I know the answer. The answer is yes as I can do anything I want in my own home or home group.
However I wanted an opinion.
Referring back to one of my players. I am building a campaign centered around two players and an epic quest-line.
Suffice to say that early on, I am going to have the Paladin be granted a +1 Bastard sword. My reason is I like the sword, it can be wielded for fair damage both one handed and two handed. This weapon actually will scale in magic power as an artifact but that is later on down the line.
My idea is rather than 'waste' a feat purchasing the exotic weapon feat, I was going to inform the player that if she role plays during combats that she is trying to learn said weapon (for example taking a -2 to all attacks with it) for a level or two, I would allow her to have the exotic weapon proficiency for free.
I know I am opening myself up to ridicule but I thought I would ask what players think of that idea?
Happy Friday!
I would enforce the mechanical effects. I dislike direct benefits from RP, since if feel it's mixing in character and OOC skills.
Ok, but over all you are OK with granting the feat if the character plays for a couple of levels with the penalty?
I also prefer a role play where she voices during combat comments about how to master said weapon.
This puts it in my mind she wants to learn it and reminds me of it.
First off I did flag for a forum move since this is more advice than rules.
Second as for my advice its a bad idea. First off it sets a precedent this is something that can happen which leads to wanting to do it more and more. Second if the other player isn't getting boons to match his "flavor" then he is gonna feel like favoritism is being used to determine who gets what. All that being said if you were running this as E6 then maybe this could work better since feats are the main resource gained anyway.
I think this is a fine idea. It might be helpful to be upfront with all of the players about what your expectations are for this change tho. Is this a singular exception, based on the specifics of how the campaign is working out, or can players expect if they RP other aspects of the game they will be rewarded with free feats. For instance, if a character makes a point of using Diplomacy every chance they get, would you be open to giving them Skill Focus (Diplomacy) after a couple levels? Or if a player didn't have Diplomacy as a class skill, but accepted the relative penalty of using it anyway, could they expect to get it added to their class skill list after a while?
The main thing is to set expectations for how much change you as GM are open to and how much the players can expect. I'd recommend having that discussion with the whole group before making this one change--just to make sure no one down the line gets irked when they can't similarly benefit.
Also, if anyone ridicules you for this suggestion, they clearly fall into the You're Having Fun Wrong camp and can safely be ignored. :)
|
I might be inclined to put (what amounts to a non-penalty) on the player, once they have mastered the sword they find other blades cumbersome, and move that -2 over to them. Or because it is a scaling artifact, it could bestow the proficiency as one of the benefits it scales into, but only with itself.
The biggest thing isn't really making it fair for the player, but fair for all the players, in their view the one players a) has an artifact b) gets the feat to wield it for free, what do they get? You could give everyone else a free feat?
How about this.
@lvl 1 rules as written (without proficiency, must use the two-handed martial option)
@lvl 2 allow wielding in one had without EWP, but with the non-proficiency penalty, but only with this particular bastard sword
@lvl 3 halve the penalty
@lvl 4 eliminate the penalty
OR
Give the Heirloom Weapon trait for free, but have it apply only to this weapon (despite it being at least masterwork).
Indeed, if you intend to do this, do enforce the "learning" mechanics, maybe starting at -4 and reducing the penalty for every 2 or three combats fought until you do grant the feat as a bonus.
and do press an equivalent boon on the other player.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If it is meant to be a single weapon which grows in power as the campaign progresses I'd probably just have the sword itself grant proficiency.
Instead slowly reducing the non-proficiency penalty and giving the player a 'roleplaying feat' also seems fine. Only concern would be 'balance' for the other character, but a single exotic weapon proficiency is not a big deal either way.
Wow!! Thank you all for the excellent advice. My group are fairly laid back. If I made such a change it would only apply to learning 'exotic' weapons.
However there is an underlying consensus that doing this sets a poor precedent in the rules.
It would probably be a better Idea to have the weapon grant the feat for free at lvl 5 perhaps. I did not think of it till it was posted here (which is why I post stuff..to learn and grow).
That's a pretty good idea! You might want to restrict it a bit. Exotic is only available if you have martial proficiency, martial if you have simple, and simple is available to everyone. You can't use it on a two-handed weapon (just to avoid tempting everyone with the "optimal" greatsword). I'd go with roughly a full level of use, personally, but two isn't unreasonable for a quick game.
I would definitely have it be along the lines of only granting proficiency with this specific weapon, rather than all Broadswords.
I've been known to give out Traits for certain story purposes on occasion, and this is roughly in line with a Trait's power.
I'll echo the opinion of the "I think it's a bad idea" crowd, for two reasons (both of which have been mentioned before, but I have some personal experience with each).
1) It opens the door to letting players gain tangible benefit from something arbitrary (in this case, wielding a certain weapon for awhile). One player who used to be in our group before he moved away would do something similar, where he would make his character exceedingly tall for his race and then insist that as a result, he essentially starts 5' off the ground for purposes of climbing. So he's gaining a tangible benefit (extra climbing) from something arbitrary (making himself taller than normal). I see this as unbalancing.
2) You're locking the player into not only a certain kind of weapon, but a very specific weapon. You mentioned that the weapon will increase in power, so if the player stays happy with what it does then great. But I had a character once in 3.5 who received an intelligent weapon very early that was essentially just a +1 longsword-- great at low levels, not so much at high levels. When I eventually tried to trade it in, the DM told me it felt insulted. The weapon was fun to have around, but being restricted to it felt like a drawback.
|
Well, the weapon is already intended to become more powerfully magical as time goes on. Perhaps the weapon itself grants proficiency in its own use.
Alternatively, you could look at a Sun Blade for inspiration. Light and easy to wield as a short sword, which the Paladin is already proficient in.
The idea is that she is the holy warrior of the God Tyr. Tyr has mandated that the forces of evil and chaos have 'unbalanced' the world in their favor. Thus he has deemed she needs a particular tool to help her in her job...
Enter the sword of Tyr. Originally I wanted it to be a weapon that grew in power. It was supposed to be the following. ..
At 2nd (when she acquires it) +1 adamantine bastard sword.
At 3rd lvl (the exotic feat is granted via the weapon)
At 5th lvl (Flaming)
At 7th lvl (it becomes a +2 weapon)
at 8th lvl it also becomes Holy.
Now I have the campaign mapped out to about 8th or 9th lvl. I am going to install them into Rise of Runelords at 3rd level at the start and scale some of the encounters up a bit till the module catches up with them.
I also intended to run Daughters of Fury and of course Feast of Ravenmoor.
Better not be a 3.5 "legacy weapon", the things that levelled up with you, but ate all your feat slots to do so.
|
I'm going to echo what Curghann said in regards to the cost of the weapon. Firstly, the guideline is that no single item should be more than half of a character's WBL. Just looking at 5th level (where it's the cost equivalent of +2 adamantine and not counting the free feat), the sword has a cost of 11,000 and the normal WBL for a character is 10,500. You're already heavily smashing the game's assumed wealth with the single item.
Also keep in mind that a weapon is usually a martial character's biggest money sink. By making them never have to spend money on a weapon you're giving him the ability to spend all of his money on other things such as consumables, armor, and wondrous items so be careful about what you might need to change about your combats to reflect this drastic change in strength. I would consider gating off the bonuses not only by level, but by his devotion to Tyr. This may include money donations to the church or forgoing rewards for good deeds. Heck, you could even give each of your players solo-missions occasionally so that everyone can get extra money/power, and have this character's solo-missions revolve around Tyr to get the upgrades to the weapon. This requires him to at least give some of his assumed wealth/power in order to get higher bonuses to keep him in line with the others.
If you're doing this for one character, make sure you're doing something similar for all of the characters or it will seem like that one player is the "main character". Although it may seem cool for a person's backstory, I see it as a bad idea if he's the only one favored by a god or similarly important entity in this way. As gamers, readers, and other fictional media purveyors we've been programmed to be able to single out which characters are important and/or which ones have the most "presence" in the world. If this is the only boon of this magnitude being given out you've essentially singled out this one character as having the most "presence" and have therefore designated them as the main character in everyone's mind whether you wanted to or not.