Getting Monk AC in place of light armor proficiency....maybe. It would make the Ninja more MAD. Cha for Ki, Dex for stealth and normal fineese attack routine, con for HP. Adding Wis for AC probably wont result in a huge boost for the Ninja's AC versus just wearing armor. All the same, I wouldn't change it as a GM.
In regards to published weapons weighing more than you think they should or not doing the correct damage types...tough. If the weight actually matters then you've dumped strength and it should come with penalties. Look through the list and see if another weapons stats more accurately reflect what you would like to have. Call it whatever you want for RP and just mechanically have it as whatever the item is lited as.
|
The "weapons should be the way they are in real life" is a road I'm not willing to travel with you.
As for swapping abilites that is what archetypes do so I do not see why not to houserule your own. However, as GM I would make sure the trade offs are fair. For instance, your example is trading something you feel is useless for something useful. Is the ability swap on the level?
I was curious how people feel about switching out class abilities for others and if they are fair switches. More specifically I was talking to my dm and I felt that the ninja class would be better suited with the monk ac ability instead of light armor proficiency and poison use as I detest all the poisons that are published and view their use as pointless. He said he was not sure that that switch was warranted and might be overly powerful.
Thank you.
Ask your dm if you can use the 3rd party products The talented rogue and the talented monk. In that product they break down all the archetypes for each class (including the ninja for the rogue) into talents and edges. And the monk has rules for combining the two classes.
I highly recommend it, and it is a very well thought out and balanced approach to making more modular classes.
I also had a question about accuracy when it comes to weight and weapon types. If a weapon was historically a slashing/piercing weapon but in game it is only marked as a slashing weapon and it weighs twice as much as it does IRL is it wrong to ask for it to be changed?
Its not wrong, but its very annoying. There are lots of things in the game that are not perfectly accurate. But the game is meant to be an abstraction of combat, not a perfect historical recreation. Not to mention this is fantasy, no real life. There is nothing that says longswords made by dwarves in golarion weigh the same or are used the same as those made in europe during the middle ages. The gm doesnt need to track a ton of tiny changes to statistics in the game for the sake of historical accuracy.
|
|
Claxon makes a good point about how MAD your ninja would be. However, if your GM is the type to rain golden showers on his group you could potentially come out way ahead on that deal. I guess it depends on how high level you typically game and the expected income level of the PCs.
Weapons are an abstraction they dont represent real world all that well. You could argue any weapon could be used to pierce or blunt damage something if used a certain way. I typically like limitations and differences in weapons. If you are the type of group that hates the "golf bag" aspect of 3E then I could see your point better.
