|
Agreed 100%. Rovagug and Gorum should not care about what weapon you wield, as long as it is wielded in their names. Similiarly, I doubt Iomedae cares if you use a longsword, greatsword, or even your fist to fight evil, as long as evil is being fought. I also doubt that the wise Pharasma wants you to face against undead with a small ritual dagger either, especially when skeletons and liches resist slashing and piercing weapons.We're overcomplicating things here. The Warpriest is a Soldier for their God...They have Simple and martial Weapon proficiencies...allow them to chose one type of simple or martial Weapon...irregardless of their dieties favored weapon and that weapon type will be Their favoed weapon
Stop derailing and return to the topic please.
I would say that posting a simple solution is better than inventing a solution requiring feats and at least a page of rules to buff bad weapons.
|
|
I would say that posting a simple solution is better than inventing a solution requiring feats and at least a page of rules to buff bad weapons.
And I would say you haven't read the thread, and ask that you do so before commenting on something addressed a long time ago in the topic.
The discussion is not about buffing "bad weapons".
Again, I would like to avoid more derailing at this point and either address what is being discussed or offer new solutions or suggestions.
I would say that posting a simple solution is better than inventing a solution requiring feats and at least a page of rules to buff bad weapons.And I would say you haven't read the thread, and ask that you do so before commenting on something addressed a long time ago in the topic.
The discussion is not about buffing "bad weapons".
Again, I would like to avoid more derailing at this point and either address what is being discussed or offer new solutions or suggestions.
Well this is a new solution right here, and just as valid as any other solution. Its also the easiest to implement:
We're overcomplicating things here. The Warpriest is a Soldier for their God...They have Simple and martial Weapon proficiencies...allow them to chose one type of simple or martial Weapon...irregardless of their dieties favored weapon and that weapon type will be Their favoed weapon
|
|
I would say that posting a simple solution is better than inventing a solution requiring feats and at least a page of rules to buff bad weapons.And I would say you haven't read the thread, and ask that you do so before commenting on something addressed a long time ago in the topic.
The discussion is not about buffing "bad weapons".
Again, I would like to avoid more derailing at this point and either address what is being discussed or offer new solutions or suggestions.
Well this is a new solution right here, and just as valid as any other solution. Its also the easiest to implement:
We're overcomplicating things here. The Warpriest is a Soldier for their God...They have Simple and martial Weapon proficiencies...allow them to chose one type of simple or martial Weapon...irregardless of their dieties favored weapon and that weapon type will be Their favoed weapon
Are you done now?
Just because you disagree doesn't make it bad idea
Not gonna be done until December 17th. As long as the rules say that favored weapons are required in order to get class benefits, I will oppose it because as a playtester it is my duty to advise against rules that I feel will not let a class live up to its full potential. I am against weapons being restricted like this because it kills diversity and makes no sense story-wise.
Your ideas to replace blessings have potential, but I do not think they should be entirely focused on weapon enchants. I believe they should grant static abilities along with a list of weapon enchantments.
A list of bonus feats also turns me off. I like the freedom the current class gives you with feat selection.
|
|
Just because you disagree doesn't make it bad idea
It does make it derailing. That ship has sailed and you two can either continue to derail or be part of coming up with a solution.
As it stands, the class has a benefit to favored weapons.
Based on all blog posts and feedback, that is not going to change.
The class also has other benefits, and those benefits effect all weapons.
If you want to discuss the blessing ideas, or other ideas, or propose some new ideas based in reality, by all means stick around.
If you want to beat a dead horse, please start another thread. The favored weapon will be favored. Deal with it and move on.
|
|
Your ideas to replace blessings have potential, but I do not think they should be entirely focused on weapon enchants. I believe they should grant static abilities along with a list of weapon enchantments.
A list of bonus feats also turns me off. I like the freedom the current class gives you with feat selection.
The enchantments are for armor or weapons. Static abilities are already on the sacred weapon, but I would say it would make sense to have those types of things them as some of the mystery style bonuses in the weapon groups.
The problem with the current feat set up is the need for pre-requisites. By going ranger style you don't need to be as MAD (no ability score MINs) and you can bypass stepping stone feats.
The weapon group is going to have the feats that you would pick for the types of weapons in that group. And as I said you can choose any weapon group, it just will be more likely people will choose the group they have a sacred weapon with, given the bonuses and weapon focus.
that is not going to change.
This is a crowdsourced playtest. Things can still change drastically. Nobody can throw around statements like that with absolute confidence.
|
|
that is not going to change.This is a crowdsourced playtest. Things can still change drastically. Nobody can throw around statements like that with absolute confidence.
Read the blog post and the most recent post from the person writing the class.
"With the rewrite, the favored weapon of your god is going to become something you want to use, not just something you are forced to use. "
Posted 6 hours ago.
The Favored weapon will be favored. Accept and move on.
that is not going to change.This is a crowdsourced playtest. Things can still change drastically. Nobody can throw around statements like that with absolute confidence.Read the blog post and the most recent post from the person writing the class.
"With the rewrite, the favored weapon of your god is going to become something you want to use, not just something you are forced to use. "
Posted 6 hours ago.
The Favored weapon will be favored. Accept and move on.
The favored weapon will be favored in the next pdf. The next pdf will be posted before the 17th, so it is not final. Now what did you think of my post 5 posts above? I addressed your points and gave you the input you have been asking for.
Now what did you think of my post 5 posts above? I addressed your points and gave you the input you have been asking for.I responded to it. 5 posts above actually :)
Where is the response to this then?
"Your ideas to replace blessings have potential, but I do not think they should be entirely focused on weapon enchants. I believe they should grant static abilities along with a list of weapon enchantments.
A list of bonus feats also turns me off. I like the freedom the current class gives you with feat selection."
This is direct feedback on your ideas.
|
|
Now what did you think of my post 5 posts above? I addressed your points and gave you the input you have been asking for.I responded to it. 5 posts above actually :)Where is the response to this then?
"Your ideas to replace blessings have potential, but I do not think they should be entirely focused on weapon enchants. I believe they should grant static abilities along with a list of weapon enchantments.
A list of bonus feats also turns me off. I like the freedom the current class gives you with feat selection."
This is direct feedback on your ideas.
Or just scroll up.
Well darn, did not see that there. Good point on the feat prerequisites though.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is an idea to fix some of the weapon complaints for the warpriest (based off an earlier post of mine in the warpriest discussion):
Blessed Weapons: At 1st level, the warpriest gains +1 to hit with his blessed weapons. The favored weapon of his deity is always considered a blessed weapon. Whenever the warpriest prepares his spells for the day, he may designate one additional weapon he is proficient with as a blessed weapon. Every four levels thereafter (5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th), this bonus increases by +1.
A warpriest may use the favored weapon of his deity as a divine focus for his spellcasting. At 9th level, his deity's favored weapon is also treated as the same alignment of his deity for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.
---
Aside: I like the current blessings. They are unique and I believe they add alot of flavor to each domain, without being just a boring list (feats, magic item special qualities, etc) that a player can select from at certain levels. I like that most of them give a special ability to a weapon/ally at first level, that is normally gained at a higher level, different power level, or has not appeared before.
|
|
@Thomas - I think the blessings read better than they build out and test in play. The death blessing for example makes no sense for a cleric of Pharasma. And the playtest above showed the issues with Erastil.
In and of themselves they are interesting. As a part of this specific class, integrated into the dynamics of the class, they don't work.
As to the "fix"...I'm still in the "It's not a problem it is a feature" group. :)
New Warpriest of Pharasma: "Well I'm trained and now ready to go fight the Legions of Undead!!"
Head priest: "Great!!...here's your dagger...have fun killing the skeletons!!"
New Warpriest: "I'm so hosed"
Or:
New Warpriest of Pharasma: "Well I'm trained and now ready to go fight the Legions of Undead!!"
Head priest: "Great!!...here's your dagger...have fun killing the skeletons!!" <hands the Warpriest daggers of disruption, Bane vs Undead>
New Warpriest: "I'm so gonna own that undead!"
|
Warpriest = avenger or runepriest from 4th edition D&D. This is not to start an edition war, rather I want those who are play-testing and those who are designers to look at these classes and see what worked and what didn't work. Both were divine classes and filled their respective niches quite well. Again, the heavy armor proficiency needs to be thrown out the window and instead limit the class to light armor only. In turn give them a defensive aura similar to the monk class.
I think the main problem with warpriest is that the designers are trying to blend fighter and cleric together, which in all honesty we already have (i.e. paladin). Instead, why not blend bard and cleric?? Then you would have a fighter that could do damage and buff/ debuff without adding a bunch of crazy mechanics.
This is just my two-cents.
Similiarly, I doubt Iomedae cares if you use a longsword, greatsword, or even your fist to fight evil, as long as evil is being fought.She does actually. That's why there's a feat called Iomedan Sword Oath. which can only be taken by her worshippers.
My gosh, that is an awful and suicidal feat!
Or:
New Warpriest of Pharasma: "Well I'm trained and now ready to go fight the Legions of Undead!!"
Head priest: "Great!!...here's your dagger...have fun killing the skeletons!!" <hands the Warpriest daggers of disruption, Bane vs Undead>
New Warpriest: "I'm so gonna own that undead!"
Except we're talking a 1st level starting Warpriest here...if you regularly hand out minimum +4 equivalent weapons to 1st level characters then I want to play in your campaign...can I get +5 Adamantine Full Fortification Plate Armor as well??..pretty please?
|
Here is a good way to think about favored weapons, if your religion is a martial one you will be trained in that deities favored weapon. Also just cause you have the same weapon as your brother war priest does does not make you the same. One could be a power fighter vs another could be a dex fighter or a maneuver fighter.
Just cause it is the best if you use the favored weapon does not mean you are limited to that weapon either. If I am a worshiper of desna I can use a star knife and a spear, throw my knife and then use the spear, yes the spear is not getting the abilities of the class feature but you can make interesting characters non the less. If you are not looking to use the favored weapon then maybe you should be playing a fighter that worships the deity.
A lot of the argument I have read is talking about "flavor" but then totally disregards the flavor of the deity. It sounds more like the "flavor" is optimization. When someone says your flavor is not flavor you decide to say the favored weapon of the deity is not flavor in anyway, yet that is the system you play.
A lot of the argument I have read is talking about "flavor" but then totally disregards the flavor of the deity. It sounds more like the "flavor" is optimization. When someone says your flavor is not flavor you decide to say the favored weapon of the deity is not flavor in anyway, yet that is the system you play.
Actually the system we play isn't made yet. Still playtesting. If that makes sense. Being forced to use your deities favored weapon can also be very arbitrary and not actually related to flavor. There's actually a much larger advantage in not being so focused on the weapon in that you don't run into weird situations like that and a wider variety of concepts is fun, but you can still grab the favored weapon if you wanted. Just narrowing it down makes everyone who didn't want to do that suffer, but keeping it open allows everyone to win.
Also, choosing not to use class features can lead to being undervalued and definitely gimped relative to the guy to the left of you. Just losing out on weapon focus isn't that bad, but losing out on a +5/+5 can actually pretty major, especially for a 3/4 BAB class(those guys really want their to hit!).
Of course... We've been over this over and over and we have no idea what it'll look like come revision.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Here is a good way to think about favored weapons, if your religion is a martial one you will be trained in that deities favored weapon. Also just cause you have the same weapon as your brother war priest does does not make you the same. One could be a power fighter vs another could be a dex fighter or a maneuver fighter.
Just cause it is the best if you use the favored weapon does not mean you are limited to that weapon either. If I am a worshiper of desna I can use a star knife and a spear, throw my knife and then use the spear, yes the spear is not getting the abilities of the class feature but you can make interesting characters non the less. If you are not looking to use the favored weapon then maybe you should be playing a fighter that worships the deity.
A lot of the argument I have read is talking about "flavor" but then totally disregards the flavor of the deity. It sounds more like the "flavor" is optimization. When someone says your flavor is not flavor you decide to say the favored weapon of the deity is not flavor in anyway, yet that is the system you play.
Mmmhmm. Yep. Because we want to play concepts that may not be the Deity's favored weapon that means we hate flavor and we're optimizing.
If you've read the good arguments you'll find the deities dont match their flavor or give any good reason for specializing in their favored weapon if they specialize in using their favored weapons. Gorum sees value in all weapons and expects his followers to use each in the proper place on the battlefield and totally digs armor spikes. Shelyn never uses her glaive in combat because its an evil soul devouring artifact that might turn into an evil demigod. Pharasma's dagger is a sacred ritual tool that some priests deem too holy to shed blood with and go into battle with a different weapon.
That is the flavor. It directly conflicts with the notion of a Warpriest focusing on a single weapon above others.
Except we're talking a 1st level starting Warpriest here...if you regularly hand out minimum +4 equivalent weapons to 1st level characters then I want to play in your campaign...can I get +5 Adamantine Full Fortification Plate Armor as well??..pretty please?Or:
New Warpriest of Pharasma: "Well I'm trained and now ready to go fight the Legions of Undead!!"
Head priest: "Great!!...here's your dagger...have fun killing the skeletons!!" <hands the Warpriest daggers of disruption, Bane vs Undead>
New Warpriest: "I'm so gonna own that undead!"
Funny. It's not beyond the pale that the daggers may bypass the DR of undead, because they are favored weapons of Pharasma.
Sorry I didn't use level equivalent examples.
Except we're talking a 1st level starting Warpriest here...if you regularly hand out minimum +4 equivalent weapons to 1st level characters then I want to play in your campaign...can I get +5 Adamantine Full Fortification Plate Armor as well??..pretty please?Or:
New Warpriest of Pharasma: "Well I'm trained and now ready to go fight the Legions of Undead!!"
Head priest: "Great!!...here's your dagger...have fun killing the skeletons!!" <hands the Warpriest daggers of disruption, Bane vs Undead>
New Warpriest: "I'm so gonna own that undead!"Funny. It's not beyond the pale that the daggers may bypass the DR of undead, because they are favored weapons of Pharasma.
Sorry I didn't use level equivalent examples.
I'm not against bypassing DR myself, but it is probably a little over the top to give a bane/disrupting to a level one. Totally useless against a gobln, but man if someone brings that goblin back as a zombie he won't know what hit him!(zombies aren't smart enough to know anyway, they are mindless dontcha' know.)
|
|
Actually it does not conflict with the idea of a war priest focusing on one weapon above all, in fact it backs up the idea that they use the favored weapon. The one weapon above all others that is sacred to the God. Gorum sees value in all weapons but favors the greatsword, which makes sense as it is one of the best damage weapons out there and he is all about war and destruction. If you want a class that can focus on one weapon above all others they have the weapon master fighter. Up thread Ciretose gave a good reason for Shelyn's worshipers to use the Glaive. Pharasma's dagger would be used by a war priest and they would know that daggers are not just ritual tools, also a mortician (pharasma worshipers) would use a knife or dagger to do some of his work there is good flavor.
The flavor you are saying is more you wanting to do any weapon as a deities favored weapon. The ideas you are wanting to play don't sound like the ideas of the class itself, like I said it sounds more like you want a weapon master then a war priest.
Yes the the class can change but it does not sound like it is going to and there is quiet a bit of people who like the flavor of it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually it does not conflict with the idea of a war priest focusing on one weapon above all, in fact it backs up the idea that they use the favored weapon. The one weapon above all others that is sacred to the God. Gorum sees value in all weapons but favors the greatsword, which makes sense as it is one of the best damage weapons out there and he is all about war and destruction. If you want a class that can focus on one weapon above all others they have the weapon master fighter. Up thread Ciretose gave a good reason for Shelyn's worshipers to use the Glaive. Pharasma's dagger would be used by a war priest and they would know that daggers are not just ritual tools, also a mortician (pharasma worshipers) would use a knife or dagger to do some of his work there is good flavor.
Uh what? So Gorum is just contradicting himself then? "Yeah guys, all weapons have their place on the battlefield, but y'know, only use my Greatsword because its cool." You'd think good followers would follow their God's holy word. And Ciretose didnt give a good reason for Shelyn's worshipers to use the Glaive. The fact remains that Shelyn has no good reason to favor the Glaive when hers is a soul devouring artifact of pure evil. It pretty much makes no sense for her to have a favored weapon at all.
Have you read any of the deities' entries?
"All priests carry a skane, a double-edge ceremonial dagger with a dull gray blade, often with a stylized depiction of the goddess’s face and hair on the pommel. The dagger is used to hold open prayer scrolls, to touch parts of a corpse when performing death rites, to cut shrouds for the dead and the umbilical cord of newborns, and to slice kolash on
feast days. It is not forbidden for a priest to use a skane to draw blood or take a life, but some refuse to do so, and carry a different weapon if they must fight. A casarmetzes carries a special skane, bearing Pharasma’s likeness on one side of the pommel and a crying child on the other."
We have entries that imply that their favored weapons are not chosen for combat purposes.
I'm all for getting Weapon Focus in your deity's favored weapon, but I think tying sacred weapon or any other major feature to the weapon is like building a bridge on applesauce. You will end up with a class that is only competitive with its favored weapon, which is a class that does not have the melee/ranged versatility of a fighter (or a melee cleric with some blasting capability), limited customization, and a weird visual aesthetic in some cases. My fix is to allow the bond with any weapon, including all the martial weapons they are proficient with.
If you consider the number of feats available I don't think the existence of a single feat that ties to favored weapons is suggestive of anything, really.
That said, I'd love to see more feats and spells that encourage (encourage mind, not require) all the divine classes to use their favored weapon, not just the Warpriest. I'd like to see incentive put in place to make inquisitors, and clerics and paladins AND warpriests seriously consider the favored weapon as a viable option.
I want options, but I don't want to be punished for not using an option thrust at me.
Regardless, it does suggest that "deities don't really care about their sacred weapons" isn't actually a particularly accurate statement.
It suggest one deity has really stupid followers imo. "Oh my gosh... I... I... I used a longbow to kill a harpy to save that village! I must atone or I no longer can wield a longsword as I used to!" There are a lot of things wrong with sword oath. Its also unrelated to iomadae herself, and more about her zealots.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually I something for the main Warpriest thread a few days ago but I decided not to post it to give it a chance to cool off and discuss some other aspects of the class. Since things are a bit quieter now I figured I can post it here instead:
As I'm sure some of you are aware of I am a little concerned about the latest development on the Warpriest and I wanted to share my thoughts from the limited view I have on the class at the moment. I realize this is a bit of a read, but I have tried very hard to make it clear, concise and brief(ish).
When I look at the previous characters I've played that used classes similar to the Warpriest(Cleric, Inquisitor, Paladin, Oracle), characters with a form of divine connection, one thing stands out. None of these classes get bonus feats that can be used to improve their chosen style of combat. This means that these classes either have to choose fairly simple styles of combat that don't require many feats (typically sword and shield or Two-handed fighting), or if they choose a more feat-intensive style (crossbows, archery, TWF, throwing weapons etc) they either dip other classes to get the bonus feats they need, or they need to wait to the mid levels before they have picked up the feats needed to really become effective.
For Archery the "needed feats" would be Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Deadly Aim and Precise Shot, for TWF it would be Two-weapon fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Double Slice, for crossbows it would be the crossbow mastery line etc.
Some deities have background stories and flavour that includes an emphasis or a predilection for a certain combat style, for instance Torag strikes me as a deity who would go to combat wearing heavy armor and a heavy shield - focusing on defense and protection over wanton destruction. Many clerics want to emulate or reflect that aspect in their character builds. As an example, earlier in the Warpriest thread I mentioned a cleric of Irori who reflected Irori's search for self-perfection by specializing in archery - using archery as a form of active meditation, believing each bowshot was a prayer to Irori, and each perfect shot was a prayer heard. This was a real character concept I tried to build with one of my players, who ultimately gave up because the character he wanted to build was just not feasible with the way Cleric was written. Instead he made a Zen Archer monk, which worked out well but lost out on most of the divine touch the original backstory had included.
So... If you pick one of the more feat-intensive combat styles you either wind up waiting around for a while before you can really get going, you compromise your concept by dipping fighter to get the feats you need faster, or you wind up using a completely different class in order to make what you want to play. In my opinion none of these options are ideal.
Therefore one of the things I like most about the Warpriest is that the bonus feats it comes with offers the resources to make thematically appropriate "divine" characters come online much sooner. A warpriest of Calistria who dualwields whips? No problem! A warpriest of Desna that specializes in throwing Starknives? Sure thing! The warpriest receives enough combat bonus feats to encompass pretty much every style of combat seen on Pathfinder's battlefield, which means that two warpriests can and probably will be wildly different.
I think back to the D&D 3rd edition of the Ranger, which gained Two Weapon Fighting at level 1. So the vast majority of 3.0 rangers would be fairly similar and vast majority fought using two-weapon fighting. Then in 3.5 they added the combat style system, acknowledging that rangers occasionally want to use bows too. Then Pathfinder came along and added combat style options for THF, TWF, archery, crossbows, mounted combat, natural weapons and sword and shield, illustrating that having more options is a boon for a class, not a penalty.
Now it's entirely possible I'm reading too much into the focus on favored weapons and if so no one will be happier than me. However this is the time for discussing the Warpriest and giving feedback...
What worries me is that if the focus on the Favored Weapon of your God is too strong, you disincentivize characters from using any other weapon or even worse, put players in a position where they have to choose a deity based on what kind of combat style they want to play. In the process you'd lose a lot of the variety I hope to see in Warpriests since most Warpriests would instead be fairly predictable and similar - "oh, he's a warpriest of Susumu? Better prepare Wind Wall and try to kill the horse as fast as possible".
To use the example of the Irori-worshipping archer again: I don't want to be in a position where I have to tell my player: "Sure, you can make a warpriest that focuses on archery - but you have to worship Erastil instead of Irori, or else you can't use your primary class ability with your longbow".
I still think making more warpriests (and clerics and paladins and inquisitors) find the favored weapon of their deity attractive is a great idea, there's nothing I'd like to see more than characters who will happily wield the weapon of their deities. However I think the best way to do this is to incentivize the favored weapon by offering spells, feats, and other options to make the favored weapons better, options like Guided Hand and Crusader's Flurry for instance.
I firmly believe that offering options and letting the player choose is better than restricting players to a single weapon and subsequently taxing them to make a different choice, or not even letting them make the choice at all.
I sincerely hope Paizo makes the favored weapon mechanic wide enough to encompass multiple character concepts irregardless of what weapon they wield, or barring that; That they offer alternate class features like the way the paladin handles the Divine Bond ability.
|
|
But what if the problem is not the mechanics, but your approach to them? Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the warpriest's mechanics are every bit as "bad" as you are afraid of - that they massively incentivize using only your deity's favored weapon to the point that using anything else is ridiculously suboptimal.
Why, then, if your player comes to you and says, "I want to make an Irori-worshipping archer," would you say, "well, make a warpriest, then, but it's going to suck, or change your concept entirely," in complete defiance of sanity?
"Warpriest," like any class, is a game construct. "Irori-worshipping archer" is a character concept. If you start with the latter, then it will take you to whichever version of the former makes the most sense. In this case, it means you'd wind up as a fighter/cleric, or perhaps more suitably a Zen archer/cleric. That is not a bad thing. Multiclassing is not a bad word, and it's not like a two level dip before focusing on being a cleric is going to weaken your casting any more than the 6-level casting of the warpriest does anyway. If "specialist in their deity's favored weapon" turns out to be the central focus of the warpriest, then that's the sort of characters that should be warpriests - and if you want to play something that isn't that, then there are roughly 30 other classes and about a zillion archetypes that can probably help you out.
If you consider the number of feats available I don't think the existence of a single feat that ties to favored weapons is suggestive of anything, really.
That said, I'd love to see more feats and spells that encourage (encourage mind, not require) all the divine classes to use their favored weapon, not just the Warpriest. I'd like to see incentive put in place to make inquisitors, and clerics and paladins AND warpriests seriously consider the favored weapon as a viable option.
I want options, but I don't want to be punished for not using an option thrust at me.
I'd prefer to make those options specific to the deities for which favoring one particular weapon above all others makes sense rather than trying to bake it into classes that can serve any deity. Make Iomedae-specific feats and archetypes (maybe even a PrC) that makes wielding a longsword super awesome.
As for the combat style thing... That's just a reality of how PF works, and it's something *every* class has to deal with, not just the divine casters. I don't know how you could fix it save a complete rewrite of the system.
I'd prefer to make those options specific to the deities for which favoring one particular weapon above all others makes sense rather than trying to bake it into classes that can serve any deity. Make Iomedae-specific feats and archetypes (maybe even a PrC) that makes wielding a longsword super awesome.If you consider the number of feats available I don't think the existence of a single feat that ties to favored weapons is suggestive of anything, really.
That said, I'd love to see more feats and spells that encourage (encourage mind, not require) all the divine classes to use their favored weapon, not just the Warpriest. I'd like to see incentive put in place to make inquisitors, and clerics and paladins AND warpriests seriously consider the favored weapon as a viable option.
I want options, but I don't want to be punished for not using an option thrust at me.
I always make clerics of obscure or homebrew deities myself(or of an ideal/philosophy!). They tend to suffer from a lack of open design. Imo, attaching things to deities is a flawed design because it narrows concepts, inspires metagaming, and requires extra book keeping.
I always make clerics of obscure or homebrew deities myself(or of an ideal/philosophy!). They tend to suffer from a lack of open design. Imo, attaching things to deities is a flawed design because it narrows concepts, inspires metagaming, and requires extra book keeping.
For core content I agree, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with setting-specific crunch with setting-specific fluff.
I always make clerics of obscure or homebrew deities myself(or of an ideal/philosophy!). They tend to suffer from a lack of open design. Imo, attaching things to deities is a flawed design because it narrows concepts, inspires metagaming, and requires extra book keeping.For core content I agree, but I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with setting-specific crunch with setting-specific fluff.
I'd say it depends on how its run, its very possible to add a lot of fluff without being restrictive, and its also very possible to add little and make an arbitrary restriction. I like flavorful and attractive, but I dislike restrictive and narrow.
"Warpriest," like any class, is a game construct. "Irori-worshipping archer" is a character concept. If you start with the latter, then it will take you to whichever version of the former makes the most sense. In this case, it means you'd wind up as a fighter/cleric, or perhaps more suitably a Zen archer/cleric. That is not a bad thing. Multiclassing is not a bad word, and it's not like a two level dip before focusing on being a cleric is going to weaken your casting any more than the 6-level casting of the warpriest does anyway. If "specialist in their deity's favored weapon" turns out to be the central focus of the warpriest, then that's the sort of characters that should be warpriests - and if you want to play something that isn't that, then there are roughly 30 other classes and about a zillion archetypes that can probably help you out.
That would make warpriest an unnecessarily restrictive game construct. I can't think of any other class who has their fighting style decided for them based on one piece of character background (deity). In my view, if you want to be a character who focuses on a deity's favored weapon, you should play a cleric. Possibly dipping into some kind of Prestige Class that supports such a narrow concept as focusing on a favored weapon.
If you want to play a steel-plated buttkicker with a greatsword and a longbow, shouting the motto of his order and casting holy smite, you play a Warpriest. Or, if things take an ugly turn, Fighter 1/Cleric X.
|
|
That would make warpriest an unnecessarily restrictive game construct. I can't think of any other class who has their fighting style decided for them based on one piece of character background (deity).
Monk. Magus. Gunslinger. Brawler. Swashbuckler.
All as restrictive as the warpriest would be in this conception, if not more so.
That would make warpriest an unnecessarily restrictive game construct. I can't think of any other class who has their fighting style decided for them based on one piece of character background (deity).Monk. Magus. Gunslinger. Brawler. Swashbuckler.
All as restrictive as the warpriest would be in this conception, if not more so.
Please explain to me how this is true, as it appears to me all of those have classes have a multiple of the choices afforded to the Favoredweaponistpriest.
Monk. Magus. Gunslinger. Brawler. Swashbuckler.
All as restrictive as the warpriest would be in this conception, if not more so.
I'd agree with this if all gunslingers were either Pistoleros or Musket Masters. Divided along the gender of the character.