant has fighter 4/scout 5/dervish 7. The dervish captain has fighter 4/scout 6/dervish 10. He's pretty cool, especially when dancing with his +4 shock adamantine greataxe at +37/+32/+27/+22 for 1d12+24+3d6, or an average of 41 (excluding any Power Attack). With improved boots of striding and springing (using expeditious retreat rather than longstrider) he has a speed of 85! :D I think that ultimately the dervishes will provide a weaker challenge than the frenzied berserkers I would have used, but they provide a new and different challenge and a new flavor, so I think they might actually prove more enjoyable. I'm looking forward to the first time the players see them dance and think, "what the heck is that?!" :D
dman11235 09-09-07, 03:27 AM	Just make sure to never let the party tank get a full attack, at least, unless he works for it. And hard.
EjoThims 09-09-07, 07:08 AM	Yes you can flurry with TWF, but you can't use your body as both weapons. You can use unarmed strikes as both mainhand and offhand in the same round, even if making a flurry attack with your mainhand. And if you're building a number of attacks monk you'd be a fool not to take 5 levels of shou disciple. Stacks for all the important damage abilities, gives you flurry with any weapon, and an end BAB of 16 for that extra attack.
Thorsbjorn 09-10-07, 01:03 AM	Just make sure to never let the party tank get a full attack, at least, unless he works for it. And hard. It's funny. We were just discussing at Saturday night's session that the party does't have a traditional "tank." The best melee specialist is a half-celestial barbarian/lightning warrior who's fast and wears light armor. Because of a high Dexterity he does have a good AC, but he's fast and mobile. He's got Great Flyby Attack, so he could just zoom over them and hit them all (or a bunch of them) in one attack, making it very difficult for them to dance around him. The party also has my campaign's celerity spell, which at 5th level does what the 3.0 haste did--grants an extra action (and a +4 bonus to AC)--which will allow the party's melee specialists to move to a dervish and make a full attack. So I think when the dervishes start dancing, they'll provide a nice surprise to the party, which hasn't seen anything like it before, but I also think that between Great Flyby Attack and celerity that the party is going to provide a nice surprise for the dervishes too. :) Assuming that the party doesn't fight the whole dervish force stationed on the island before going into the Labyrinth, the party will have an advantage fighting in the narrow confines of the Labyrinth which will limit the ability of the dervishes to dance (and skirmish). You can use unarmed strikes as both mainhand and offhand in the same round, even if making a flurry attack with your mainhand. And if you're building a number of attacks monk you'd be a fool not to take 5 levels of shou disciple. Stacks for all the important damage abilities, gives you flurry with any weapon, and an end BAB of 16 for that extra attack. I don't see any way around page 41 of the PHB where the text under "Unarmed Strike" says "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed." What source contains the shou disciple?
dman11235 09-10-07, 01:24 AM	Sorry Ejo, but if you think about it from a mechanics perspective, there's a good reason to not allow your body as both weapons in TWF: amulet of natural attacks. And greater magic weapon. You pay once and receive twice. Also, there's a reason for the scorpion kama. Just grab that and you're good.
EjoThims 09-10-07, 02:52 PM	Shou Disciple is Unapproachable East. That text is meant to show that main-hand attacks can be used with any part of the body, not that off-hand attacks simply cannot be made (read the FAQ for that). And I can't believe I have to dig this out again... From Cust Serv: "Because of the FAQ entry that says you can use your unarmed strikes as part of your flurry along with two-weapon fighting, you can indeed use your unarmed strikes as both primary and off-hand weapons in the same round. If a DM feels that is too powerful for their games, they have every right to disallow this. Any ruling they make overrules any rulings or clarifications we can provide." Emphasis is mine. TWF with only unarmed strikes is perfectly okay, as is doing so if combining twf and flurry.
Thorsbjorn 09-10-07, 05:28 PM	Shou Disciple is Unapproachable East. That text is meant to show that main-hand attacks can be used with any part of the body, not that off-hand attacks simply cannot be made (read the FAQ for that). And I can't believe I have to dig this out again... From Cust Serv: "Because of the FAQ entry that says you can use your unarmed strikes as part of your flurry along with two-weapon fighting, you can indeed use your unarmed strikes as both primary and off-hand weapons in the same round. If a DM feels that is too powerful for their games, they have every right to disallow this. Any ruling they make overrules any rulings or clarifications we can provide." Emphasis is mine. TWF with only unarmed strikes is perfectly okay, as is doing so if combining twf and flurry. The FAQ dismisses the rule in the PHB that says you can't use and off-hand attack while fighting unarmed. There's no good reason for it other than that the author of the FAQ just likes allowing an off-hand attack and doesn't like the rule in the PHB.
EjoThims 09-10-07, 05:34 PM	The FAQ dismisses the rule in the PHB that says you can't use and off-hand attack while fighting unarmed. There's no good reason for it other than that the author of the FAQ just likes allowing an off-hand attack and doesn't like the rule in the PHB. Or, you know, that the PHB rule in the monk section only covers making main-hand attacks and flurry, not TWF rules. It never says a monk can't make off-hand unarmed attacks, simply that the source body part of the attack is of no matter when making uanrmed attacks. This FAQ ruling does not contradict the PHB rule, it just clarifies it's use. Therefor the FAQ rule is valid and official.
Thorsbjorn 09-10-07, 05:40 PM	Or, you know, that the PHB rule in the monk section only covers making main-hand attacks and flurry, not TWF rules. It never says a monk can't make off-hand unarmed attacks, simply that the source body part of the attack is of no matter when making uanrmed attacks. This FAQ ruling does not contradict the PHB rule, it just clarifies it's use. Therefor the FAQ rule is valid and official. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. There's no loophole for using the flurry, or for not using the flurry. There are no off-hand attacks for a monk striking unarmed.
EjoThims 09-10-07, 05:59 PM	There's no loophole for using the flurry, or for not using the flurry. There are no off-hand attacks for a monk striking unarmed. Context is your friend. It really is. And I never said there were any loopholes, simply that that entire passage never once even mentions TWF. It's meant solely to clarfiy that when making mainhand and flurry attacks a monk can use any body part equally.
dman11235 09-10-07, 08:10 PM	BTW Ejo, since it was CustServ that ruled that, I'm inclined to believe that it is wrong. However the FAQ did state that you can use an unarmed strike as your off-hand you are right in that respect.
EjoThims 09-10-07, 09:37 PM	Until FAQ, Sage, or book says otherwise (none have given an explicit ruling to the contrary), the CustServ ruling is valid. Besides that there is nothing logically or rules wise to prevent it in the first place.
dman11235 09-11-07, 12:26 AM	But what about the paying half of what you should? Getting an amulet of natural attacks that covers two weapons? I think that's a logical reason not to allow it.
EjoThims 09-11-07, 07:52 AM	Firtsly, thing B being overpowered is never a reason to nerf thing A. Secondly, by the strictest (and also the most sensical in this case) reading of the rules, to get the benefit of the amulet on off-hand attacks you'd have to pay twice as much, just like enchanting a double weapon.
Thorsbjorn 09-11-07, 08:30 PM	Context is your friend. It really is. And I never said there were any loopholes, simply that that entire passage never once even mentions TWF. It's meant solely to clarfiy that when making mainhand and flurry attacks a monk can use any body part equally. Intelligence is your friend. It really is. The context is unarmed fighting; when fighting unarmed the monk has no off-hand attack. That's clear and there's no way around it. If the authors intended to allow an off-hand attack unarmed that would have said, "the monk suffers no penalty when fighting unarmed and making an off-hand attack." Instead they said that a monk has no off-hand attack when fighting unarmed. They didn't say "a monk has no off-hand attack when fighting unarmed when it benefits him not to have one but has one when it benefits hit to have one." In your own inimitable words, deal with it. If you want to argue about it further, with people who actually care what you think, start your own thread. This thread is for developing a good build for a dervish, toward which your comments have been useless and with on exception, entirely off topic.
EjoThims 09-11-07, 09:13 PM	I cannot recall (nor can I find) where I used those words in this thread. The argument is very valid to the thread, as the ability to flurry and TWF with the servish gives many attacks at great damage. If you don't want to allow such in your games (or to use it yourself), that is fine. But what you want doesn't change the rules as a whole. Just because you don't like the FAQ answer doesn't mean it's wrong. Besides, your interpretation is entirely wrong to begin with. A monk TWF with unarmed strikes takes all penalties for off-hand attacks with his off-hand unarmed strikes. Now... if you don't like the idea of a monk dervish, simply say "Interesting suggestion (though I find the CustServ ruling dubious), but I think I want to go another direction," instead of showing yourself for the ignorant, self-rightoues fool that you apparently are.