So now that 'Brawling' is the worst armor enchant ever . . .

[Haru Drakestand]

Need some advice. With the latest eratta from ultimate equipment, there were a lot of changes. some were not so bad, some really hurt (such as the Jingasa of the fortunate soldier being changed to a deflection bonus) but the one that hurt the worst was by far the brawling enchantment (in my opinion) and it has severly hurt my character, I think. It has gone from a +1 cost (a great deal, but hardly game-breaking) to a +3 cost (ridiculous and useless unless you happen to find it on an armor in campaign mode.)

Some context: I have a PFS (so I have to follow the new rules) Esoteric Magus with a one-level dip into sorcerer, and he utilized brawling armor to get his attack bonus high enough to do stuff. (Click my portrait for his stats)

At level six, without brawling on his armor his to-hit is +10 if fully buffed, or +8/+8 (if using spell combat) and I feel that is just too low. What I need is a way to increase my accuracy, preferably through items (I have plans for his feats.)

While the loss of damage stings, it is nowhere near as bad as the loss of accuracy. Does anyone have any idea for how to boost my to-hit (and don't just say "Amulet of the mighty fists," I have one already.)

[N. Jolly]

Before I give advice, let me give moment of silence for this once great enhancement. You will be missed. #thisiswhymeleecanthavenicethings

[Chess Pwn]

barb/bloodrager dip, more buff spells (heroism?), the magus arcana to get int to attack rolls, Cracked Pale Green Prism +1 competence bonus on attack rolls, FOUR-LEAF CLOVER on three attacks a day, stat boosters.

*why the dip into sorcerer?
EDIT: Ah wanted fire shocking grasp and the extra damage.

[Grandlounge]

Can you use a four leaf clover on attacks?

[Sundakan]

To be fair, it's not the worst enchantment in the game.

I mean, it's utterly trash now, but that puts it on par with literally every other armor enchantment.

[Hrothdane]

I dont agree at all that it's trash.

It's an untyped +2 bonus to attack and damage in a slot that normally never gives bonuses to hit and damage. I happily rebought it for my PFS character.

[Blackwaltzomega]

Hrothdane wrote:

I dont agree at all that it's trash.

It's an untyped +2 bonus to attack and damage in a slot that normally never gives bonuses to hit and damage. I happily rebought it for my PFS character.

Brawling's a bit of a steal as a +1 bonus, but I considered that fair since it was only available to lightly armored unarmed strikers, of which there are few.

As a +2 enchantment, I'd call that tough but fair.

As a +3 enchantment, though, I think that's too much for too little. +4 armor just plain doesn't crop up in many games, and for the Brawling enchantment to be +4 armor or better only means it basically doesn't exist in a lot of campaigns anymore. I say phooey to that.

[Hubaris]

N. Jolly wrote:

Before I give advice, let me give moment of silence for this once great enhancement. You will be missed. #thisiswhymeleecanthavenicethings

Before I give advice, let me give a moment of silence for the once great Mnemonic Vestments. You will be missed. #thisiswhyspontaneouscanthavenicethings

Ditto the ever-broken Feather Step Slippers and Quickrunner's Shirt.

Ring of Continuation works with Heroism and doesn't suck so much anymore either. I'm also a fan of the Bloodstained Gloves.

[graystone]

Hrothdane wrote:

I dont agree at all that it's trash.

It's an untyped +2 bonus to attack and damage in a slot that normally never gives bonuses to hit and damage. I happily rebought it for my PFS character.

It's +1 Ac, +2 bonus to attack and damage vs +4 AC... It's not exactly awesome. Blackwaltzomega's post is pretty close to my thinking. +1 was a good deal for the few people that could use it, +2 is workable and +3 is pretty bad.

[Wonderstell]

Pale Green Prism Ioun Stone

+1 Competence bonus to Attack. 4000 gp.

[Ms. Pleiades]

Hubaris wrote:

N. Jolly wrote:

Before I give advice, let me give moment of silence for this once great enhancement. You will be missed. #thisiswhymeleecanthavenicethings

Before I give advice, let me give a moment of silence for the once great Mnemonic Vestments. You will be missed. #thisiswhyspontaneouscanthavenicethings

Ditto the ever-broken Feather Step Slippers and Quickrunner's Shirt.

Ring of Continuation works with Heroism and doesn't suck so much anymore either. I'm also a fan of the Bloodstained Gloves.

Good lord, I just looked at the changes and hot damn did Paizo just neuter several nice items with a rusty ice-pick or what?

[VampByDay]

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Hubaris wrote:

N. Jolly wrote:

Before I give advice, let me give moment of silence for this once great enhancement. You will be missed. #thisiswhymeleecanthavenicethings

Before I give advice, let me give a moment of silence for the once great Mnemonic Vestments. You will be missed. #thisiswhyspontaneouscanthavenicethings

Ditto the ever-broken Feather Step Slippers and Quickrunner's Shirt.

Ring of Continuation works with Heroism and doesn't suck so much anymore either. I'm also a fan of the Bloodstained Gloves.

Good lord, I just looked at the changes and hot damn did Paizo just neuter several nice items with a rusty ice-pick or what?

A lot of them don't make sense either! Like, now the Jingasa of the fortunate soldier sucks now, as you can't upgrade it like a ring (at least not in PFS), and Brawling now is a terrible enchant. (I mean, it was REALLY good as a +1 enchant, but it wasn't game-breaking or anything. If anything, I would argue it should be a straight +10000 GP investment or something, that I would pay for.)

[Oterisk]

Yeah, um... Mnemonic Vestments are still nice to have in a pinch. Simply because you can't swap them out a half dozen times per day doesn't mean they aren't still useful. If you are going to cast certain spells that often, just get it on your actual list. I went through a whole campaign with only one set, and still found it immensely useful.

[Xexyz]

Could someone post a link to these changes?

[Ricardo Bolas]

@Xexys

Link

[Captain Morgan]

Those are some intense changes.

[Claxon]

I felt like many of the items Paizo addressed needed to be changed.

Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier and Bracer's of Falcon's Aim were both far too good for the price. But I wish they had simply raised the price of the items to something fair instead of changing the mechanics.

Both are now items that will no longer be bought.

[lemeres]

Haru Drakestand wrote:

It has gone from a +1 cost (a great deal, but hardly game-breaking) to a +3 cost (ridiculous and useless unless you happen to find it on an armor in campaign mode.)

Well, the idea of the errata has precedent, if nothing else. As a general rule for item creation, you shouldn't make something that replaces other items at a cheaper price.

The armor property could go onto a +1 chainshirt, making it a +2. So, for half the price of a +2 weapon, you could get the same general effect while still getting a +1 to AC. And if you think of unarmed strikes as TWF, that is actually at the same price as two +1 weapons while getting the +2/+2 and +1 AC.

It was a VERY attractive proposition to ignore the amulet of mighty fists for quite a while. At least at the level ranges where you couldn't pick up +3, where having an actual enhancement bonus means something other than bonuses.

Also, with brawler or even swashbuckler, it isn't such a huge trade off forcing you to go with light armor, since they get scaling bonuses to AC that make them like heavy armor anyway. Brawling armor was made to make an unattractive style (light armor unarmed) attractive, but other classes did that and exceeded the original boundaries when both set of incentives were stacked.

While putting it at a +3 seems a bit much, it is reasonable not to allowing it to continue as a mere +1. And seeing how desperately druids wait for their +4 wilding armor... it isn't exactly asking you to go to an impossible length to buy it. Particularly for an untyped +2 that stacks with anything, ever. IT makes this more of a mid game option, but it isn't useless.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

lemeres wrote:

Haru Drakestand wrote:

It has gone from a +1 cost (a great deal, but hardly game-breaking) to a +3 cost (ridiculous and useless unless you happen to find it on an armor in campaign mode.)

Well, the idea of the errata has precedent, if nothing else. As a general rule for item creation, you shouldn't make something that replaces other items at a cheaper price.

The armor property could go onto a +1 chainshirt, making it a +2. So, for half the price of a +2 weapon, you could get the same general effect while still getting a +1 to AC. And if you think of unarmed strikes as TWF, that is actually at the same price as two +1 weapons while getting the +2/+2 and +1 AC.

It was a VERY attractive proposition to ignore the amulet of mighty fists for quite a while.

Also, with brawler or even swashbuckler, it isn't such a huge trade off forcing you to go with light armor, since they get scaling bonuses to AC that make them like heavy armor anyway. Brawling armor was made to make an unattractive style (light armor unarmed) attractive, but other classes did that and exceeded the original boundaries when both set of incentives were stacked.

While putting it at a +3 seems a bit much, it is reasonable not to allowing it to continue as a mere +1. And seeing how desperately druids wait for their +4 wilding armor... it isn't exactly asking you to go to an impossible length to buy it. Particularly for an untyped +2 that stacks with anything, ever. IT makes this more of a mid game option, but it isn't useless.

While we're also nerfing Brawling, why not Bashing too? It provides a +1 to attack rolls, and your shield deals 2 damage dice higher, all for a measly 3,000 gold. That benefit would be the equivalent of a +3 Weapon (+1 with 2 Impact enhancements on the weapon), all consolidated into a +1 Armor enhancement for Shields. Why don't we nerf that into the ground too, because it should equate to the price of a +3 Weapon to get such benefits?

If we go with the concept that new options MUST be appropriated by existing options, then there's no such thing as creativity, and splatbooks would cease to exist (because every book would be filled with the same exact garbage as the first book). So clearly, not only is that logic flawed and wrong, but it also shouldn't (always) be used as a means to gauge an item's power. Especially for something as niche as a Light Armor enhancement that only works on Grapple checks and Unarmed Strikes.

Amulet of Mighty Fists still costs an absolute fortune to purchase, it's just that now you can only buy an Amulet of Mighty Fists or a Brawling enhancement, but not both, ever, at any given time. In which case, why even have the Brawling enhancement in the first place?

I'd also like to see all these supposed Druids that actually bother to save up enough gold for +4 Wild Armor. Because they need to get consumables and other items besides their precious Armor, which sucks. Like an Amulet of Mighty Fists if they Wild Shape, or Headbands and Belts for their casting/melee needs. And guess what? That +4 Wild Armor will run into the same problems as Brawling Armor; it's too expensive for one sitting, meaning you can afford either one or the other, and never either.

[Wiggz]

Paizo's never-ending nerfing of popular options, particularly for martials, makes me want to vomit. What makes it more egregious by far is that they are doing it to the game as a whole just to address issues happening at PFS tables WHEN THERE ARE ALREADY PFS-SPECIFIC RULES ERRATA!!!

I've been told that when it comes to home games, GM's are free to ignore or adjust errata as they see fit... but if that's the case, wouldn't common sense tell you that they are just as capable of addressing the issues at their table without the labyrinthine errata? Its become a running joke - whereas before players at my table would universally end up with illegal characters by the time they finished an AP due to arbitrary rule changes, now they can't even make it through a module.

Toss this one on the ever-growing pile of crap I'm just going to ignore, but will inevitably have to explain, debate and justify to new players or other GM's because Paizo had to meddle with something in my game due to some squeaky wheel out in PFS-land.

[Cavall]

Once again people make guides and a million posts that say "you'd be an idiot to choose anything but this because it's so cheap and broken" and we pretend we are shocked when someone from paizo reads along and says "yes. You're right. Let's change that."

Honestly I think we bring it on ourselves. An unpopular opinion but likely a correct one.

A +3 armour however. That's a hefty cost. It is, however, still cheaper than a weapon cost. So maybe as an untyped boost its an "option" but I don't think an ideal one. I'd rather a +2 than a 3. Seems like a huge cost for what someone's already pointed out ends up being plus 4 armour.

[Durifen Nefirud]

Hi there,
first time poster here.
I agree with the pale green prism ioun stone. Maybe you could even have that implated to avoid it getting sundered.

@ Wiggz
The problem with ignoring it in a home game is that you can only do that for some time. Like the scarred witch doctor for example who got his CON casting stat changed back to INT.
Our group really liked the archetype back when it had CON. Very flavorful as well. We imagined how the pain magic really put a strain on the body of the user^^
But now when a player goes to get a new book they'll only be able to find the INT version of the archetype. And so, slowly but surely the old options start to vanish until only the Errata-versions are left.
I wish there was a way to still have long term access to those old versions :/

[N. Jolly]

Cavall wrote:

Once again people make guides and a million posts that say "you'd be an idiot to choose anything but this because it's so cheap and broken" and we pretend we are shocked when someone from paizo reads along and says "yes. You're right. Let's change that."

Honestly I think we bring it on ourselves. An unpopular opinion but likely a correct one.

A +3 armour however. That's a hefty cost. It is, however, still cheaper than a weapon cost. So maybe as an untyped boost its an "option" but I don't think an ideal one. I'd rather a +2 than a 3. Seems like a huge cost for what someone's already pointed out ends up being plus 4 armour.

Pretty strong language there, as a guide writer I don't think I've ever once called someone an idiot for not making a choice.

But let's follow your logic here. In every guide I have ever written, a few items have always been 5/5 must take, and none of them were the ones that were nerfed (which were commonly 4/5).

Cloak of Resistance, Belt of stat increase, headband of stat increase.

Yeah, glad those were changed. There's a difference between a popular and overpowered option. Sometimes they're the same, sometimes they're not. Sometimes something is just so universally useful (like negating a crit) that it ends up being selected a lot. And yet we have the big six never being touched rather than being altered to allow more design creativity.

They could have altered these in ways to help make them more restrictive to use, but they basically nuked them, and that's what a lot of people are angry about. I'd have picked up the Jingasa for 12k, Bracer's of falcon's aim for the same, but now they're not worth the paper they're printed on, like a large number of options.

[Cavall]

Welcome to the forums, Durifen

One thing I can say is if you like the old options buy the books when they come out. Can't say much past that, it will be harder and harder after time.

[Cavall]

N. Jolly wrote:

Cavall wrote:

Once again people make guides and a million posts that say "you'd be an idiot to choose anything but this because it's so cheap and broken" and we pretend we are shocked when someone from paizo reads along and says "yes. You're right. Let's change that."

Honestly I think we bring it on ourselves. An unpopular opinion but likely a correct one.

A +3 armour however. That's a hefty cost. It is, however, still cheaper than a weapon cost. So maybe as an untyped boost its an "option" but I don't think an ideal one. I'd rather a +2 than a 3. Seems like a huge cost for what someone's already pointed out ends up being plus 4 armour.

Pretty strong language there, as a guide writer I don't think I've ever once called someone an idiot for not making a choice.

But let's follow your logic here. In every guide I have ever written, a few items have always been 5/5 must take, and none of them were the ones that were nerfed (which were commonly 4/5).

Cloak of Resistance, Belt of stat increase, headband of stat increase.

Yeah, glad those were changed. There's a difference between a popular and overpowered option. Sometimes they're the same, sometimes they're not. Sometimes something is just so universally useful (like negating a crit) that it ends up being selected a lot. And yet we have the big six never being touched rather than being altered to allow more design creativity.

They could have altered these in ways to help make them more restrictive to use, but they basically nuked them, and that's what a lot of people are angry about. I'd have picked up the Jingasa for 12k, Bracer's of falcon's aim for the same, but now they're not worth the paper they're printed on, like a large number of options.

I'm running a skull and shackles game and 2 players have the Jingasa. Given many battles are one per day because you sail from place to place it works very well as a once a day item.

[Durifen Nefirud]

Thanks Cavall :)
Sadly it looks like that is the only option for now.
In my opinion less radical changes for the mentioned items would have been a good choice. As it is, I feel that the changes were unnecessarily hard. So... I kind of agree with N. Jolly here.

[Chemlak]

Just going to to say to the OP: your unbuffed bonuses are pretty much right on the money. A CR 6 monster has an AC around 19, so your +10 or +8/+8 is almost bang on according to the game's design.

[The Shaman]

I am considering making "greater" versions of the Jingasa, Lace etc with the old bonuses. I would agree, some of the changes seem a bit too radical.Does anyone really think brawlers and the like were too dominant and needed a nerf to a typical item?

[Darigaaz the Igniter]

Wiggz wrote:

Paizo's never-ending nerfing of popular options, particularly for martials, makes me want to vomit. What makes it more egregious by far is that they are doing it to the game as a whole just to address issues happening at PFS tables WHEN THERE ARE ALREADY PFS-SPECIFIC RULES ERRATA!!!

I've been told that when it comes to home games, GM's are free to ignore or adjust errata as they see fit... but if that's the case, wouldn't common sense tell you that they are just as capable of addressing the issues at their table without the labyrinthine errata? Its become a running joke - whereas before players at my table would universally end up with illegal characters by the time they finished an AP due to arbitrary rule changes, now they can't even make it through a module.

Toss this one on the ever-growing pile of crap I'm just going to ignore, but will inevitably have to explain, debate and justify to new players or other GM's because Paizo had to meddle with something in my game due to some squeaky wheel out in PFS-land.

My thoughts exactly. I've been willing to put up with a LOT of these very-questionable erratas, but at this point I think we've reached the "straw that breaks the camel's back" threshold.

[Jesse Heinig]

It's simple business: Put out book with new hotness. Everyone buys book. Upon release of next book, nerf old hotness to uselessness and release new hotness.

[The Shaman]

It is almost never a good idea to make people wander what the designers were doing, though, especially when the crunch of the books is already available online (so people do not need to buy the books to know what the new items are). If faith in the testing of the product decreases enough, many people will just shift to other games.

[Grue]

Claxon wrote:

I felt like many of the items Paizo addressed needed to be changed.

Jingasa of the Fortunate Soldier and Bracer's of Falcon's Aim were both far too good for the price. But I wish they had simply raised the price of the items to something fair instead of changing the mechanics.

Both are now items that will no longer be bought.

<Sigh>There are times I wonder if the folks writing for paizo actually play the game regularly. They certainly make a lot of decisions that make way too many feats, archetypes, and magic items utter dross (to outright traps over simulating the same 'flavor' using vanilla options in the case of too many archetypes).

Guess I'm just frustrated about the increasing uselessness of my printed books as a table reference (and one of the main reason I dropped my subscriptions), but...heh...is it too much to ask for the folks making these decisions to display a little system mastery?

Bracers of Falcon's Aim for instance should have had its price dropped from 4k to in the range of 400gp (1st level spell * 2000/5 because of 1 charge a day). I'd probably go with 800 gp as a final tweak given it's primarily a ranger self-buff spell (but still on druid list), but at 4k, a UMD skill and a druidic wand of aspect of the falcon would probably be the better option for a PC that really wanted the spell (not to mention it chews up a wrist slot).

The plethora of 'wearer must wear this item continuously for 24 hours before...' additions is just an eye-rolling insult to injury. Besides the lack of realism factor (who the heck goes days without taking off these sorts of accessories let alone stuff that would be uncomfortable to sleep with) but it makes me wonder what sort of campaigns (if any) the paizo folks play in given the interaction between earning experience and WBL.

For instance a Mnemonic Vestment is a 5k item. Just how many of these things are spontaneous casters buying to gain access to unknown spells on their caster lists? At what point does it become viable for a PC to budget buying a wardrobe of Mnemonic Vestments considering they have some basic resistances & enhancements to buy as well? 12th or 13th? Most campaigns are in their endgames by that point (and it's far from an 'I win' button). If a lower level PC wanted to spend his resources this direction and sacrifice basic coverage in other areas (and still have to use a spell slot to tap into it)...more power to them. But with the change it makes me wonder if paizo folks grok how the system comes together within a campaign.

Maybe if they stopped calling these updates 'errata' and use the word revision instead. Standard usage of errata is to correct an error...spelling mistakes, printing errors, clarify language. A number of these are mechanical revisions (and magic item pricing is still wildly inconsistent).

Eh...I'd be less bothered if I didn't want to keep a common set of reference for my players.[/rant]

[Azten]

Sundakan wrote:

To be fair, it's not the worst enchantment in the game.

I mean, it's utterly trash now, but that puts it on par with literally every other armor enchantment.

I don't know... I think Wild is worse after they neutered it like Bob Barker was reminding them.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

@ Grue: A lot of the "24 hour minimum" changes were implemented because people were cheesing the system. For example, carrying multiple Quick Runner's Shirts, Mnemonic Vests (for storing multiple scrolls and thereby saving money from keeping on buying scrolls), etc. Let's also not take into consideration stuff like the Ring of Inner Fortitude, which was used to get "free" Wishes through the likes of Blood Money.

Not all changes in the recent Errata were bad...some absolutely necessary (and some of them not made, even though there are glaringly obvious issues, such as Throwing Shields). But clearly, a lot of those changes were horrible.

**EDIT** Corrected something that could've been construed as offensive...

[Dracoknight]

Am i the only one that felt this "Errata" made more questions than it actually tried to resolve?

A lot of these changes seems to be pointless, but i guess thats because i dont understand Paizo and their "war on cheese"?

I think they are taking it in the wrong direction and in their attempt to make us take more options they rather make the popular ones trash in hopes we take one of their less attrative items.

Forexample the Jingasa have now become a "once" item with a expensive pricetag, and possibly be the victim of the "Elixir Hoard" syndrome. (From the JRPG days like Final Fantasy where you never used any of the rarer curative items because you hold on to them for a "better reason")

*sigh* I really dont understand where Paizo even want to go at this point, their recent "erratas" seem like they think they are balancing a mmorpg.

[Squiggit]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

@ Grue: A lot of the "24 hour minimum" changes were implemented because people were cheesing the system. For example, carrying multiple Quick Runner's Shirts, Mnemonic Vests (for storing multiple scrolls and thereby saving money from keeping on buying scrolls), etc.

I understand these, though I wish they would have done what they did with Conductive "you can't gain this benefit more than once per x even if you use another piece of equipment". Because waiting a day for your magic item to work is kinda lame.

[Blackwaltzomega]

Cavall wrote:

Once again people make guides and a million posts that say "you'd be an idiot to choose anything but this because it's so cheap and broken" and we pretend we are shocked when someone from paizo reads along and says "yes. You're right. Let's change that."

Honestly I think we bring it on ourselves. An unpopular opinion but likely a correct one.

A +3 armour however. That's a hefty cost. It is, however, still cheaper than a weapon cost. So maybe as an untyped boost its an "option" but I don't think an ideal one. I'd rather a +2 than a 3. Seems like a huge cost for what someone's already pointed out ends up being plus 4 armour.

See, the thing is there are very, very few classes in the game that focus on unarmed strikes and wear light armor. At the time Brawling armor was implemented, the only classes with an unarmed strike focus that could even WEAR armor were two fighter archetypes and the Sohei. With the fighter archetypes that +2 helped offset the fact they were stuck with 1d3 damage dice the entire game, while the Sohei's unarmed strike damage never increased after level 4.

Later on, the Brawler is introduced, giving a character with larger unarmed strike dice that can also wear light armor, so it seems to me like this change in particular is simply taking away an advantage the Brawler had over other unarmed classes. The thing is, I don't feel like anyone was complaining the Brawler was causing problems, and quadrupling the price of a +1 Brawling Chain Shirt seems like a severe overreaction to a rather minor perk.

[Chemlak]

Probably should have been a flat-cost, rather than a bonus equivalent. I'd peg it somewhere around 8-12k - +2 bonus to attack and damage on a weapon costs 8k, and it's not unreasonable to add up to 50% to that because it stacks with enhancement bonuses.

Point of interest: +2 gauntlets would cost 8k. Letting people get the equivalent of those for half the price, particularly since it would stack, is probably not the intended result. The price increase for +1 brawling after errata is 12k. Coincidence?

[James Risner]

I keep seeing people ask:

• trying to balance
  
• discourage people from taking popular options
  
• nerfing for spite

Why can't it simply be "people are interpreting this doggedly than designed and we see how they got that impression. So let's align it to intent.

That has nothing to do with balance, spite, popularity or anything similar.

[Ms. Pleiades]

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

[Wonderstell]

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

Sure they do!

Wonderstell wrote:

Pale Green Prism Ioun Stone

+1 Competence bonus to Attack. 4000 gp.

Cheaper than the slotted alternative Bracers of Archery! And it also works on all attack rolls, not just with bows!

[9mm]

James Risner wrote:

I keep seeing people ask:

• trying to balance
  
• discourage people from taking popular options
  
• nerfing for spite

Why can't it simply be "people are interpreting this doggedly than designed and we see how they got that impression. So let's align it to intent.

That has nothing to do with balance, spite, popularity or anything similar.

Because this isn't our first ride on the "what the hell are they doing!" train. We've had 7 years of illogical nonsense from this crew; and our patience is wearing thin. they, to be blunt, should know better by now.

[Imbicatus]

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

Yeah, it's not letting like the Bracers were the most bang for the buck item that made archers way too good and were universally banned long before the kineticist was released. Oh wait they were. Like it or not, they were way too good when compared to bracers of archery, and anyone who didn't see this coming for them in particular wasn't paying attention.

[N. Jolly]

Imbicatus wrote:

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

Yeah, it's not letting like the Bracers were the most bang for the buck item that made archers way too good and were universally banned long before the kineticist was released. Oh wait they were. Like it or not, they were way too good when compared to bracers of archery, and anyone who didn't see this coming for them in particular wasn't paying attention.

That doesn't mean they should be nerfed into the ground. They were too good, already banned in PFS, no one's arguing they weren't painfully unfair (especially when compared with the sarcastically overpriced bracers of archery), but the lack of middle ground between 'too good' and 'paizo rebalancing' leaves much to be desired.

[Cavall]

Blackwaltzomega wrote:

Cavall wrote:

Once again people make guides and a million posts that say "you'd be an idiot to choose anything but this because it's so cheap and broken" and we pretend we are shocked when someone from paizo reads along and says "yes. You're right. Let's change that."

Honestly I think we bring it on ourselves. An unpopular opinion but likely a correct one.

A +3 armour however. That's a hefty cost. It is, however, still cheaper than a weapon cost. So maybe as an untyped boost its an "option" but I don't think an ideal one. I'd rather a +2 than a 3. Seems like a huge cost for what someone's already pointed out ends up being plus 4 armour.

See, the thing is there are very, very few classes in the game that focus on unarmed strikes and wear light armor. At the time Brawling armor was implemented, the only classes with an unarmed strike focus that could even WEAR armor were two fighter archetypes and the Sohei. With the fighter archetypes that +2 helped offset the fact they were stuck with 1d3 damage dice the entire game, while the Sohei's unarmed strike damage never increased after level 4.

Later on, the Brawler is introduced, giving a character with larger unarmed strike dice that can also wear light armor, so it seems to me like this change in particular is simply taking away an advantage the Brawler had over other unarmed classes. The thing is, I don't feel like anyone was complaining the Brawler was causing problems, and quadrupling the price of a +1 Brawling Chain Shirt seems like a severe overreaction to a rather minor perk.

I do not disagree with you. Perhaps they felt that armor costs being cheaper than weapons and it being almost a no brainer for most brawlers meant it was a little too cheap. I also think +1 was too cheap. Like I said a 2 wouldn't be terrible. But 3 is a little overkill. Still workable? Maybe. But not enough to be attractive to me as an option.

[_Ozy_]

Cavall wrote:

I'm running a skull and shackles game and 2 players have the Jingasa. Given many battles are one per day because you sail from place to place it works very well as a once a day item.

Well, not anymore it doesn't.

[HyperMissingno]

Imbicatus wrote:

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

Yeah, it's not letting like the Bracers were the most bang for the buck item that made archers way too good and were universally banned long before the kineticist was released. Oh wait they were. Like it or not, they were way too good when compared to bracers of archery, and anyone who didn't see this coming for them in particular wasn't paying attention.

As good as they are they shouldn't be removed until we can get melee up to the par archery has set. I mean as it stands it's the one combat style I can see a mundane class doing better in than a class with magic, even if it's just marginal.

[Chengar Qordath]

N. Jolly wrote:

Imbicatus wrote:

Ms. Pleiades wrote:

Oh lord, Bracer's of Falcon's Aim got hit too, because apparently Kineticists aren't allowed any items to boost their chance to hit except for belts...

Yeah, it's not letting like the Bracers were the most bang for the buck item that made archers way too good and were universally banned long before the kineticist was released. Oh wait they were. Like it or not, they were way too good when compared to bracers of archery, and anyone who didn't see this coming for them in particular wasn't paying attention.

That doesn't mean they should be nerfed into the ground. They were too good, already banned in PFS, no one's arguing they weren't painfully unfair (especially when compared with the sarcastically overpriced bracers of archery), but the lack of middle ground between 'too good' and 'paizo rebalancing' leaves much to be desired.

Yeah, it'd be nice if Paizo's nerf-button had a setting other than "nuke it into oblivion." Granted, that assumes they're not following the EA business model of:

Jesse Heinig wrote:

It's simple business: Put out book with new hotness. Everyone buys book. Upon release of next book, nerf old hotness to uselessness and release new hotness.

[Joey Cote]

I thought the change is bracer's of falcon's aim was perfectly reasonable. Giving a bow/crossbow a stacking +1 to hit and keen and a +3 on perception checks for 4k was stupidly cheap.

The change to brawler enchant seems perfectly reasonable too. The change in a suit of armor's cost from +1 to +4 is 15000gp. The brawler enchantment gives a +2 to hit and damage that seems to stack with the modifiers from a amulet of mighty fists. At the same time, changing a weapon from a +1 to +3 costs 16000gp. The one big advantage for the weapon is that the weapon is considered silver/cold iron.

The change in weapon cord seems a bit weird. Needing a full move action to recover a weapon attached to a weapon cord seems a bit excessive. I am guessing there must have been problems with people using it to cast by "dropping" the weapon and then equipping it as a swift action.