Still, my point is that, until you get it fixed, you've lost the "proficiency" you had. Until you can get it fixed, you're -4 to all of your attacks, because you're only proficient with that one weapon, not any other weapon of the same type.
Or you use a slightly different weapon (e.g. my back-up weapon is a morningstar instead of a falcata, or a javelin instead of a composite longbow).
EDIT: ninja'ed...
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
And gives you effectively two feats, just like heirloom weapon does.I don't think "ignore the range penalty between 1 and 2 range increments with a bow" is worth a feat. It's certainly not equivalent to Far Shot.
I bet you could count on one hand the number of encounters in published PFS scenarios that have distances outside 1 range increment of a longbow.
|
I slightly agree with teribithia9.
If I was a melee character, this would be one of the traits I would take. I'm good for another +1 to hit and start with a mwk item. That +1 would be great to help counter Power Attack or Combat Expertise.
I have thus far only encountered 1 scenario where the weapon would be threatened. If that stays consistent, and it can be used in place of Weapon Focus for prerequisites (though I'm not sure why you wouldn't take that anyway) and a Make Whole will fix it back to the way it was, I would consider for PFS only, that this is equivalent to a feat not a trait. Only because I don't see PFS targeting players who have taken a particular trait or feat. (This did happen in LG, where players who took a particular feat/PC/magic item were singled out in specific adventures. But that's another thread.)
As has been said before, in a home campaign this can be circumvented. However in PFS, or any OP, this has the potential to be more powerful than just a basic trait.
|
Go Rustmonster, go
We just need the occasional occurence of one of these critters in future PFS scenarios.
Yes - the player facing a Rustmonster will be able to put away his weapon, go to the back - whatever. Same of course with other 'valuable weapons'. But it would be a nive reminder of the limits of the trait.
And just if someone says - but you can have an exotic non-metal weapon. Yeah - but I can't recall any overpowered one right now. And the whole issue here is that you combine the trait with the most powerful weapons - not with some quirky ones.
Of course I'm not objective here - likely I will be the GM and I just hot two Otherworld Rustmonsters that wait to be painted and used :)
Thod
What if it didn't make the weapon automatically masterwork in PFS games? Or would that make it too weak?
My house rule would probably be to remove the +1 trait bonus to attacks.
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.
|
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.
I'm thinking about a house-rule that the +1 to attack isn't given. With it, it's basically Weapon Focus with that weapon, free Proficiency with that weapon, and free Masterwork with that weapon. A lot for one trait. Granted, it's all for naught if the weapon is destroyed, but how often is that going to happen?
I'm specifically talking about Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which can't really have house rules. :-)
|
|
I'm specifically talking about Pathfinder Society Organized Play, which can't really have house rules. :-)
Well, I knew it was for Society play, but I thought Society play was full of House Rules? How buying consumables (wands/scrolls being from wiz/clr/drd) is handled, hand-waving prestige class flavor requirements, no crafting feats, etc. It seems easy enough to add to the "Legal for Play" list a note that the Heirloom Weapon trait doesn't give the +1 attack bonus.
Personally, I think the trait is a needed one, if only to solve the problem of the 'I want an exotic ancestor weapon as a non-full BAB class but can't take EWP until +1 BAB' that seems to pop up a lot. :)
Heh, that is what I thought too. Anything not done by the core rules was a "house rule", just that in this case the "house rules" are also official for a huge group called The Pathfinder Society.
Anyway, it is too bad that something like this trait would have to be an all or nothing decision, and you can't say something like "you get a free masterwork weapon and are proficient with it, but receive none of the other bonuses." Nut I can see what Josh means that this feels even more like a "house rule" than the normal types of changes made for PFS.
|
|
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.
Precisely how many reports of broken and destroyed heirloom weapons would you need to bring it back from that edge? 'Cause I'll start sundering left and right so my inquisitor can keep his bastard sword.
|
But I'm imagining a Pathfinder Society table:"That's your grandpappy's meteor hammer? What a coincidence -- this is my grandpappy's launching crossbow!"
"Hey, you guys got a weapon from your grandpappy, too? That's where I got this falcata!"
"Yeah, and that's where I got my injection spear! There's a lot of history in this ol' injection spear..."
Yeah, within the past month this has happened now in *multiple games* for me... you have foretold the future. Now it's a bit trite, but the trait's just so good, players can't help themselves!
Nothing like a level 1 sorcerer running around with an Elven Curve Blade and having +5 to hit at 1st level. Or a 1st level Inquisitor using Mark of Justice to ramp up to +8 to hit with Granpappy's exotic weapon at 1st level to make the Fighter/Paladin/etc say "whaaa?"
Either I missed this in amongst the posts or no one ever mentioned this, but I finally got a chance to look through a copy of Adventurer's Armory and read the text for this trait and realized the following (bolding is mine):
You carry a weapon that has been
passed down from generation to generation in your
family. This heirloom weapon is of masterwork quality
(but you pay only the standard cost at character creation).
You do not get a free weapon, only the cost of it being masterwork is free with this trait. Now I know that with a lot of weapons, the masterwork cost is the major part, so if would be good for a longsword for example, but taking some expensive or exotic weapon, like a two-handed sword or long composite bow, with this trait will make a big impact on your starting gold.
|
|
Either I missed this in amongst the posts or no one ever mentioned this, but I finally got a chance to look through a copy of Adventurer's Armory and read the text for this trait and realized the following (bolding is mine):
You carry a weapon that has been
passed down from generation to generation in your
family. This heirloom weapon is of masterwork quality
(but you pay only the standard cost at character creation).You do not get a free weapon, only the cost of it being masterwork is free with this trait. Now I know that with a lot of weapons, the masterwork cost is the major part, so if would be good for a longsword for example, but taking some expensive or exotic weapon, like a two-handed sword or long composite bow, with this trait will make a big impact on your starting gold.
That sort of prices some items out of the picture entirely.
For what it's worth this feat has already made an appearance at my table, maybe twice, I didn't check the other character. I was tempted to take it myself.
Nothing...a 1st level Inquisitor using Mark of Justice to ramp up to +8 to hit with Granpappy's exotic weapon at 1st level to make the Fighter/Paladin/etc say "whaaa?"
I intend on doing precisely that with my Inquisitor's cold iron fauchard. At least until the DM throws a rust monster at us. Any rust monsters in Kingmaker? :) Oh, and Mark of Justice is a different thing entirely, or so the greasemonkey/SRD script says.
Zo
|
Hi
Wasn't aware of that Trait when I started my Sorc 1/Pal 2 (going Dragon Disciple) character, but would STILL have taken Anatomist (+1 Melee damage to ALL weapons).
Even if I switch to Claws (from Gt Axe) I still get the bonus. Arcane Strike adds further +1 dam at my level, and makes the weapons count as magical.*
Heirloom isn't that great when we consider what else is out there..........
Cheers
Paul H
* Attack: 2xClaws +4 Dam: D4 +4(Magical). Smite: 2xClaws +7 Dam: D4 +6
Hi
Wasn't aware of that Trait when I started my Sorc 1/Pal 2 (going Dragon Disciple) character, but would STILL have taken Anatomist (+1 Melee damage to ALL weapons).
You can take them both, of course. It's not an either-or thing.
|
|
Where are you getting the anatomist trait from? The version of that trait I see says you get a +1 to confirm all crits.
Anatomist: You have studied the workings of anatomy, either as a student at university or as an apprentice mortician or necromancer. You know where to aim your blows to strike vital organs and you gain a +1 trait bonus on all rolls made to conf irm critical hits.
Hi
I thought you couldn't have two Traits from the same type of source? EG two Combat Traits?
Heirloom Weapon is an Equipment Trait.
|
|
Hi
The PDF I downloaded in February says:
"Anatomist: You have studied the workings of anatomy, either as a student at university or as an apprentice mortician or
necromancer. You know where to aim your blows to strike vital organs and you gain a +1 trait bonus on all melee damage rolls."
Other versions say +1 to confirm crits. Which is the updated version?
Cheers
Paul H
|
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.
Josh, have you had any additional thoughts on this trait now that PaizoCon is over and you're probably had some time to see it in action?
|
|
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.Josh, have you had any additional thoughts on this trait now that PaizoCon is over and you're probably had some time to see it in action?
Josh, please don't! My gnome gardener will be very disappointed if he has to actually get training to use the tree pruner (aka, a ripsaw glaive) that's been is his family of gardeners for generations! :-(
|
|
I am totally in support of Josh and not allowing this trait for PFS play. This trait essentially gives two feats and a MW weapon for free. You gain martial or exotic weapon proficiency(depending on the chosen weapon) and weapon focus feats for free and then you get a free 300-450gp item for free. UMmmm broken. I don't even allow this in my home campaign.
|
|
I am totally in support of Josh and not allowing this trait for PFS play. This trait essentially gives two feats and a MW weapon for free. You gain martial or exotic weapon proficiency(depending on the chosen weapon) and weapon focus feats for free and then you get a free 300-450gp item for free. UMmmm broken. I don't even allow this in my home campaign.
As has been pointed out by others earlier:
- A +1 trait bonus to hit <> Weapon Focus. The latter opens up an entire feat chain, whereas the trait does no such thing.
- "... you get a free 300-450gp item ..." No, you don't. You get a masterwork weapon for which you don't pay the masterwork cost. Are you going to take away the wizard's (or arcane sorecerer's) arcane bonded staff? That's a "free masterwork item" ...
- Exotic weapon proficiency -- guess we need to take away weapon familiarity from elves, dwarves, gnomes, halflings, and orcs, because we can't go handing out free EWP for elven curve blades, dwarven maulaxes and waraxes and dorn-dergars and urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double-axes, or halfling sling staffs. Man, we should really just ban dwarves -- they get four EWP feats for free ...
Are you going to take away the wizard's (or arcane sorecerer's) arcane bonded staff?
If there were a trait that says "this trait gives you an arcane bonded item", then yes, I would take that trait away from my players.
The point is not that the trait is better than various similar feats, class features and racial abilities. The point is that the trait is better than other combat- or weapon-related traits.
|
|
Are you going to take away the wizard's (or arcane sorecerer's) arcane bonded staff?If there were a trait that says "this trait gives you an arcane bonded item", then yes, I would take that trait away from my players.
The point is not that the trait is better than various similar feats, class features and racial abilities. The point is that the trait is better than other combat- or weapon-related traits.
Well, IMHO, to say that a trait should be banned because it's better than another is kind of a silly argument. We should ban a crap-ton of them then based on that...
- Why would I take the Skill Focus: Knowledge (engineering) feat, when I could take the Egorian School Apprentice trait and get the same benefit, plus a "+2 trait bonus on Perception checks to find secret doors or traps in buildings built in the Egorian School style" -- guess we should ban the trait, because it's better than a feat.
- Why would I ever take the Jaded or Courageous traits, with both granting a +2 to saves vs. fear effects, when I could take Nightstall Urchin, get the save vs. fear and a "+1 trait bonus on attack rolls and all skill checks for the next minute" after making one of those saves. Clearly the latter trait is "better" than the first two, so we should ban it?
- We should probably ban the Watching Taldor trait, since it gives you the Quick Draw feat "for free"
- The Birthmark trait gives you a +2 trait bonus on saves vs. charms and compulsions and a "free" divine focus that can never be sundered or disarmed from you (short of killing you); probably should ban that
- Looks like the Lost Nobility gives you the Weapon Focus feat and partial benefit of Weapon Specialization, so that's 1.5 feats for the price of a trait -- ban it
- And good grief... The Wisdom in the Flesh trait could be absolutely sick depending on the build
Now, so I really think any of the above should really be banned? No. But the arguments are in the same vein as some of those I've seen for banning Heirloom Weapon
Any given trait is going to be better than another, or even possibly better than a feat, based on how the player perceives it will be useful to him or her.
|
|
Hi
What about feat prereqs?
Dervish Dance has:
"Prerequisites: Dexterity 13, Weapon Finesse, Perform
(dance) 2 ranks, proficient with scimitar."
Can I meet proficiency req's with an Heirloom Scimitar? If the answer's 'Yes', I know the feat will only work with that weapon specifically. Or do I need to be proficient with all Scimitars?
Just that I'm starting a new Qadiran Halfling Rogue. (Dex 18). If answer's 'yes' I can take the feat as my Rogue Talent at 2nd level, otherwise I'll have to take level of Fighter instead.
Thanks
Paul H
This is a rule question. Should be in the rule area. But on this note, no it does not. you are not proficient with scimitars, you are proficient with this singular item.
Which also, interestingly enough, prevents you from taking a great number of combat feats, including Weapon Focus and all its derivatives. I think that's a pretty strong limiting factor--if you actually want to specialize in the weapon, you still have to take the proficiency feat.
|
|
This is a rule question. Should be in the rule area. But on this note, no it does not. you are not proficient with scimitars, you are proficient with this singular item.Which also, interestingly enough, prevents you from taking a great number of combat feats, including Weapon Focus and all its derivatives. I think that's a pretty strong limiting factor--if you actually want to specialize in the weapon, you still have to take the proficiency feat.
It's not equivalent to exotic weapon proficiency if you are a fighter and want to use weapon specialization. For every other class except for eldritch knight that's not a limitation at all. Even a fighter who wants to takes an exotic weapon still gets a masterwork upgrade at 1st level and a +1 on attack bonuses that stacks with weapon focus.
Essentially any character who wields a weapon gets a pretty decent benefit out of this feat.
It's not equivalent to exotic weapon proficiency if you are a fighter and want to use weapon specialization. For every other class except for eldritch knight that's not a limitation at all. Even a fighter who wants to takes an exotic weapon still gets a masterwork upgrade at 1st level and a +1 on attack bonuses that stacks with weapon focus.
And said fighter can always take Exotic Weapon Proficiency in that weapon type as well, if he wants access to Weapon Focus, et al.
|
|
We've discussed this trait at great length. I'm of the opinion it's a little too powerful for a trait and is more akin to a campaign trait. I'm going to think about it some more, but this is perched precariously on the edge of me disallowing it.
If you think that it's a little to powerful (I'm on the fence with it) just drop the +1 to hit. No I am not suggesting that every feat/item/trait/whatever that seems to be too powerful or not fit in PFS be modified instead of banned, that's just too confusing and too much work. I just think that dialing down this trait instead of disallowing it is a better way to go.
I've been looking at this trait for a half-elf Paladin using an Elven Curved Blade. It's a perfect fit for the role-playing and mechanics. Instead of being an outcast, he grew up in an elven community and learned to use all the elven weapons just like an elf.
Also, I'd rule that this trait allows a character to use a bastard sword/dwarven waraxe/or similar exotic weapon with two hands but that they would need to take the EWP feat to use the weapon one handed.
-Swiftbrook
Just My Thoughts
Honestly, it's not really my job to re-design stuff the design team puts out. It's my job to determine how their design might affect organized play and the balance of play at the table. If something isn't a good fit for org play, then I'd rather just not allow it then re-write it entirely.
I'm likely to remove this trait from legality in the next update. It's as good as a feat and a half--which is too good for a trait IMHO.
|
|
Honestly, it's not really my job to re-design stuff the design team puts out. It's my job to determine how their design might affect organized play and the balance of play at the table. If something isn't a good fit for org play, then I'd rather just not allow it then re-write it entirely.
I'm likely to remove this trait from legality in the next update. It's as good as a feat and a half--which is too good for a trait IMHO.
Heirloom Weapon: You're on notice! :P
Aside from the mechanics of the trait, it also makes sense to not allow it just because it is a free weapon, a weapon that could cost a lot otherwise. After all, the traits that allow extra gold are not allowed either in the spirit of a level start for all characters.
|
|
Honestly, it's not really my job to re-design stuff the design team puts out. It's my job to determine how their design might affect organized play and the balance of play at the table. If something isn't a good fit for org play, then I'd rather just not allow it then re-write it entirely.
I'm likely to remove this trait from legality in the next update. It's as good as a feat and a half--which is too good for a trait IMHO.
When something like this happens, what happens to characters who've used this trait as a backbone for their character? (invested in feats, skill ranks, ability scores, magic items)
|
|
When something like this happens, what happens to characters who've used this trait as a backbone for their character? (invested in feats, skill ranks, ability scores, magic items)
I have no idea what the "official" answer is, (or even if there is one), so the following is STRICTLY my opinion.
Feats, skills, etc. aren't tracked anywhere other than your character sheet. As a player, I'd just quietly rebuild my character as closely to the original spirit/concept as possible given the new available mechanics. I would NOT take the removal of a trait as an excuse to make unrelated changes. As a GM, I wouldn't give a player at my table (who I somehow found had had done this) a hard time.
Your mileage, as well any official answer which may be forthcoming, may vary.