Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Are magical weapon costs too high in PFS?


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion

1 to 50 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
**

It seems that magical weapon costs are far too expensive in the society to be anywhere near useful. The cost for a +1 enchantment is 2,000 gold plus 300 for the masterwork cost PLUS the cost of the weapon. Let's compare this to armor costs which are exactly half the cost of magical weapons. Shields are the same.

Why is the cost of magical weapons exactly 2 to 1 against the armor? The benefit of a +1 magical weapon is not that significant in society games. The gold acquired in early levels is something else to be considered too. A low level player can get on average 500 gold a session. 2 sessions in, they can purchase magical armor, and will likely do so because not falling in combat is more critical than doing one extra damage. (A smart player will also realize that this is a better option because nothing in the PFS has a decent attack bonus. And before anyone argues this point, I just played a tier 5 scenario that gave monsters a +3 :P ) Low level players can also get the armor in 2 scenarios, compared to saving up gold for four scenarios to get a +1 on their weapon.

If that's still not enough proof for you that's something is wrong with the costing, I'll give you this case: At the venue where I play PFS, the rouges have started using shields even though they're not proficient in them. The player realized that he was a little too squishy and wanted to boost his survivability. He looked at getting a magical shield or a magical weapon. He decided to go with a magical Darkwood heavy shield because it gave him a +3 to his AC with no attack penalty at a cost of 1300 gold. The shield was still 700 gold less than the +1 weapon. There's something wrong here.


Let's not complain that the defenses are cheaper than the offenses. And if the benefit of a +1 weapon is "not that significant," why are you complaining about it being expensive? If it isn't significant...

Taldor **** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Northwestern Indiana aka VanceMadrox

This isn't really a PFS issue.

PFS uses the prices set in the Core book.

**

Alitan wrote:
Let's not complain that the defenses are cheaper than the offenses. And if the benefit of a +1 weapon is "not that significant," why are you complaining about it being expensive? If it isn't significant...

Just because it's not significant doesn't mean it's not useful. But the pricing is so expensive that the +1 weapons see very little use.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I don't see an issue with this. Having the ability to increase AC to make up for always-increasing BAB seems to me like "working as intended".

**

VanceMadrox wrote:

This isn't really a PFS issue.

PFS uses the prices set in the Core book.

It is more of a PFS issue than a core issue. If a +1 weapon drops in core, your character or someone else in your party can keep it. You don't have to pay to keep it the item.

In PFS +1 weapons drop extremely frequently. While you can use these weapons in the scenario, once your done with the scenario you have to purchase the weapon again. But the price of the weapons is still set to this magical weapon chart, so you still have to pay the normal price for the gear. Meaning that in most situations, you still won't purchase the magical weapon.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion Subscriber

Have fun with DR x/magic and incorporeal opponents :)


... I just can't see being concerned with the pricing on weapons. If having a +1 weapon is so direly important, you either save the money for it or get yourself access to the "magic weapon" spell.

And as it is the 'normal price' for the gear, it's not like you haven't got the same opportunities as everyone else to get it.

But I can think of (literally) dozens of things I'd want long before a +1 weapon. Mind you, I'm multiclassing into Wizard soon, so I can always get the spell... for those DR (x)/magic critters.

***** Venture-Captain, Indiana—Indianapolis aka Red-Assassin

I think pricing is fine, gold is awarded based on the party selling items back.

I found a +1 javelin in a scenario, I wanted to use it but never did. I would likely not buy one. I am a dual wielding rogue with only a single magical weapon at this point. My character is level 8, and could of bought another weapon, but I choose not to so far.

Different characters will want different items, a caster may want meta magic rods, etc.
Oil of magic weapon is a good low cost consumable.

Andoran *****

You are incorrect, sir, and will see the importance of having a magical weapon, and why they are worth the cost when we start playing higher level scenarios. :P

Also, in regards to 'dumb scenario with +3 to hit on a CR 5 encounter' part of your post: the CR table is dumb at certain points. That encounter is one example. In regards to that same scenario, I didnt hear you guys laughing about all the 'auto damage' you were taking. Also, I dont think I heard one peep about searching for traps. :P

**

godsDMit wrote:

You are incorrect, sir, and will see the importance of having a magical weapon, and why they are worth the cost when we start playing higher level scenarios. :P

Also, in regards to 'dumb scenario with +3 to hit on a CR 5 encounter' part of your post: the CR table is dumb at certain points. That encounter is one example. In regards to that same scenario, I didnt hear you guys laughing about all the 'auto damage' you were taking. Also, I dont think I heard one peep about searching for traps. :P

I just may make you eat those words. I keep hearing that an 8 con is a horrible idea, yet that character keeps managing to kill off your summoners :P

And that scenario....that's just an awful scenario. If I could vote on it on the site...

Anyways, back on topic. Bless weapon would work fine against incorporeal creatures, and possibly some DR creatures as well.

I also think there's some misunderstanding of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that a +1 weapon is useless, but that the cost makes using one prohibitive. If the cost was lowered to even 1500 gold, I think it would be a better value for the money.

**** Venture-Lieutenant, Canada—Ontario aka Feegle

Tarma wrote:
VanceMadrox wrote:

This isn't really a PFS issue.

PFS uses the prices set in the Core book.

It is more of a PFS issue than a core issue. If a +1 weapon drops in core, your character or someone else in your party can keep it. You don't have to pay to keep it the item.

In PFS +1 weapons drop extremely frequently. While you can use these weapons in the scenario, once your done with the scenario you have to purchase the weapon again. But the price of the weapons is still set to this magical weapon chart, so you still have to pay the normal price for the gear. Meaning that in most situations, you still won't purchase the magical weapon.

For the record, while you don't get to keep the items that you find, players are compensated with additional gold at the end of each scenario. This gold is a share of the value of the magic items that you find in the course of the scenario. eg: You find a +1 sword. You get an additional 2K/4 people = 500 gp on the chronicle.

You might feel that you're being denied the ability to keep magical items that you find, but you're missing that you're getting significantly more coin than you would get in a home game.

Shadow Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarma wrote:
I also think there's some misunderstanding of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that a +1 weapon is useless, but that the cost makes using one prohibitive. If the cost was lowered to even 1500 gold, I think it would be a better value for the money.

But that's not the price. The price is 2k + masterwork weapon.

Maybe you're just used to home games where your DM throws the Wealth by Level guidelines out the window, and gives you magic weapons at level 2. Sorry, but that's the exception, not the standard.

Once again, this isn't a PFS issue. You're problem seems to be with the core rules.

Silver Crusade **

Mystic Lemur wrote:
Tarma wrote:
I also think there's some misunderstanding of what I'm saying. I'm not saying that a +1 weapon is useless, but that the cost makes using one prohibitive. If the cost was lowered to even 1500 gold, I think it would be a better value for the money.

But that's not the price. The price is 2k + masterwork weapon.

Maybe you're just used to home games where your DM throws the Wealth by Level guidelines out the window, and gives you magic weapons at level 2. Sorry, but that's the exception, not the standard.

Once again, this isn't a PFS issue. You're problem seems to be with the core rules.

Ok, I'll bite. PFS, lvl 1-2, you should get 400-500 gold per session. 2,000/400 = 5 sessions. You could easily get a magic weapon while still level 2, and thats assuming low cash.

Shadow Lodge ***

Which just shows that PFS already takes some liberties with WBL, and further shows that the OP's concerns are unfounded.

And I would counter that a 2nd level PC who saves up all his money to buy that +1 weapon is still the exception to the rule. ;)

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Illinois—Decatur aka TwilightKnight

Tarma wrote:
And that scenario....that's just an awful scenario. If I could vote on it on the site...

You certainly can and are encouraged to do so. Just go to the webpage for that specific scenario and scroll to the bottom of the listing. You should find an option to review the product as well as the ability to rate it on the 5-star scale.

Feedback from players helps the authors to improve their styles for future products and lets Paizo staff know what types of encounters/challenges you/we enjoy the most so they can encourage more of it.

**

Mystic Lemur wrote:


But that's not the price. The price is 2k + masterwork weapon.

Maybe you're just used to home games where your DM throws the Wealth by Level guidelines out the window, and gives you magic weapons at level 2. Sorry, but that's the exception, not the standard.

Once again, this isn't a PFS issue. You're problem seems to be with the core rules.

Except that I don't play core Pathfinder at all. My only pathfinder experience is with the society.

I think the worst response (and sadly one of the most common) for any issue involving the society is "Well, that's what it is in the core. So deal with it." The society isn't the core game, and there are a lot of rules and systems in place that reflect that. But magical weapons are an area that just are not handled well by the core rules.

It's been stated that you could in theory get a magical weapon at level 2 if you did nothing else but save for it. But that just doesn't seem to happen. As Mystic Lemur stated, the character that rushes for the +1 weapon is the exception to the rule.

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Consider this, as well:

You get half (arguably, more than half) of the benefit of a magic +1 weapon just by buying a masterwork weapon. The masterwork quality, at 300 gp (plus the cost of the weapon) gives you the +1 attack bonus; the additional 2000 gp expenditure to make it a magical +1 weapon just gives you the +1 to damage. I'd argue that, particularly at low levels, it's the bonus to attack rolls that's more valuable.

Conversely, masterwork armor simply reduces the armor check penalty. You need to actually get the magical enhancement to improve your AC.

Finally, for classes which focus on using heavy armor, the Pathfinder rules follow the same unfortunate (to me, anyway) pattern that 3E and 3.5 did...heavy armor is danged expensive. I just started up a paladin PC in PFS. Ultimately, when I get to the point where I have her in the "right" armor type, her AC will be 19 (plate plus light shield). Right now, it's only 16 (scale plus light shield), because "stock" plate armor costs 1500 gp (and, as long as I'm saving up for that, might as well save up the additional 150 gp to get masterwork armor). Until that happens (sometime in 2nd level), her AC is no better than dextrous rogues running around in leather.

Paizo Employee ** Developer

It is my goal to deviate from the Core Rulebook (and subsequent printed releases) as little as possible. Not everyone purchasing or running Pathfinder Society Scenarios does so as part of the organized play campaign, and any variation from a standard adventure is one more hurdle for such a GM. Additionally, the fewer rules changes, additions, or subtractions from the baseline rules set, the easier it is for people to transition back and forth from Pathfinder Society to other Pathfinder RPG campaigns. As such, there are currently no plans to alter the long-established magic item pricing system or the wealth curve.

Andoran *****

Tarma wrote:

I just may make you eat those words. I keep hearing that an 8 con is a horrible idea, yet that character keeps managing to kill off your summoners :P

1) He has used that ability successfully on one Summoner.

2) Ive had two very good opportunities to kill him, I just havent done it yet. One of those I fudged in order to avoid it, cause you guys would have all died without him, and I didnt want to TPK your group (and you specifically so soon after the death of your other character).

Since you guys seem to be so vocal and sure of yourselves though, I guess I'll stop being so nice and play hardball. ;)

Grand Lodge ***

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
Tarma wrote:
VanceMadrox wrote:

This isn't really a PFS issue.

PFS uses the prices set in the Core book.

It is more of a PFS issue than a core issue. If a +1 weapon drops in core, your character or someone else in your party can keep it. You don't have to pay to keep it the item.

Well the item price in core isn't going to drop, given that it was set way back in D&D 3.0. So that IF is a non-IF as long as we have a Pathfinder 1.0.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

godsDMit wrote:
Since you guys seem to be so vocal and sure of yourselves though, I guess I'll stop being so nice and play hardball. ;)

OH SNAP

Osirion ***

While I haven't messed up any summoners lately, I still smack down entire encounters. =P

And I the issue with the +2 weapons is that buy the time you have the fame to buy a +2 weapon, you can get +3 armor and shields. In any arms race, its offense versus defense. The problem arises that one can get their AC really high before anything in the scenarios can counter it without trying to minmax anything.

Cheliax ****

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Mourne wrote:

While I haven't messed up any summoners lately, I still smack down entire encounters. =P

And I the issue with the +2 weapons is that buy the time you have the fame to buy a +2 weapon, you can get +3 armor and shields. In any arms race, its offense versus defense. The problem arises that one can get their AC really high before anything in the scenarios can counter it without trying to minmax anything.

Except the full BAB characters are increasing their to-hit bonus by at least 1 every level, so it's not really that bad at all. If there's a bad few levels, the rest of the levels are pretty poor on the side of the poor high AC.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Tarma, why is it that you feel a +1 weapon is needed earlier than it's currently affordable? What's the "pain" that you're getting by not having it yet?

**

Oh man....so many responses......

So, I'll try to tackle these one at a time. First of all, wow, got a post from Mark :) Anyways, I don't have a problem with trying to match core rules to the society. I have a problem with whenever there's something that doesn't quite work right in PFS, the response is "well, that's the rules in core so...ehh"

Personally, I have not felt the pain of not having a magical weapon but I am starting to see other players have to deal with it. Not having easy access to +1 magical weapons really hurts those classes that rely on heavy damage output in combat, like Rouges for example. Those classes should be able to focus on what they do best, dealing damage. Instead, it's more beneficial for them to concentrate on armor and have a lower damage output because of the costs. So rather than having your standard "glass cannon" where you have to be careful how you approach battle, you can just charge up and hurt who ever your target is, even if your class isn't really meant to do so.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarma wrote:
Personally, I have not felt the pain of not having a magical weapon but I am starting to see other players have to deal with it. Not having easy access to +1 magical weapons really hurts those classes that rely on heavy damage output in combat, like Rouges for example.

This doesn't really make sense, as the Rogue's damage in combat tends to come primarily from Sneak Attack, which works as well with a mundane club as it does with a +3 Rapier. When I was at Con of the North this past weekend and my table's rogue was firing her crossbow for 1d8+4d6 damage, she wasn't saying "Man, if only that had instead been 1d8+4d6+1 damage, then I'd be contributing so much more to this fight!"

Quote:
Those classes should be able to focus on what they do best, dealing damage.

Let's see...

A 10STR rogue (level 7) flanking with a rapier: 5d6 damage.
Same rogue, with a +1 rapier: 5d6+1 damage.
An 22rageSTR barbarian (lv7), power attacking w/greatsword: 2d6+15.
Same barbarian, with a +1 greatsword: 2d6+16.

I'm really not seeing how that little +1 is making or breaking the damage-dealers.

Quote:

...even if your class isn't really meant to do so.

Perhaps it's not that they can't do what they're supposed to, but rather that you're simply incorrect about what they're "meant to do"? Or maybe you're mistaken about how they're supposed to be able to do it?

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jiggy wrote:

Let's see...

A 10STR rogue (level 7) flanking with a rapier: 5d6 damage.
Same rogue, with a +1 rapier: 5d6+1 damage.
An 22rageSTR barbarian (lv7), power attacking w/greatsword: 2d6+15.
Same barbarian, with a +1 greatsword: 2d6+16.

Agreed. As I pointed out a few posts ago, the important thing for them is going to be *hitting* more often, so they can deal their damage; the additional +1 to damage from the magic is relatively inconsequential. For that, all they need is that masterwork (300gp) weapon.

Osirion ***

But the power that comes from magical weapons isn't the +1 to damage, its from the effect you can put on it (like flaming and shock). Listening to you guys talk, its almost as if you're saying magical weapons are totally useless and should be removed.

And as Tarma is saying, its more beneficial to take armor and shields, even if you're not suppose to. If your class isn't proficient with shields, RAW states that they just take the shields armor check penalty on attack and skill rolls. But a heavy darkwood shield has a 0 check penalty and only costs 257 gold. There's a rogue at our games who has this, and suffers no penalty to be harder to hit. The bonuses of magical weapons is suppose to counter armor, but its WAY too easy to get the armor and very difficult to get the weapons to counter it.

And full BAB doesn't matter. The mentioned rogue is level 4 and has an AC of 25 with magical equipment. A full BAB character can't counter that. Even at level 5, the full BAB character would need a nat 20 to hit the rogue before bonuses from stats and equipment. And not many enemies encountered in the PFS scenarios have full BAB, making the rogue all but impossible to hit.

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Mourne wrote:
And full BAB doesn't matter. The mentioned rogue is level 4 and has an AC of 25 with magical equipment. A full BAB character can't counter that. Even at level 5, the full BAB character would need a nat 20 to hit the rogue before bonuses from stats and equipment.

You're looking at the rogue's AC with stats and equipment, then looking at an attacker's bonus without stats and equipment, and using that as an example of why people need magic weapons faster?

That's a bit silly.

It's also silly because a +1 weapon does not increase your odds to hit over a masterwork weapon. Not at all. (Nor do the special enhancements you meantioned, like flaming.) Yet you cite high AC as a reason to allow earlier magic weapons? That doesn't even make sense.

You're telling us that you need magic weapons in order to counter something that magic weapons don't counter.

Osirion ***

1- I was mentioning enchantments like flaming on your comment about damage. You say that a magical weapon isn't affecting damage because it only gives a +1. But if you get enchantments like flaming, that weapon now adds 1d6+1.

2- Ok, lets add stats and equipment to the attacker. Or should I say stats, because equipment really doesn't factor in. If it's a full BAB attacker designed only to hit, you get a melee attacker with a high strength (usually 16-18). So against that level 4 rouge, the level 4 attacker has a +7-8 to hit. Throw in a masterwork weapon and it goes to a +8-9. That's only a 16-17 to hit that rouge. Better than my nat 20 in the original comparison, but not by much. But that's a full BAB attacker with equipment. Many of the enemies encountered in PFS scenarios (not core, but the society. in core you can fiddle with the rules and and the enemies however you want, but in PFS the rules and scenarios are set in stone) are not all full bab or even have equipment. So your +8-9 to hit drops to a +4-5 to hit, so we're back to the nat 20 to hit.

And what I'm saying is not that magic weapons are the sole solution to the this problem. I'm saying that the benefits of a magic weapon (bonuses to damage, eventual bonuses to hit past the masterwork +1) are lost by the fact that its easy to get magical armor and equipment to get your AC to the point of being almost unhittable. And its much more beneficial to become unhittable and have no fear of damage than it is to get the +1 to damage or the eventual higher bonuses that magical weapons give.

Silver Crusade **

The only thing I would do with Fame is to tweak it up by a bit. For example, having an item cost cap at 8000 means you cant get that +2 weapon yet, but not by a whole lot. By the time you move to the next tier of $$$, its a huge quantity off. Why not raise it slightly, so that a +2 weapon goes with the +2 cost, aka 8000. Or, state that the cost of the weapon does not factor against the wealth cap.

**

Jiggy wrote:
Quote:

...even if your class isn't really meant to do so.

Perhaps it's not that they can't do what they're supposed to, but rather that you're simply incorrect about what they're "meant to do"? Or maybe you're mistaken about how they're supposed to be able to do it?

Maybe it's me, but I don't think I've ever seen a fantasy movie with a rouge type character running around laughing as he can't be hit by everyone he's fighting. Even Ashur in Spartacus is sneakier about it :P

I also think a Rapier is a bad weapon to use as an example, because any smart player will take weapon finesse and eventually agile on that thing. That's where the real damage is.

But even then, it's hindered by the cost of the enchantments. 2000+ just for the plus one and then another 5000 grand or so for agile. Odds are even at that level, there's still something else more critical for that character to take, such as armor, speed increasing boots, or anything else to make them more efficient in combat.

Characters that focus on crits should really be getting plus to damage weapons as well, because that +1 suddenly becomes a lot more impactful, especially when you have double weapons.

Taldor **** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Northwestern Indiana aka VanceMadrox

Mourne wrote:
2- Ok, lets add stats and equipment to the attacker. Or should I say stats, because equipment really doesn't factor in. If it's a full BAB attacker designed only to hit, you get a melee attacker with a high strength (usually 16-18). So against that level 4 rouge, the level 4 attacker has a +7-8 to hit. Throw in a masterwork weapon and it goes to a +8-9. That's only a 16-17 to hit that rouge. Better than my nat 20 in the original comparison, but not by much. But that's a full BAB attacker with equipment. Many of the enemies encountered in PFS scenarios (not core, but the society. in core you can fiddle with the rules and and the enemies however you want, but in PFS the rules and scenarios are set in stone) are not all full bab or even have equipment. So your +8-9 to hit drops to a +4-5 to hit, so we're back to the nat 20 to hit.

Speaking from experience I can definitely agree that having a high AC can make lots of PFS battles almost pointless. My high level is a Bard with high AC and there've been countless enemies that have needed nat 20s to hit him.

That said I think your numbers are a tad low.

Let's assume a 5th level Fighter as an enemy in a mod. (Going with your example of a character that's designed to hit). He'll have Bab of +5, a Str of approx 16 (+3), Weapon Focus (+1), Weapon Training (+1), and a +1 Weapon. That's a Total of +11, more if his Strength is higher. For your Rogue with AC 25 it means he needs a 14 to hit him. Still a high number but better than you credit above.

For the record though even with an AC in the 30s my Bard never reached a point where he had no fear of damage.

Taldor **** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Northwestern Indiana aka VanceMadrox

Tarma wrote:


I also think a Rapier is a bad weapon to use as an example, because any smart player will take weapon finesse and eventually agile on that thing. That's where the real damage is.

No the real damage is with Two Handed weapons, Two Weapon fighting, or Archery.

But I agree the agile weapon property is nice.

Osirion ***

VanceMadrox wrote:

Let's assume a 5th level Fighter as an enemy in a mod. (Going with your example of a character that's designed to hit). He'll have Bab of +5, a Str of approx 16 (+3), Weapon Focus (+1), Weapon Training (+1), and a +1 Weapon. That's a Total of +11, more if his Strength is higher. For your Rogue with AC 25 it means he needs a 14 to hit him. Still a high number but better than you credit above.

For the record though even with an AC in the 30s my Bard never reached a point where he had no fear of damage.

To be fair, I wasn't quoting as it being a fighter, just a generic full BAB. And it is possible to get it higher, but they usually don't. I've gmed some scenarios, and they give the enemies the worst feats possible. I've seen level 3-5 baddies with pointless feats like skill focus (profession (sailor)) when they have some tie to a boat, yet they only fight the party on sight.

And I salute you sir. My main is a bard as well, and we are few and far between in PFS. =)

Taldor **** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Northwestern Indiana aka VanceMadrox

Mourne wrote:


And I salute you sir. My main is a bard as well, and we are few and far between in PFS. =)

Thanks. My main is actually Bard 11/ Fighter 1

Doing it this way got me medium armor and Spring Attack Two full levels earlier than straight Bard would have.

Bob Jonquet can tell you all about how annoying my high AC Bard has been.

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Illinois—Decatur aka TwilightKnight

VanceMadrox wrote:
Bob Jonquet can tell you all about how annoying my high AC Bard has been.

Gawd forbid you try an AoO from movement. He's neigh unhittable.

RPG Superstar 2012 Top 16

FYI, neigh is what a horse does (as well as whinny and snort). You want 'nigh unhittable'. :) FYI, not a slam! Smart people appreciate proper word usage (and new words are always fun, too!)

==Aelryinth

Grand Lodge ***** Venture-Captain, Illinois—Decatur aka TwilightKnight

Aelryinth wrote:

FYI, neigh is what a horse does (as well as whinny and snort). You want 'nigh unhittable'. :) FYI, not a slam! Smart people appreciate proper word usage (and new words are always fun, too!)

==Aelryinth

Sorry, but unless it gets caught by the spell checker thingy...

Besides, if you understand what was said, win! :-)

I don't see the posters using rouge getting slapped with a fish ;-)


Mourne wrote:

1- I was mentioning enchantments like flaming on your comment about damage. You say that a magical weapon isn't affecting damage because it only gives a +1. But if you get enchantments like flaming, that weapon now adds 1d6+1.

(snip)

And what I'm saying is not that magic weapons are the sole solution to the this problem. I'm saying that the benefits of a magic weapon (bonuses to damage, eventual bonuses to hit past the masterwork +1) are lost by the fact that its easy to get magical armor and equipment to get your AC to the point of being almost unhittable. And its much more beneficial to become unhittable and have no fear of damage than it is to get the +1 to damage or the eventual higher bonuses that magical weapons give.

#1: Unless we've shifted something from core, a +1 flaming weapon is really a +2 weapon... wandering from the unavailability of +1 weapons a bit (though you could logically be proceeding to the unavailability of +2 weapons I guess).

#3: Way back at the start of this thread, I mentioned that we really ought not complain that the defenses are cheaper. Especially from the point of view that magical armor, etc., is "much more beneficial..."

Aside from overcoming DR (easily handled with Magic Weapon -- heck, get a wand!), and adding spiffy excess damage of various types (a luxury), there isn't ANY NEED for a magic weapon. It's gravy/icing/other fattening goodness.

And, as was pointed out, if you REALLY, REALLY have to have one, you can afford it easily by SECOND LEVEL. So I'm really having a hard time taking complaints about expense seriously. Maybe I'm thick. O.o


Bob Jonquet wrote:


I don't see the posters using rouge getting slapped with a fish ;-)

I haven't got my wizard levels yet, so no Summon Monster I.

:)

Osirion ***

Bob Jonquet wrote:
I don't see the posters using rouge getting slapped with a fish ;-)

Wait, you have makeup getting attacked by fish? What the heck scenarios are you playing? =P

Grand Lodge ** RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Bob Jonquet wrote:


I don't see the posters using rouge getting slapped with a fish ;-)

Actually, I once saw a webstore gninja minion correct the title of a thread from "rouge" to "rogue", and then comment on having done so in said thread.

**

Alright alright....now it's just gotten silly :P

Andoran *****

Mourne wrote:
To be fair, I wasn't quoting as it being a fighter, just a generic full BAB.

So your comparing a class featureless, featless full BAB to a complete Rogue then?

The fact of the matter is in ALL classes of the game, there is a Attack progression. At some point, their attack bonus will rise from 0 to 1 and so forth. There is 1 class in the game that receives a Defense progression, being the Monk. But even the Monk's progression doesnt scale with any Attack progression.

If magical weapons were cheaper, then the average attack bonus on your average guy would be higher, which would result in more hits to the players which result in more damage taken, which results in more expendables being spent and more character deaths.

Osirion ***

Well, I was commenting on the difficulty to hit using an example defender that we've both dealt with against a plausible badnik you'd run into in a scenario. I know that there's more to each class than BAB and stats, but then we'd be getting into comparing everything against everything. If I was to include the unique features of a fighter or monk, I should include other defenders too (like you're buddy Jaximus, who even level 6 full bab BBEG need a nat 20 to hit still). Its normal for when you run data to have a sample to represent the whole, otherwise the point of the data set gets lost in the process of getting more data.

Paizo Employee ***** Global Organized Play Coordinator

Mourne wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
I don't see the posters using rouge getting slapped with a fish ;-)
Wait, you have makeup getting attacked by fish? What the heck scenarios are you playing? =P

A super secret special exclusive scenario I run only for Venture-Officers.

Andoran *****

Mourne wrote:
Well, I was commenting on the difficulty to hit using an example defender that we've both dealt with against a plausible badnik you'd run into in a scenario. I know that there's more to each class than BAB and stats, but then we'd be getting into comparing everything against everything. If I was to include the unique features of a fighter or monk, I should include other defenders too (like you're buddy Jaximus, who even level 6 full bab BBEG need a nat 20 to hit still). Its normal for when you run data to have a sample to represent the whole, otherwise the point of the data set gets lost in the process of getting more data.

I notice you reference the one part of my post that doesnt give you the answer you are looking for. ;)

Also, would you prefer PFS to be filled with optimized bad guys so its a challenge to survive even a single scenario? Bad guys so tough that character death is a regular occurence? How fun would that be?

Osirion ***

I know that PFS isn't going to be filled with optimized bad guys. I know that, especially at lower levels, not ever single encountered baddie is going to have magical equipment. But the fights that are suppose to be tough and optimized to fight PCs aren't. The bad guys for the last handful of mods that we've run have difficulty hitting 1-2 members of our party, if not all of them. I don't want every single fight killing a PC, but some challenge would be nice.

And as a side note, we complained about the auto-damage from the last mod we ran because we couldn't search for traps. We tried several times, but the gm said the traps are unavoidable and we can't search for them or disarm them. We just get hit by them.

1 to 50 of 77 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Are magical weapon costs too high in PFS? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.