The Courageous Property: What does it really do?


Rules Questions

151 to 200 of 477 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

seebs wrote:

Huh? Now I'm confused. My reading of the weapon is that a +2 courageous weapon gives a +2 morale bonus to saves against fear, and increases by +1 any morale bonuses to <something> from other sources.

Without the second clause, if you had a +2 morale bonus from another source, you'd just have a flat +2; you'd have a +2 from the weapon, and the other +2, and they wouldn't stack, so you'd get nothing. Increasing the other bonus to +3 means you get at least something.

What's confusing to me is: I can see it making sense to believe it applies only to morale bonuses to saves against fear, and I can see it making sense to apply it to absolutely all morale bonuses to anything. What I can't come up with is a basis for interpreting the text as referring to all morale bonuses to saves, whether or not they're against fear, because nothing else in this text ever refers to saves as a category, rather than saves against fear only.

This would make some sense to me as errata, though.

What I believe it does is as you mentioned for the first part: you get a flat morale bonus on saves against fear. Any other morale bonuses on saves you get from other sources receive a bonus of 1/2 the enhancement.

So saving throws against fear get either your weapon's enhancement bonus or the other morale bonus plus half your weapon's enhancement bonus, whichever is greater. All other saving throws which are currently affected by a morale bonus have that bonus increased by half the weapon's enhancement bonus. If you don't currently have a morale bonus on your saves from any other source, saves against anything but fear are unaffected by the property.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

@fregod99: And yet that still doesn't make sense according to the RAW. Bravery does not grant a Morale Bonus to Saves V.S. Fear. SKR's clarification is the only grounds on which Bravery is even remotely applicable, because although it's a bonus to Saves V.S. Fear, it's not a Morale Bonus, which is called out in the RAW.

To be honest, the only way SKR's interpretation (or to be more precise according to his statements, the supposed collective viewpoint of the design team, of which he is currently no longer a part of) would be considered correct is if the "morale bonus" increase being referred to in the second sentence was treated as flavor text, since the literal definition of morale refers to the confidence or discipline of a person or group, the only feasible explanation I draw from which people claim it only affects Fear Saves (and for it to affect the Fighter's Bravery).

But "morale bonus," as far as I can tell, is a kind of conjoined game term; bonus is a positive integer/modifier being granted to a specific roll or result of an action/activity a creature takes or is given. Morale is a prefix type applied to a bonus (or even possibly a penalty) so as to help determine the stacking of bonuses. Throw them together, and you have a type of positive modifier being applied to a roll or result of an action/activity.

Using a conjoined game term, which has a completely different meaning from the flavor text for which their interpretations would be correct, is very, very poor choosing on their part to say the least, if not outright false advertising (that is, the weapon property, not the published product it comes from).

This is exactly why I called for a FAQ/Errata; because they are using an already defined (and conjoined) game term to something that is otherwise completely different. And until such subjects come to pass, the RAW would disagree with the Dev Team's statements heavily.

SKR wasn't the one talking about Bravery, though.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Robert A Matthews wrote:
Clarification to lonewolf wrote:
Our reading of this is that the second part is referring to other morale bonuses to save vs. fear – for example, a fighter’s Bravery ability

As I said above, that was from HeroLab folks not from SKR. SKR only said the final line.

seebs wrote:
The other thing that's bugging me is that the email from SKR to Hero Lab said "morale bonuses to saves, fear or otherwise", which would mean that if you had something giving you a morale bonus to non-fear saves, it would still apply. Which is even stranger.

Which means if you have a bonus to fort saves for poison that is a moral bonus, then it would be enhanced.


This whole scenario smells of fish and old cheese.

The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

The clarification, in its execution, goes 100% contrary to EVERYTHING Paizo has said about official clarifications (If it's not a FAQ/Errata it doesn't count, HeroLab is not a rules source, we will post any clarifications in the form of FAQ/Errata where people can easily find them on the site, etc.).

It feels like Bizarro World Paizo.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Rynjin wrote:
The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

According to you.

Not according to me and others.


Rynjin wrote:

This whole scenario smells of fish and old cheese.

The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

The clarification, in its execution, goes 100% contrary to EVERYTHING Paizo has said about official clarifications (If it's not a FAQ/Errata it doesn't count, HeroLab is not a rules source, we will post any clarifications in the form of FAQ/Errata where people can easily find them on the site, etc.).

It feels like Bizarro World Paizo.

It's not an official clarification. I'm sure you can continue using Courageous in the way you prefer until a FAQ is released, although you may run into arguments with GMs, just as you would before. It is, however, an unofficial clarification on how the power was intended to work, and is a good indicator of how it will work should a FAQ be released.

In other words, if you're using this for PFS, caveat emptor.


Rynjin wrote:

This whole scenario smells of fish and old cheese.

The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

The clarification, in its execution, goes 100% contrary to EVERYTHING Paizo has said about official clarifications (If it's not a FAQ/Errata it doesn't count, HeroLab is not a rules source, we will post any clarifications in the form of FAQ/Errata where people can easily find them on the site, etc.).

It feels like Bizarro World Paizo.

Seriously why do people turn this stuff into drama? Lone wold has a contract with paizo that allows them to have proprietary content. The origonal email was a question they had.

There isn't anything weird about it they produce one of the most popular suppliments to the game.

As far as the over all property goes that last line seems poorly worded but I can't really see how anyone saw it as effectively adding at the least 16k in buffs and sisnt think this was op for a +1 ability.


James Risner wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

According to you.

Not according to me and others.

I honestly can't fault anyone for coming to the conclusion that courageous affects all morale bonuses when reading:

Courageous wrote:
In addition, any morale bonus the wielder gains from any other source

I agree that if the Design Team feels that this interpretation is wrong, then it needs to be updated with a FAQ or errata. As it stands, all we have to go on is an email response to a 3rd party, copied and pasted on one of their forums, and linked to by a poster on these forums. If a clarification needs to be made about a rule, then it should be easier to find than having to go to a third party website to get the answer.

[/customer feedback]


James Risner wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

According to you.

RAW(Rules as Written), it boosts all morale bonuses. Thats it. That's all it says.

RAI(Rules as Interpreted), SKR's interpretation and yours come into play.

In a perfect world, RAW and RAI match. But....time and again there have been powerful choices that when asked "Wow really? Yes really!" was the answer. Its a shame that those answers seem to be only for casters.

Alas, SKR's "clarification" is unoffical.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mojorat wrote:


Seriously why do people turn this stuff into drama?

The only person I see trying to be dramatic here is you. I was just stating facts.

Mojorat wrote:

Lone Wolf has a contract with paizo that allows them to have proprietary content. The origonal email was a question they had.

There isn't anything weird about it they produce one of the most popular suppliments to the game.

There isn't anything weird about it? Yes, yes there is.

This is something that, to my knowledge, Paizo has never done before.

Further, it is something they have specifically said they never WILL do.

Hell, their ENTIRE REASON for not introducing "incremental change via errata" (disregarding that they do so all the time...) is because they don't want to change the game to a significant degree so you're forced to use the forums to play the game "right".

But now, they're doing so on a completely DIFFERENT forum, for a product that may very well be popular, but the majority of forum goers don't use, and the VAST majority of Pathfinder's players won't either (since the majority don't even use THESE forums)?

The fact that HeroLab is a popular 3rd Party supplement is irrelevant. They should not have been, and should NEVER BE the vehicle for and sole recipient of a game changing clarification.

Mojorat wrote:
As far as the over all property goes that last line seems poorly worded but I can't really see how anyone saw it as effectively adding at the least 16k in buffs and sisnt think this was op for a +1 ability.

Whether it is OP or not is irrelevant. Simulacrum and Blood Money are both OP.

They're both working as intended as well.

Which is what is in question here. "Is it working as written"?

The answer is, yes. The way it is written is quite unambiguous in its wording. It increases any other morale bonuses you have.

Whether it SHOULD work that way is an entirely different discussion, which people have continually gotten muddled together with the actual issue in this thread.

This is the Rules Questions forum, where we answer questions based on what the rules say, rather than how we would like them to work. That is what the House Rules forum is for.

Liberty's Edge

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:
Diego Rossi wrote:
Getting the benefit of the ability at the minimum cost is the goal of at least some of the people arguing in favour of "it applies to all morale bonuses".
Isn't it normally a little hard to know exactly why people are arguing for and against a particular issue? Making assumptions = bad, and sometimes even rude.

Some of the people I cited stated that their goal was to get the courageous special ability benefit while using another weapon to attack the enemies (the starting example was a glaive while wearing courages spiked gauntlets). I think that people speaking their mind give a clear idea of their goal. You disagree?


Uhh see this is what frustrates me. First, the magic item rules have specifig guidelines the dm should go over when a pc makes a magic item.

You look over other abilities check their power level then compare the item to them.

Curageous is a pre manufactured weapon ability that as fsr as I know is not on any pre made swords.

That means any sword made with ir fslls under the compare guidelines. When you compare what it does withother items the warning klaxxons fo off.

2) in light of the above expressing the opinion that its probably not intended is any attempt to offer an informed opinion.

3) where the warning signs show there is a problem with how the ability is percieved to work is when like the other thread the item is being used as a wonderous item rather than a weapon.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

redward wrote:
It's not an official clarification.

Actually it is an official clarification on how it works, what the RAW is.

The fact this official clarification wasn't widely disseminated doesn't make it less official.

Scavion wrote:
RAW(Rules as Written), it boosts all morale bonuses. Thats it. That's all it says.

Using the forum created awkward RAW, which is "how can I purposely twist the words to mean something they don't mean".

There is two RAWs:
1) Awkward RAW "all morale bonuses. Thats it. That's all it says."
2) RAW "it only helps saves"


James Risner wrote:
redward wrote:
It's not an official clarification.

Actually it is an official clarification on how it works, what the RAW is.

The fact this official clarification wasn't widely disseminated doesn't make it less official.

2) RAW "it only helps saves"

If it was Official then it would have to be in the FAQ or Errata for Ultimate Equipment. It's not.

Your RAW is literally what RAI means. You cannot come to the conclusion that it works only specifically for saves without interpreting it.

As written it only says that it boosts all morale bonuses.

EDIT: And it's not even awkward. All morale bonuses is pretty easy to understand.


James Risner wrote:


Actually it is an official clarification on how it works, what the RAW is.

The fact this official clarification wasn't widely disseminated doesn't make it less official.

Yes. It does.

Unless Paizo was lying when they said that anything not a FAQ/Errata is unofficial.

I really don't want to have to call them liars myself.

James Risner wrote:


Using the forum created awkward RAW, which is "how can I purposely twist the words to mean something they don't mean".

There is two RAWs:
1) Awkward RAW "all morale bonuses. Thats it. That's all it says."
2) RAW "it only helps saves"

How is is "awkward RAW"? That's your own bias slipping in.

It literally says "any morale bonus from any other source".

Unless the word "any" has a different meaning in your mother tongue, I don't see where your confusion on the RAW comes from.


Any is a very inclusive term. I don't see how you could see something like any morale bonus from another source as just saves...


In addition, I'm not certain I understand why people are attributing bonuses from spell effects into the cost of the weapon property. The property isn't giving you squat until you have the spell up which, for a barbarian, has a significant associated opportunity cost.

In short, nobody is getting free buffs out of this, and when they eventually get to the level where they can afford a fully stacked enhancement bonus, they are likely to have conflicting bonus interactions.


Robert A Matthews wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
The clarification, in its content, goes 100% contrary to how the text reads.

According to you.

Not according to me and others.

I honestly can't fault anyone for coming to the conclusion that courageous affects all morale bonuses when reading:

Courageous wrote:
In addition, any morale bonus the wielder gains from any other source

I agree that if the Design Team feels that this interpretation is wrong, then it needs to be updated with a FAQ or errata. As it stands, all we have to go on is an email response to a 3rd party, copied and pasted on one of their forums, and linked to by a poster on these forums. If a clarification needs to be made about a rule, then it should be easier to find than having to go to a third party website to get the answer.

[/customer feedback]

I agree with all of this.

I think it's clear what the PDT's intent is. I also think it needs to be clarified via an official source (one that can be shown to GMs at a PFS event, for instance) to wrap it up in a nice bow because the wording doesn't necessarily make the intent clear.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

You know, I never had any inkling of reason to think that Courageous didn't apply to all Morale bonuses, before this thread.

Neither did anyone from any of my gaming groups. They took one look, and "yup, that's how it works" was the basic response.

I am damn tired of those who come out to rampantly agree with some Dev comment, that decides to tell everyone that some rule, doesn't quite work like everyone thinks it does, and straight puts down anyone who disagrees.

Seriously, tired of the hipster high-horse response of "I was running it like before it was cool" attitude.

Things aren't perfect, and writers/Devs make mistakes. Even clarification sometimes get changed.

So stop flinging the overused, eye-rolling accusation of "munchkin/cheese" and stop claiming the Devs are infallible, and only idiots see it differently.


While we're on the topic of things people need to stop doing, can all the people who use the words "If X works Y way that's over/under powered." stop using that as an argument for what the rules should be. Rules aren't determined by the power level of something, power level is determined by the rules.

Grand Lodge

Anzyr wrote:
While we're on the topic of things people need to stop doing, can all the people who use the words "If X works Y way that's over/under powered." stop using that as an argument for what the rules should be. Rules aren't determined by the power level of something, power level is determined by the rules.

I sometimes slip both ways with that, but I try not to.

We all make mistakes.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Scavion wrote:
If it was Official then it would have to be in the FAQ or Errata for Ultimate Equipment. It's not.

They don't clarify everything. Ignoring context with this ability, you can assert it works for all morale bonuses. But if you understand they don't have the space to double the size of every rule, then you assume rules are written in context.

They probably should FAQ this, just because it seems to be something that even when we know the way the rule works some people continue to say "nuh uh" and keep saying it works the awkward way.


Trogdar wrote:
Any is a very inclusive term. I don't see how you could see something like any morale bonus from another source as just saves...

Because there is a small group of posters who either don't read the rules before declaring they know what the rules say, or do read it but ignore it. Those people didn't process the word "any", because they never read it.


137ben wrote:
Trogdar wrote:
Any is a very inclusive term. I don't see how you could see something like any morale bonus from another source as just saves...
Because there is a small group of posters who either don't read the rules before declaring they know what the rules say, or do read it but ignore it. Those people didn't process the word "any", because they never read it.

Sadly, that makes more sense than I would like it to.


James Risner wrote:
Scavion wrote:
If it was Official then it would have to be in the FAQ or Errata for Ultimate Equipment. It's not.

They don't clarify everything. Ignoring context with this ability, you can assert it works for all morale bonuses. But if you understand they don't have the space to double the size of every rule, then you assume rules are written in context.

They probably should FAQ this, just because it seems to be something that even when we know the way the rule works some people continue to say "nuh uh" and keep saying it works the awkward way.

"The awkward way".

You keep saying that, but you have yet to show me how following what the text says, quite clearly, in an unambiguous manner is the "awkward way".

Lantern Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.

If your trying to say that it is obvious that it only works for saves, you are wrong. If that were the case, I would have noticed that earlier. My brother's would have noticed that earlier. And the several groups I've been in with a barbarian would have noticed that earlier. In fact, the last thread never would have come up, we would have simply said to the barbarian "Courageous doesn't work the way you think it does". But no, it is not even close to obvious.

This is the first time in 2 years of PF, a year and a half of browsing the forums, that I've ever heard of such a thing.

I have no horse in this race, I just wanted to get my two cents in. Who ever interprets that it's only to saves is in the minority, that's for sure. Not saying it's wrong, RAI speaking, especially with SKR's message to Lone Wolf. But the rules as they are written needs to be sproused up in this instance to correct it, because very, very few casual players are going to think "it only works for saves".

Grand Lodge

Haha. Of course I agree with anything any Dev says, ever.

It is just so obvious.

Anyone who would ever see it any other way, is an idiot, or liar.

I am sorry if you disagree with me.

I can't help being better than you.

:|


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Haha. Of course I agree with anything any Dev says, ever.

It is just so obvious.

Anyone who would ever see it any other way, is an idiot, or liar.

I am sorry if you disagree with me.

I can't help being better than you.

:|

Precisely. Everyone knows the devs are perfect gods of perfectness, and have never needed to issue a clarification on anything ever. Let alone actually make a mistake. The mere idea that they might muddle the wording of an ability so that the original intent is lost is nothing less than heresy. What do you think they are, mere fallible mortals?


Yeah Risner i think youre far off in this case. I agree with you abouy how it should be run, and also think theres often an anally awkward RAW-hysteria in these parts, but reading it as "any morale bonus" isnt awkward, its the most obvious way. That doesnt make it correct necessarily but its not in any way twisting words or an "awkward" reading. Give someo who doesnt know the game an exerpt of the Rage ability and this weapon enhancement and ask how big bonus someone with a +4 courageous weapon raging gets to strength and youll probably get the answer "six".


Ilja wrote:
Yeah Risner i think youre far off in this case. I agree with you abouy how it should be run, and also think theres often an anally awkward RAW-hysteria in these parts, but reading it as "any morale bonus" isnt awkward, its the most obvious way. That doesnt make it correct necessarily but its not in any way twisting words or an "awkward" reading. Give someo who doesnt know the game an exerpt of the Rage ability and this weapon enhancement and ask how big bonus someone with a +4 courageous weapon raging gets to strength and youll probably get the answer "six".

Give someone who never played the game a Barbarian and a Courageous weapon and I doubt they ever realize their ability increases are "morale" bonuses.


Well, it was an oversimplification tomake a point. But if one wabts to make it a bit closer to what could be done, give it to someoe whos played a fair bit of Neverwinter Nights 2 (which is based on 3.5) and you get somethig closer to a reasonable.comparision. And i think theyll still assume it applies to their rage bonuses.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Risner, there are exactly two ways to read the rules:

The straight forward way: It says it applies any morale bonus, so it applies to any morale bonus.
The interpretive way: The straight forward way is too OP, so it must only apply on saves against fear, like the first part of the ability.

The AWKWARD way to read the rules is to somehow jump to the conclusion that a weapon ability that enhances "any morale bonus" and only ever in any context mentions "saving throws" in conjunction with "against fear" actually works on "any morale bonus to saving throws of any kind".
Nobody who ever reads that ability will ever think that it is meant to apply to all morale bonuses to saving throws if they don't also read that email on the herolab forums because there is no way to reach that conclusion from the RAW. I don't agree with what I dubbed "the interpretive way" either (because that's still not what it says in the book) but at least I can see how they got there based on the written rules.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

FrodoOf9Fingers wrote:

If your trying to say that it is obvious that it only works for saves, you are wrong

This is the first time in 2 years of PF, a year and a half of browsing the forums, that I've ever heard of such a thing.

Obvious is a strong word. I'm fine with the concept that some people think it works on everything including Craft (Pottery) checks if you have a morale bonus to it.

It isn't the first time this subject has came up on the forums here. But without the quote from the Herolab forum, there wasn't much to be done. You would say "it only works on saves" and the chorus of forum posts would say "obviously not it works on any" and the thread would drown out any other discussion.

In all my time playing PF, in over 250 PFS tables (combined total of played vs GM-ed) I've yet to see a single player using a Courageous weapon. So this issue isn't something that I'd say even 1 % of PF players use. This isn't an issue because people don't use the property.

Do people not use it because people read it and say "that is junk it only helps saves slightly" or do people say "this is awesome it helps Rage, but I'll not use it cause blah".


For starters, not everyone plays a barbarian, and not everyone plays at levels where courageous is actually worth a damn (you need a total of +5 bonus for it to not just give you +1STR and CON when raging, which, you know, isn't even enough to get a bonus if your stats aren't odd numbers), not everyone has ultimate equipment, or feels like combing it through for optimal stuff.


LoneKnave wrote:
For starters, not everyone plays a barbarian, and not everyone plays at levels where courageous is actually worth a damn (you need a total of +5 bonus for it to not just give you +1STR and CON when raging, which, you know, isn't even enough to get a bonus if your stats aren't odd numbers), not everyone has ultimate equipment, or feels like combing it through for optimal stuff.

Huh? How do you figure? A +1 Couragous weapon would give +1 Str and Con and Will saves when raging.


Ilja wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
For starters, not everyone plays a barbarian, and not everyone plays at levels where courageous is actually worth a damn (you need a total of +5 bonus for it to not just give you +1STR and CON when raging, which, you know, isn't even enough to get a bonus if your stats aren't odd numbers), not everyone has ultimate equipment, or feels like combing it through for optimal stuff.
Huh? How do you figure? A +1 Couragous weapon would give +1 Str and Con and Will saves when raging.

It increases the score. It takes 2 points into an attribute to either increase or decrease the modifier it grants.

A Courageous Weapon with a less than +4 Enhancement Bonus only grants 1 point to the given attribute.

The Will Saves would increase, but the Strength/Constitution modifiers would be unchanged unless the amount needed to increase the modifier is 1 attribute point.


It first appeared in Ultimate Equipment, so a lot of people simply don't know about it. Like some others have said, you need a +4 enhancement bonus to gain a +2 benefit from it, and +4 Furious to reliably gain a +3 benefit. Other enchants like Cruel or Keen might be more important to an individual. Or maybe they just don't have access to such a weapon, in a campaign with no crafters in the party, and no magic marts.

All that said, I don't think it's overpowered in the slightest. There's just so much other awful crap in the enchant department that Courageous is amazing in comparison.


Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Ilja wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
For starters, not everyone plays a barbarian, and not everyone plays at levels where courageous is actually worth a damn (you need a total of +5 bonus for it to not just give you +1STR and CON when raging, which, you know, isn't even enough to get a bonus if your stats aren't odd numbers), not everyone has ultimate equipment, or feels like combing it through for optimal stuff.
Huh? How do you figure? A +1 Couragous weapon would give +1 Str and Con and Will saves when raging.

It increases the score. It takes 2 points into an attribute to either increase or decrease the modifier it grants.

A Courageous Weapon with a less than +4 Enhancement Bonus only grants 1 point to the given attribute.

The Will Saves would increase, but the Strength/Constitution modifiers would be unchanged unless the amount needed to increase the modifier is 1 attribute point.

Oh, talking about the modifiers? But if you can assume a courageous weapon, it isn't harder than just getting an uneven score to begin with. Very efficient from a point buy perspective.


Ilja wrote:
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
Ilja wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
For starters, not everyone plays a barbarian, and not everyone plays at levels where courageous is actually worth a damn (you need a total of +5 bonus for it to not just give you +1STR and CON when raging, which, you know, isn't even enough to get a bonus if your stats aren't odd numbers), not everyone has ultimate equipment, or feels like combing it through for optimal stuff.
Huh? How do you figure? A +1 Couragous weapon would give +1 Str and Con and Will saves when raging.

It increases the score. It takes 2 points into an attribute to either increase or decrease the modifier it grants.

A Courageous Weapon with a less than +4 Enhancement Bonus only grants 1 point to the given attribute.

The Will Saves would increase, but the Strength/Constitution modifiers would be unchanged unless the amount needed to increase the modifier is 1 attribute point.

Oh, talking about the modifiers? But if you can assume a courageous weapon, it isn't harder than just getting an uneven score to begin with. Very efficient from a point buy perspective.

Only if you can guarantee that you are going to get that property soon and will be able to keep that weapon relevant over time, which I have never seen happen in practice.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Just to add a little more fuel to the fire, here are other sources of good hope (about the worst offender here):[list]

  • Clerics and Paladins of Iomedae
  • Clerics and Paladins of Shelyn
  • Clerics and Rangers of Milani
  • UMD + Wand @ 315gp per charge (Scroll 525, Potion 1050)
  • Potentially Pathfinder Savants, and any other class that gains spells from any source
  • Sorcerer + Ring of Spell Knowledge IV (24K)

    Shorter than I suspected! I couldn't find a single Oracle or Sorcerer source of it (other than the Ring).


  • Majuba wrote:
    Just to add a little more fuel to the fire, here are other sources of good hope (about the worst offender here):[list]
  • Clerics and Paladins of Iomedae
  • Clerics and Paladins of Shelyn
  • Clerics and Rangers of Milani
  • UMD + Wand @ 315gp per charge (Scroll 525, Potion 1050)
  • Potentially Pathfinder Savants, and any other class that gains spells from any source
  • Sorcerer + Ring of Spell Knowledge IV (24K)

    Shorter than I suspected! I couldn't find a single Oracle or Sorcerer source of it (other than the Ring).

  • I'd say Heroism is arguably better than good hope in this situation as it is much easier to come by and lasts 10 min/level rather than 1 min/level. Getting an additional +1 or +2 only when a relevant spell is in effect still doesn't seem that broken to me. People are acting like its effects are always on as if Good Hope or Heroism lasts the entire day. Seems kind of strange to me that it requires Heroism to construct the item but only augments saves when heroism is cast on you when heroism buffs damage and attack rolls as well.

    Compare:

    Buying a +2 weapon
    +2 attack and damage all the time

    vs

    Buying a +1 Courageous weapon
    +1 attack and damage all the time
    +1 additional attack, damage, and saves from good hope
    or +1 additional attack and saves from Heroism

    In the end you are getting +2 attack and damage on both items, just one item requires a spell to be in effect before you get it. Still not seeing how this is OP.

    Edit: Whoops, forgot that Heroism doesn't add to damage


    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

    Heroism does not add to damage.

    Also, good hope will affect the whole party, not just the Courageous weapon wielder.


    Trogdar wrote:


    Only if you can guarantee that you are going to get that property soon and will be able to keep that weapon relevant over time, which I have never seen happen in practice.

    Well, I think it's a bit of an understatement to say "you need a +5 weapon to gain a Str/Con bonus from it" when it's rather "you need a +5 bonus or a +2 bonus and uneven scores". It's quite a big difference, and a rather large chance that at least one of the scores are uneven. Especially since you get to increase every 4 levels and then just can stop at an uneven instead of an even number (until you get the +4 courageous weapon).


    Robert A Matthews wrote:


    In the end you are getting +2 attack and damage on both items, just one item requires a spell to be in effect before you get it. Still not seeing how this is OP.

    Edit: Whoops, forgot that Heroism doesn't add to damage

    Also, one adds +1 to saves which is quite a costly benefit otherwise. Though of course, you're now comparing them in about the worst possible scenario, where the character has literally no class features that benefit from it. Kind of like saying thar Staff of the Master sucks because barbarians aren't good with it. Bards, cavaliers, barbarians, inquisitors and paladins all have morale bonuses as part of class features, and I'd wager there's quite a few clerics and rogues and other classes getting them from domains or talents or what have you.

    Not saying this is necessarily Teh Brokenzzz but I mean, it's kind of unfair to compare it to the absolute _minimum_ that a character will have access to.


    Ilja wrote:
    Robert A Matthews wrote:


    In the end you are getting +2 attack and damage on both items, just one item requires a spell to be in effect before you get it. Still not seeing how this is OP.

    Edit: Whoops, forgot that Heroism doesn't add to damage

    Also, one adds +1 to saves which is quite a costly benefit otherwise. Though of course, you're now comparing them in about the worst possible scenario, where the character has literally no class features that benefit from it. Kind of like saying thar Staff of the Master sucks because barbarians aren't good with it. Bards, cavaliers, barbarians, inquisitors and paladins all have morale bonuses as part of class features, and I'd wager there's quite a few clerics and rogues and other classes getting them from domains or talents or what have you.

    Not saying this is necessarily Teh Brokenzzz but I mean, it's kind of unfair to compare it to the absolute _minimum_ that a character will have access to.

    Ok.

    +2 Weapon vs +1 Courageous Weapon

    Inspire Courage

    +2 Weapon = +1 to saves against fear and charm
    +1 Courageous Weapon = +2 to saves against fear and charm

    Aura of Courage

    +2 Weapon = (no effect)+4 to saves against fear
    +1 Courageous Weapon = +5 to saves against fear

    Banner

    +2 Weapon = +3 to attack rolls when charging, +2 saves vs fear
    +1 Courageous Weapon = +3 to attack rolls when charging, +3 saves vs fear

    Rage

    +2 Weapon = (no effect)+4 Strength, +4 Constitution, +2 Will saves
    +1 Courageous Weapon = +5 Strength, +5 Constitution, +3 Will saves

    Stern Gaze

    +2 Weapon = (no effect)+level to intimidate checks
    +1 Courageous Weapon = +(level+1) to intimidate checks

    Some of these effects give morale bonuses to attack and damage which makes the +1 Courageous weapon deal the same damage as a +2 weapon. When said morale bonuses to attack and damage are not in effect, the +2 weapon is better. Really not seeing this as being overly powerful. In many cases you are trading +1 attack and damage for +1 to saves. The only time it seems like you are getting more than a +2 weapon out of the deal is when you use good hope, in which case you get +1 extra to saves.


    Let's focus on Barbarian Rage as that seems to be what everyone has a problem with.

    Barbarian with 18 Strength and 14 Con

    +2 Weapon while raging gains:

    +4 Attack rolls(+2 morale from strength, +2 enhancement)
    +4 Damage rolls(+2 morale from strength, +2 enhancement
    +2 HP/level(+2 morale from Constitution)
    +2 Will saves(+2 morale from rage)

    +1 Courageous while raging gains:

    +3 Attack rolls(+2 morale from strength, +1 ehhancement)
    +3 Damage rolls(+2 morale from strength, +1 enhancement)
    +2 HP/level(+2 morale from Constitution)
    +3 Will saves(+2 morale from rage, +1 extra from courageous)

    Barbarian with 17 Strength and 13 Con

    +2 Weapon while raging gains:

    +4 Attack rolls(+2 morale from strength, +2 enhancement)
    +4 Damage rolls(+2 morale from strength, +2 enhancement
    +2 HP/level(+2 morale from Constitution)
    +2 Will saves(+2 morale from rage)

    +1 Courageous while raging gains:

    +4 Attack rolls(+3 morale from strength, +1 ehhancement)
    +4 Damage rolls(+3 morale from strength, +1 enhancement)
    +3 HP/level(+3 morale from Constitution)
    +3 Will saves(+2 morale from rage, +1 extra from courageous)

    Both Barbarians end up with a Strength of 22 and a Con of 18. The +1 Courageous weapon gets +1 Will saves over the +2 Weapon. That is the only thing extra you are getting out of it. Notice how the Barbarian wielding the +1 Courageous Weapon has -1 attack and damage rolls compared to the Barbarian wielding the +2 weapon (22 Str, +2 weapon = +8 attack and damage vs. 22 Str, +1 courageous = +7 attack and damage). Even if you do the same exercise using a +4 Courageous weapon vs a +5 weapon, you aren't dealing more damage or getting a higher bonus to attack rolls, you will only get more hp and more saves than the +5 weapon.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.

    A +4 Courageous Weapon V.S. a +5 Weapon isn't as fair of a comparison, since by that point the benefits increase to +2 per instead of simply +1.

    With the above Courageous Weapon, you'll get an extra to-hit and damage over the +5 Weapon. However, you then won't be able to bypass all alignment-based DR, and by the time you're affording +5 Enhancement Bonus weapons is when you're fighting things like Inevitables and all of the other Chaotic/Lawful DR creatures, that +1 to hit and damage may not be as valuable, since you would effectively have a -10/-15 to damage by taking the +4 Courageous.

    It's also important to point out that at even-leveled increase intervals (for example, let's take a +4 Courageous Flaming Burst Furious Bane (Evil Outsider) Greataxe {abbreviating it as the Hellslayer from Diablo II}, and compare it with a 17 Strength or 18 Strength base Barbarian fighting some demon). While raging and fighting, the weapon's effective enhancement bonus is a +8, meaning the Barbarian has an increased point of Strength, Constitution, and Will Saves versus that creature on a rate of +4. So the 18 Strength Barbarian goes up to a 22 when fighting the demon, and the 17 Strength Barbarian goes up to a 21 when fighting the demon. While the same increase is met, there is still a 1 point strength modifier difference between the two because of it.

    It's the same phenomenon associated with, say, odd-numbered stat belts/headbands when used with odd-numbered stats. An odd number + an odd number equals an even number. It's when you take an even number and add an odd number and add them together is when the total does not change (in terms of statistics). The Will Save increase otherwise remains equal amongst the Barbarians.


    Quote:
    The +1 Courageous weapon gets +1 Will saves over the +2 Weapon. That is the only thing extra you are getting out of it.

    That isn't correct. The second barb gains the following benefits that the first doesn't:

    +1 on _all_ attack rolls, whether with that weapon or another.
    +1 on CMB rolls not utilizing the weapon.
    +1 on CMD
    +1 hp/level
    +1 will saves
    +1 on strength and con checks
    +1 on fortitude and will saves

    That's more than +1 to will saves. Whether it's balanced or not is another question, but don't sell it short when it has noticable benefits.

    Also, if we compare a more beneficial scenario, that is more likely considering if you're a barbarian you aim for it:

    12th level barbarian
    Str 29 when raging (16 base +2 racial +3 level +4 belt +4 rage)
    Con 18 when raging (14 base + 4 rage)
    Has prebuffed with Heroism (wand charge is dirt cheap and lasts 40 minutes)
    Has Adopted/Tusked racial traits

    Normal attack routine is +23/+18/+13 (2d6+13) and +18 (1d4+4)

    A +2 weapon will change the routine to:
    +25/+20/+15 (2d6+15) and +18 (1d4+4) and will also give
    +2 to any CMB checks with the specific weapon

    A +1 courageous weapon will change attack routine to:
    +26/+21/+16 (2d6+16) and +20 (1d4+5)
    +1 to any CMB check, +2 to those with the specific weapon
    +1 to all saves
    +1 CMD
    +1 on various skillz and trickz

    So yeah, with very low synergy it comes out just right ahead, and with decent synergy (not even a real investment) it comes out way ahead.


    Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

    Darksol... I'm not really sure what you're saying there.

    Robert: You're comparing the 17/13 Barbarian to the 18/14 Barbarian and saying they come out even... that's a HUGE plus. The real comparison is in the 17/13 Barbarian vs. 17/13 with Courageous. Coming out close to even (Courageous is still ahead on hp and will saves) means that for the odd-stat barbarian, this is always worthwhile.

    Add even a bless spell on top of this, and the Courageous pulls ahead quickly.

    Edit: Good points Ilja - the +1, Courageous weapon could be your off-hand Kukri.


    Quote:

    +1 on _all_ attack rolls, whether with that weapon or another.

    +1 on CMB rolls not utilizing the weapon.

    How so?

    Unless he's TWFing or summat.

    151 to 200 of 477 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / The Courageous Property: What does it really do? All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.