Pathfinder Player Companion: Adventurer's Armory (PFRPG)

I was so happy to see this on my Downloads page this morning! :D

I just noticed an ommission under the Channel Foci section. The table on Page 24 lists a Pectoral crest (75gp, 4 lbs.), but there is no description for it in the section. Did this get cut, or is there info on this that can be shared?

Thanks!

Your Friendly Neighborhood Dalesman
"Bringing Big D**n Justice to the Bad Guys Since 1369 DR"

I was so happy to see this on my Downloads page this morning! :D

I just noticed an ommission under the Channel Foci section. The table on Page 24 lists a Pectoral crest (75gp, 4 lbs.), but there is no description for it in the section. Did this get cut, or is there info on this that can be shared?

Thanks!

Hope you enjoy the book :)

The Pectoral Crest is my bad. I actually cut it even before I sent it to Sean but somehow managed to miss chopping it from the price list.

Hmm, I was hoping to see the equipment from the Campaign Setting updated in this, and while some of the armour gets a brief mention, the mechanics aren't changed (not even the standard +1 AC for medium/heavy armours). Will we need to wait for the World Guide for a full update?

Hope you enjoy the book :)

The Pectoral Crest is my bad. I actually cut it even before I sent it to Sean but somehow managed to miss chopping it from the price list.

Thanks for the clarification, Hal!

Now my curiosity is piqued - I must walk away and distract myself before it gets the better of me. Argh.... ;)

Your Friendly Neighborhood Dalesman
"Bringing Big D**n Justice to the Bad Guys Since 1369 DR"

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Aldori dueling sword should ...

With apologies to Rob, I think there's another goof with that back chart. I believe there's a missing entry on the Special line of the Exotic Two-handed weapons:

The Garrote appropriately lists "grapple, see text".
The Mancatcher lists "reach, trip, see text".
I believe "reach, trip, see text" should instead be on the Meteor Hammer (formerly reach, disarm, trip, with text). The Mancatcher probably should have "reach, grapple, see text", which may be responsible for the confusion.
This does readd some confusion to the Meteor Hammer, and whether it threatens at 5', 10', or depending on which of its fighting styles is used. I know you had previously stated it remained 10' in both styles, but that was a while ago.

Mancatcher should be "reach, grapple, see text."

I was surprised not to see the katar, tri-bladed mentioned explicitly. I know it states that items not mentioned explicitly can stay as they are and used as is; but I would still have expected it to become a x3 weapon instead of x4.

19-20/x2 (dagger) is mechanically the same as 20/x3. If the tri-bladed katar were 20/x3 as an exotic weapon, there's no reason to spend an Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat on it.

I hate to be a pest, but can we get an official ruling/verification on this? Majuba just found one of these in the game I am running and I want to make sure he is using it properly. ;-)

Yes, but when someone asks a question after 7pm on a Friday, please give me until Monday (when I'm back at the office and have access to all my files) to give an informed answer. ;)

This might be a silly question, but I wanted to confirm how much damage a monk with brass knuckles deals, do they deal their monk unarmed damage with each attack or do they deal 1d3 (adjusted for size)?

Monks use their unarmed strike damage when using brass knuckles... but as they can already deal lethal damage with unarmed strikes, there's not much benefit for them doing so. But it's cool for monks to be able to use them proficiently, so they can.

Hmm, I was hoping to see the equipment from the Campaign Setting updated in this, and while some of the armour gets a brief mention, the mechanics aren't changed (not even the standard +1 AC for medium/heavy armours). Will we need to wait for the World Guide for a full update?

Field plate "is similar to full plate but lighter in construction, sacrificing a bit in protection for greater flexibility and mobility."

Sean,
I have a few questions if you don't mind:

1) The scorpion whip description describes it as a whip, but doesn't list the same benefits/restrictions as a whip does in the core rulebook. So is a scorpion whip a weapon that threatens and has normal 10' reach or is it a weapon with 15' reach, is finesseable, doesn't threaten, and provoke's AoO's when used? Either way I'm happy to see a combat useable whip in the rules, so thanks!

2) The urumi is not listed as being different in the weapon descriptions under adapting PF campaign weapons, but it is missing reach in the table and has a 18-20 threat range (which are both different than the PF campaign description). Since there are other errors in the table I just wanted to confirm the changes to the urumi, so is the table correct?

3) Does the PF campaign version of the flying talon no longer exist now since some people call the that spear-type weapon a flying talon?

Field plate "is similar to full plate but lighter in construction, sacrificing a bit in protection for greater flexibility and mobility."

3.5 full plate: +8/+1/-6/35%
PF full plate: +9/+1/-6/35%
PCCS field plate: +7/+2/-6/40%
AA field plate: +7/+1/-5/35%
No heavy armor gives Max Dex +2, so we had to bonk that down to keep it in line with other heavy armors. AA field plate is basically masterwork banded mail... except that you can get masterwork field plate (+7/+1/-4/35%) and you can't get masterwork masterwork banded mail.
There is no medium armor in the PCCS, so the PF +1 increase to medium armors doesn't apply to anything there.

Thanks for the clarification. Are there any changes to the Bladed Scarf other than dropping the reach? (Assuming that was an intentional change on the weapon table.)

Lord Pel wrote:

I hate to be a pest, but can we get an official ruling/verification on this? Majuba just found one of these in the game I am running and I want to make sure he is using it properly. ;-)

Yes, but when someone asks a question after 7pm on a Friday, please give me until Monday (when I'm back at the office and have access to all my files) to give an informed answer. ;)

I do apologize, and I almost did not hit the send button last Friday, but I have to figure out how to stop Majuba from using his steel balls and destroying my minions before this weeks gaming session!

Thanks so much for the clarification. You guys are grreat!

A scorpion whip uses the same rules as the whip in the PFRPG Core Rulebook, except (1) it deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses, and (2) the stats in the table.

Urumi stats in the table are correct. It's not a reach weapon (it's only about 5' long at most, same as a greatsword). Take away reach from the PCCS stats and it's no better than a longsword, so we gave it a better threat range, otherwise there's no benefit for spending an Exotic Weapon Proficiency on it.

Use the chain spear stats from AA for flying talons.

Bladed scarf is correct on the table (in the PCCS it was way too good as a finesse, reach/close-reach, trip, grappler-damaging weapon).

Some more questions regarding weapons:

1) Is the flambard really meant to be a trip weapon?

2) The ogre hook changed from 1d12 damage in the PCCS to 1d10. Is this by design or a typo?

3) The khopesh is a one-handed exotic weapon that deals 1d8 damage. The PCCS version ("Osirian khopesh") was a two-handed martial weapon that dealt 1d10 damage. Is this suppoed to be the same weapon (the rest of the stats match), and why did it change?

4) The prices for falcata, temple sword and urumi changed from 16, 18, and 30 gp (PCCS) to 18, 30, and 50 gp. This looks a bit like a look-up error as the first two seem to be shifted up a row. Maybe an error or design?

ARG! Can not wait much longer, need this in my Downloads. ARG!

Are the stats for the war razor correct? (Mainly the crit threat range.)

If so, it becomes a four times more expensive dagger, without range or multiple damage types.

Bladed scarf is correct on the table (in the PCCS it was way too good as a finesse, reach/close-reach, trip, grappler-damaging weapon).

Wow, you went all spiked chain on its ass! Admittedly it was a little too good, but now it's a heavy flail that takes exotic weapon proficiency, has a lower threat range, and deals 1d6 instead of 1d10. Based on what you said about the Urumi, what's the benefit of spending the feat?

1) The flambard should not be a trip weapon (it looks like the last column of that part of the table shifted and was only partially corrected in the last pass, which is why the mancatcher and meteor hammer also had errors).

2) Ogre hook: The changes in AA are deliberate; if the hook were just 1d12/x3, it would be as good as a greataxe; with the ability to trip on top of that, it's better than a greataxe, which means it invalidates the greataxe as a weapon (and oddly, in the real world people used axes more than they used giant hooks). The choice was to make it an exotic weapon (which means most ogres would never use it) or drop the damage a little bit and keep it martial. Note that you can still have a Large ogre hook that does 2d8.

3) The khopesh change was deliberate. One, a typical khopesh is under 3 feet long and historically was a 1H weapon, not a 2H weapon. That means its damage had to go down to 1d6/1d8/19-20/x2, which makes it identical to a longsword's stats, except it also has trip. Longsword + trip means it's better than a longsword, and thus needs to move to the exotic category, otherwise it invalidates the longsword.

4) Price changes are intentional. Making a simple, straight blade is easier and cheaper than making a curvy, angular, or flexi-blade.

5) The advantage of the war razor is described in the PCCS... the blade folds into the handle, requiring no sheath, and giving you a +2 bonus on Sleight of Hand checks to conceal it.

6) The advantage over a heavy flail is you can be a sneaky bastard carrying a weaponized scarf, where carrying a flail gets you dirty looks or even arrested. General rule: new and/or fantasy weapons shouldn't invalidate historical and/or Core Rulebook weapons. There's a reason why soldiers didn't go to war armed with bladed scarves--it's because swords, axes, and even flails are more effective at killing your enemies... but are harder to conceal. To quote the PCCS, "The skill required in using such scarves effectively and not revealing their deadly nature makes them exotic weapons."

Thank you, Sean, for the clarifications!

No problem, folks. I know that the handful of errors in the last column of that last table is leading some people to wonder if all the tables are wrong (especially as there are changes from earlier sources), but you can trust those tables are accurate other than the stuff we've noticed in that last column.

And I know exactly why those errors happened, too--there's a window option on a Mac to option-click a visible window in another application, which hides the top application and brings the clicked window to the front. Except it looks like Microsoft, in all its genius, decided that not only would it process that command normally, but if a Microsoft app is the targeted window, it would also pass the option-click command TO that window. I built the initial tables in Excel, and if you option-click a cell in Excell it executes a "create a new blank cell here , and move the clicked cell and everything below it down one row to compensate." So one time when I said, "option-click to hide the campaign setting PDF and bring the exotic weapons table spreadsheet to the front," Excel grabbed that command and shifted some of the cells in the last column down. I thought I'd caught it, but apparently these ones got through. :(

Why not just throw that into the same category of "call your greatsword a zweihander" I guess it just seems kinda silly to make an exotic weapon that is weaker than a standard dagger. By the way you do know that even if we disagree I think you're an awesome writer and designer (I have your swords to plowshares and your argonauts stuff) and appreciate you taking the time to answer

In theory you could make supplemental stats to the butterfly knife, like with the Equipment Trick feat, that wouldn't apply to a regular dagger. Also, it's not *weaker* than a standard dagger, it's exactly the same damage, crit range, and crit multiplier. The difference in price is irrelevant after a PC's first adventure, anyway.

Okay question #2, the launching crossbow doesn't have any stats listed, it doesn't even have a range category or explain what the difference is between using it and just throwing a potion.

The launching crossbow has a 20 ft. range increment.

Field plate "is similar to full plate but lighter in construction, sacrificing a bit in protection for greater flexibility and mobility."

3.5 full plate: +8/+1/-6/35%
PF full plate: +9/+1/-6/35%
PCCS field plate: +7/+2/-6/40%
AA field plate: +7/+1/-5/35%
No heavy armor gives Max Dex +2, so we had to bonk that down to keep it in line with other heavy armors. AA field plate is basically masterwork banded mail... except that you can get masterwork field plate (+7/+1/-4/35%) and you can't get masterwork masterwork banded mail.
There is no medium armor in the PCCS, so the PF +1 increase to medium armors doesn't apply to anything there.

Just to confirm, Field plate doesn't get the +1 AC (3.5 to PF bonus), because it allows a +2 max dex bonus.

Should Stoneplate then have received the +1 AC (3.5 to PF bonus)?

A scorpion whip uses the same rules as the whip in the PFRPG Core Rulebook, except (1) it deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses, and (2) the stats in the table.

Urumi stats in the table are correct. It's not a reach weapon (it's only about 5' long at most, same as a greatsword). Take away reach from the PCCS stats and it's no better than a longsword, so we gave it a better threat range, otherwise there's no benefit for spending an Exotic Weapon Proficiency on it.

Use the chain spear stats from AA for flying talons.

Bladed scarf is correct on the table (in the PCCS it was way too good as a finesse, reach/close-reach, trip, grappler-damaging weapon).

Thanks for the answers Sean. I'm a bit disappointed at the slaying of the PFCS flying talon since I didn't feel a 1d4 damage light reach weapon was too good compared to other weapons, but I understand what you guys are trying to do with weapon balance and I really appreciate a combat useable whip so I can live with the change.

Sorry if someone's mentioned this and I missed it (I scanned the posts since people started getting PDFs and haven't seen it), but why are all the "FI"s missing in the explanatory text at the top of page one? I.e., "exotic weapon prociency," "procient user," "gain the benet of Weapon Focus," etc. Or is it an Acrobat issue?

Temple Sword?

This was introduced in the Campaign Setting. Sajan the monk PC in Kingmaker uses one, but it seems it did not make the Armory. Was this an accidental omission?

What exactly do the specials "grapple" and "sunder" do? The Core Rulebook only defines "brace", "disarm", double", "monk", "nonlethal", "reach", and "trip".

Another one: the Dwarven Maulaxe lists damage type "P or S" which is a change from the PCCS where it "B or S". The description of the weapon leads me to assume B should be correct.

Sorry if someone's mentioned this and I missed it (I scanned the posts since people started getting PDFs and haven't seen it), but why are all the "FI"s missing in the explanatory text at the top of page one? I.e., "exotic weapon prociency," "procient user," "gain the benet of Weapon Focus," etc. Or is it an Acrobat issue?

It is a font ligature issue that we didn't catch because the art director printed off the proofing copies and the font was on her machine, but it wasn't on the machine that made the PDF for the printer and thus the ligatures got left out. We've fixed the process so this never happens again, but that doesn't help this time. :/ It looked great on the proofing pages, who knew?

-Lisa

lastknightleft wrote:

Why not just throw that into the same category of "call your greatsword a zweihander" I guess it just seems kinda silly to make an exotic weapon that is weaker than a standard dagger. By the way you do know that even if we disagree I think you're an awesome writer and designer (I have your swords to plowshares and your argonauts stuff) and appreciate you taking the time to answer

In theory you could make supplemental stats to the butterfly knife, like with the Equipment Trick feat, that wouldn't apply to a regular dagger. Also, it's not *weaker* than a standard dagger, it's exactly the same damage, crit range, and crit multiplier. The difference in price is irrelevant after a PC's first adventure, anyway.

The reason I call it weaker is because it requires a feat to be proficient, and unless I'm mistaken, every class in the game has dagger proficiency, so having the exact same stats as a regular dagger, having no equipment tricks as of now to supplement it (and keep in mind you can also have equipment trips for a regular dagger too) and then saying, but this one takes a proficiency feat, makes it weaker IMO

Thanks for the clarification, Hal!

Now my curiosity is piqued - I must walk away and distract myself before it gets the better of me. Argh.... ;)

Trust me, you don't want to see it.

Developers cut for space. I cut for crap... :)

Joana wrote:

Sorry if someone's mentioned this and I missed it (I scanned the posts since people started getting PDFs and haven't seen it), but why are all the "FI"s missing in the explanatory text at the top of page one? I.e., "exotic weapon prociency," "procient user," "gain the benet of Weapon Focus," etc. Or is it an Acrobat issue?

It is a font ligature issue that we didn't catch because the art director printed off the proofing copies and the font was on her machine, but it wasn't on the machine that made the PDF for the printer and thus the ligatures got left out. We've fixed the process so this never happens again, but that doesn't help this time. :/ It looked great on the proofing pages, who knew?

-Lisa

Lisa, any plans already for a 2nd print run (not just for any errors, but more copies in general) and if so, will the errors be fixed for the 2nd printing?

Trust me, you don't want to see it.

Developers cut for space. I cut for crap... :)

LOL - Gotcha ;P

Your Friendly Neighborhood Dalesman
"Bringing Big D**n Justice to the Bad Guys Since 1369 DR"

Lisa Stevens wrote:

Joana wrote:

Sorry if someone's mentioned this and I missed it (I scanned the posts since people started getting PDFs and haven't seen it), but why are all the "FI"s missing in the explanatory text at the top of page one? I.e., "exotic weapon prociency," "procient user," "gain the benet of Weapon Focus," etc. Or is it an Acrobat issue?

It is a font ligature issue that we didn't catch because the art director printed off the proofing copies and the font was on her machine, but it wasn't on the machine that made the PDF for the printer and thus the ligatures got left out. We've fixed the process so this never happens again, but that doesn't help this time. :/ It looked great on the proofing pages, who knew?

-Lisa

Lisa, any plans already for a 2nd print run (not just for any errors, but more copies in general) and if so, will the errors be fixed for the 2nd printing?

+1 if nothing else I'd like the PDF to be fixed so I can print out the chart and add it to my equipment charts.

It is a font ligature issue that we didn't catch because the art director printed off the proofing copies and the font was on her machine, but it wasn't on the machine that made the PDF for the printer and thus the ligatures got left out. We've fixed the process so this never happens again, but that doesn't help this time. :/ It looked great on the proofing pages, who knew?

That's good to know, I was worried about my players opening and closing their buttery knives during the next game... ;-)

Lisa Stevens wrote:

It is a font ligature issue that we didn't catch because the art director printed off the proofing copies and the font was on her machine, but it wasn't on the machine that made the PDF for the printer and thus the ligatures got left out. We've fixed the process so this never happens again, but that doesn't help this time. :/ It looked great on the proofing pages, who knew?

That's good to know, I was worried about my players opening and closing their buttery knives during the next game... ;-)

But they'd come in so handy at breakfast for toast and English muffins! I think hobbits ought to get buttery knife proficiency as a racial trait.

Just curious as to why spiked chain gets to benefit from weapon finesse, but Battle Poi don't.

They also seem to work better as melee touch attacks that don't add a strength bonus to damage...

{Just to confirm, Field plate doesn't get the +1 AC (3.5 to PF bonus), because it allows a +2 max dex bonus.}

No, field plate doesn't get a +2 max Dex bonus at all. :)
Like I said earlier, field plate is basically masterwork banded mail, which (just like banded mail) has the PF-granted +1 AC bump to heavy armor built in.

{Should Stoneplate then have received the +1 AC (3.5 to PF bonus)?}

Yes.

{Temple Sword: This was introduced in the Campaign Setting. Sajan the monk PC in Kingmaker uses one, but it seems it did not make the Armory. Was this an accidental omission?

See 1H exotic melee weapons on the inside back cover.

{What exactly do the specials "grapple" and "sunder" do?}

Sorry, that seemed self-evident to me, but just to be clear, there are no additional abilities relating to dropping weapons or anything like that, it's just:
Grapple: You can use a grapple weapon to make grapple attacks.
Sunder: You can use a sunder weapon to make sunder attacks.

{Another one: the Dwarven Maulaxe lists damage type "P or S" which is a change from the PCCS where it "B or S". The description of the weapon leads me to assume B should be correct.}

Yep, it's "B or S"

{The reason I call it weaker is because it requires a feat to be proficient, and unless I'm mistaken, every class in the game has dagger proficiency, so having the exact same stats as a regular dagger, having no equipment tricks as of now to supplement it (and keep in mind you can also have equipment trips for a regular dagger too) and then saying, but this one takes a proficiency feat, makes it weaker IMO}

Butterfly knife says "otherwise, treat this weapon as a dagger," which means anyone can use it as if it were a dagger. So you don't have to spend a feat to use it as a dagger, which means it's just as good as a dagger. The door is open for more things with it (just as the door is open for more feats, spells, and magic items that rely on bardic performance, barbarian rage, and other rounds-per-day powers introduced in the PFRPG).

{Lisa, any plans already for a 2nd print run (not just for any errors, but more copies in general) and if so, will the errors be fixed for the 2nd printing?}

I've sent all of these to the art staff and they're making changes to the PDF. I don't make decisions about whether or not to reprint books, but in general our policy is "if things need to be fixed, fix them for the reprint."

{Just curious as to why spiked chain gets to benefit from weapon finesse, but Battle Poi don't.}

I *might* be inclined to allow battle poi to use Weapon Finesse, but you're already getting the benefit of having the TWF feat when using them, so I'm cautious about letting you use a Dex-stacking feat with a weapon that already gives you a Dex-based feat for free--it makes the weapon really appealing for Dex-based characters.

Or, to put it another way: to get optimal use out of a spiked chain, you need 3 feats: Exotic Weapon Prof, TWF, and Weapon Finesse--because TWF requires Dex 15, and odds are if you have Dex 15 then that's your highest stat, so you're going to use WF to optimize your attack bonus over a lesser stat. If battle poi allowed WF, to get optimal use out of battle poi, you'd only need 2 feats: Exotic Weapon Prof and WF--because you automatically get the benefit of TWF with it. So in this scenario, the poi-user would have one extra available feat compared to the spiked chain user.

{What exactly do the specials "grapple" and "sunder" do?}

Sorry, that seemed self-evident to me, but just to be clear, there are no additional abilities relating to dropping weapons or anything like that, it's just:
Grapple: You can use a grapple weapon to make grapple attacks.
Sunder: You can use a sunder weapon to make sunder attacks.

Presumably (?) grapple weapons avoid the penalties for grappling with one (or both) hands full, however.

{What exactly do the specials "grapple" and "sunder" do?}

Sorry, that seemed self-evident to me, but just to be clear, there are no additional abilities relating to dropping weapons or anything like that, it's just:
Grapple: You can use a grapple weapon to make grapple attacks.
Sunder: You can use a sunder weapon to make sunder attacks.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

We just got the debate over tripping weapons clarified so that we knew you can only make trip attempt with trip weapons. If you add that horrible line it means that there are only two weapons in the game by the established clarifications that can make sunder attempts. The grapple is fine but you can attempt to sunder with any weapon and you need to drop sunder unless it has some other definition.

They also seem to work better as melee touch attacks that don't add a strength bonus to damage...

As soon as you create a manufactured weapon that is a melee touch attack, it brings up a ton of questions as to how that interacts with weapon abilities (like flaming) and why can't you do the same thing with touch attacks with other weapons (whether an armored gauntlet, whip, or greatsword).

1) If you let those abilities trigger on touch attacks, then it's really easy to hurt creatures otherwise protected by high armor/natural armor, which makes the battle poi too exploitable. Plus, you could just start making touch attacks with any weapon and expect the weapon's special abilities would trigger normally.

2) If you don't let those abilities trigger on touch attacks (which is how it currently works--you can't make touch attacks with manufactured weapons, or at least you can't trigger their special abilities by doing so), then it makes special weapon abilities on touch-attack-only weapons irrelevant because they never trigger.

I'd rather see +1 disruption shock battle poi in the game that require normal (non-touch) melee attacks than relegate the battle poi to the ghetto of never getting special weapon abilities because they don't have any effect on the weapon.

They also seem to work better as melee touch attacks that don't add a strength bonus to damage...

I think they would work better as weapons that do 1d2 blunt damage and 1d4 fire damage, say.

Presumably (?) grapple weapons avoid the penalties for grappling with one (or both) hands full, however.

True. So perhaps it's not as self-evident as I thought. :)

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

We just got the debate over tripping weapons clarified so that we knew you can only make trip attempt with trip weapons. If you add that horrible line it means that there are only two weapons in the game by the established clarifications that can make sunder attempts. The grapple is fine but you can attempt to sunder with any weapon and you need to drop sunder unless it has some other definition.

Good points. So let's revise what I said earlier:

Grapple: This weapon has special rules when used to make grapple attacks.
Sunder: This weapon has special rules when used to make sunder attacks.

Better? :)

I *might* be inclined to allow battle poi to use Weapon Finesse, but you're already getting the benefit of having the TWF feat when using them, so I'm cautious about letting you use a Dex-stacking feat with a weapon that already gives you a Dex-based feat for free--it makes the weapon really appealing for Dex-based characters.

Or, to put it another way: to get optimal use out of a spiked chain, you need 3 feats: Exotic Weapon Prof, TWF, and Weapon Finesse--because TWF requires Dex 15, and odds are if you have Dex 15 then that's your highest stat, so you're going to use WF to optimize your attack bonus over a lesser stat. If battle poi allowed WF, to get optimal use out of battle poi, you'd only need 2 feats: Exotic Weapon Prof and WF--because you automatically get the benefit of TWF with it. So in this scenario, the poi-user would have one extra available feat compared to the spiked chain user.

Spiked chain is listed as a two-handed weapon. It is NOT listed as a double weapon. Why would you want to take TWF with it?

I haven't looked at the Armory yet so I don't know what the poi is, but it seems like the comparison is flawed if you're assigning feats to the spiked chain that one would never actually take with it. (Feats you WOULD be more likely to take with the spiked chain would be Combat Expertise, Improved Disarm, Improved Trip, etc. to make the most of its Disarm and Trip abilities.)

(Other comment deleted due to ninja activity)

(Other comment deleted due to ninja activity)

*hides behind tree*

*hides behind tree*

It's a hedge. Move along.

Spiked chain is listed as a two-handed weapon. It is NOT listed as a double weapon. Why would you want to take TWF with it?

*sigh* It's still early. Can I blame the construction workers who've been in my apartment drilling into the walls to upgrade the kitchen and bathroom plumbing for the past two weeks?

I was mentally combining the rules for the spiked chain and the dire flail (which *is* a double weapon). Discarding that aberrant thought, yes, you probably should be able to use WF with the battle poi.

DeathQuaker wrote:

Spiked chain is listed as a two-handed weapon. It is NOT listed as a double weapon. Why would you want to take TWF with it?

*sigh* It's still early. Can I blame the construction workers who've been in my apartment drilling into the walls to upgrade the kitchen and bathroom plumbing for the past two weeks?

I was mentally combining the rules for the spiked chain and the dire flail (which *is* a double weapon). Discarding that aberrant thought, yes, you probably should be able to use WF with the battle poi.

Certainly, you can blame the construction workers. :) Sorry about all that.

Ah yes, I see where you might have conflated the two.

Though reading through this thread--and this is not a personal criticism of you--I have to say I'm tempted to cancel my preorder of the book and wait till the second printing, if there are going to be this many errata.

We just got the debate over tripping weapons clarified so that we knew you can only make trip attempt with trip weapons.

Really? That's lame... I'm making an immediate houserule that old bald Chinese men can make trip attacks with any suitable staff, with appropriate bonuses for the length of their mustache and/or goatee.

hogarth wrote:

Presumably (?) grapple weapons avoid the penalties for grappling with one (or both) hands full, however.

True. So perhaps it's not as self-evident as I thought. :)

lastknightleft wrote:

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO!

We just got the debate over tripping weapons clarified so that we knew you can only make trip attempt with trip weapons. If you add that horrible line it means that there are only two weapons in the game by the established clarifications that can make sunder attempts. The grapple is fine but you can attempt to sunder with any weapon and you need to drop sunder unless it has some other definition.

Good points. So let's revise what I said earlier:

Grapple: This weapon has special rules when used to make grapple attacks.
Sunder: This weapon has special rules when used to make sunder attacks.

Better? :)

Much, Congrats Sean you almost made me cry :P

If it helps, I've been tracking all these changes and have noted them in the Archives:

Weapons
Armor
Gear

All the AA's weapons and armor should be up there, I am currently working on the misc. gear so that is not quite done.

One thing I wasn't sure on. Sean, you said Stoneplate should indeed receive the +1 bonus from 3.5 to PRPG, making it a total +10 armor bonus? Was the increase on its max dex intentional as well? It was +0 in the Campaign Setting and is now +1.

Thanks!

All of the armor entries in Adventurer's Armory are correct. :)

{Just to confirm, Field plate doesn't get the +1 AC (3.5 to PF bonus), because it allows a +2 max dex bonus.}

No, field plate doesn't get a +2 max Dex bonus at all. :)
Like I said earlier, field plate is basically masterwork banded mail, which (just like banded mail) has the PF-granted +1 AC bump to heavy armor built in.

Whoops, I was comparing the old and new versions and got that mixed up.

There may be a design concern with not bumping up the AC though (mainly due to its price):

• despite field plate being masterwork banded mail, it still got an extra +1 AC in the Campaign Setting, over regular banded mail and the price of 1200 gp seemed appropriate for a +7 armor that had a +2 max dex bonus.
  
• MW Banded Mail costs 400 gp and you get all the same benefits, at 15 lbs less weight. (Although field plate can be upgraded to MW -- although at a difference of 950 gp for an extra +1 armor check penalty)
  
• Given the weight increase and the hefty price, I think the original design must have taken into account extra reinforcement, increasing the AC.
  
• now that all other medium and heavy armors got a +1 AC, except field plate, and given that it's max dex bonus has dropped by 1, it seems way over priced for simply gaining -1 armor check penalty.

For the second printing, how much of the errata posted in this thread so far will be included?