Versatility is a Human Virtue

A neat little thing that I didn't notice at first: Weapon Proficiency is a combat feat and therefore eligible for upgrading with Martial Versatility.

Another party trick on the table is to extend unarmed-strike-only feats to natural weapons or other weapons (it's in the close and monk groups). I'm not sure it can be applied to Perfect Strike, sadly, since that lists a small number of weapons rather than just one.

Wow. Sheer awesome.

EDIT: But aren't fighters already proficient in all martial weapons? At best, you might get training in a handful of exotic weapons.

So, before even the book is released, we've found stuff that probably wasn't the intent. Go team!

So, before even the book is released, we've found stuff that probably wasn't the intent. Go team!

The proficiency thing seems pretty harmless, to be honest - a fighter spending two feats to get full proficiency in a weapon group seems like the kind of thing they should already be able to do if they want to.

There's probably more ways to exploit the unarmed-strike trick, but right now I'm hung up on the idea of using it with Hamatulatsu or a similar feat to deal piercing damage with a heavy shield.

edit: I guess a tripper build could use it with Vicious Stomp to get an extra armed AoO on trip attacks. It would still restrict you to close or monk weapons, though.

I decided to see what I could do with the proficiency exploit, so please...

*snickers*

Sorry, I can't refer to it as an "exploit" with a straight face. *ahem*

...So please meet Gudruun, Master of Chains, a poor bastard of a warrior raised by hobgoblins from infancy to be a ruthless killer.

He's reasonably tough, does decent damage, has a variety of tricks, covers all three weapon damage types, and knows how to use enough exotic weapons that he could be considered an exotic weapons master. Oh, and he wears a mask made from a hobgoblin's face.

Intended or not, I think I like where the feat stands.

EDIT: Somehow I "forgot" the racial prerequisite and originally posted a hobgoblin character. Fixed now.

I decided to see what I could do with the proficiency exploit, so please...

*snickers*

Sorry, I can't refer to it as an "exploit" with a straight face. *ahem*

...So please meet Gudruun, Hobgoblin Master of Chains.

He's reasonably tough, does decent damage, has a variety of tricks, covers all three weapon damage types, and knows how to use enough exotic weapons that he could be considered an exotic weapons master.

Intended or not, I think I like where it stands.

EDIT: LOL. He has to be human. *dur*

Why did you go with spiked chain for the EWP? If you'd taken, say, chain spear he'd have gotten all of those plus all double weapons and all spears. Alternately you could've gone with nunchaku, sansetsukon or urumi (probably others, too) and gotten monk weapons.

This is more important if you proceed to take other feats with this - for instance, if he took WF: spiked chain it wouldn't apply to his ranged attacks, while WF: chain spear would (since that and the javelin are both spears). It's still not actually a mechanically great idea, but hey, as long as we're doing this let's do it right. :)

The chakram is another good option, covering heavy blades, light blades, and thrown weapons. So is the wushu dart if you're into that (Close, Monk, and Thrown). I'm sure there are others.

I think the EWP trick is an entirely reasonable application of Martial Versatility; in fact, I think it's a perfect example of what a fighter should be able to do with the feat.

Why did you go with spiked chain for the EWP? If you'd taken, say, chain spear he'd have gotten all of those plus all double weapons and all spears. Alternately you could've gone with nunchaku, sansetsukon or urumi (probably others, too) and gotten monk weapons.

This is more important if you proceed to take other feats with this - for instance, if he took WF: spiked chain it wouldn't apply to his ranged attacks, while WF: chain spear would (since that and the javelin are both spears). It's still not actually a mechanically great idea, but hey, as long as we're doing this let's do it right. :)

The chakram is another good option, covering heavy blades, light blades, and thrown weapons. So is the wushu dart if you're into that (Close, Monk, and Thrown). I'm sure there are others.

I had already changed it by the time you posted. His exotic weapon proficiency is now for the nine-section whip which, with Martial Versatility, makes him proficient in all martial weapons, plus everything in the flail and monk groups. Below is a complete list of all his new proficiencies:

Also, chain spear is NOT a double weapon, nor is it even in the spear group. It just has two modes of attack (that CANNOT be used simultaneously).

I had already changed it by the time you posted. Still, chain spear is NOT a double weapon, nor is it even in the spear group. It just has two modes of attack (that CANNOT be used simultaneously).

Ah, you're right. That's what I get for relying on the wiki without double-checking the texts. The chain spear is kind of a mess it seems! (Also, at the time I posted, it was still spiked chain even though he was updated to human, I downloaded and checked because I didn't want to be rude.)

Nine-section staff is a good option. Too bad none of the monk thrown weapons go as far as the javelin.

edit: Oh, here's a fun one: Net Adept. Now you can treat any thrown weapon as a one-handed reach weapon. Since a number of them are already also usable as nonreach melee weapons, it's a fairly easy (if weird) way to get inclusive reach.

(For the ones that aren't already melee weapons, Sling Flail will cure that. Blowgun melee!)

Ravingdork wrote:

valid stuff that makes my brain hurt

This game has become too complicated.

Revan wrote:

Cheapy wrote:

I can't imagine it being "+1 HP, +1 Skill, Favored class bonus. Pick 2."

If it's not 'pick 2' than the feat does absolutely nothing for someone choosing the alternate favored class bonuses, rather than HP or Skill, so why mention it at all?

Maybe this feat was ment to put back some versatility. Right now everyone I know just uses the alternative class features and noone bothers with HPs or Skillpoints any more.

Based on my preference for avoiding "useless" options, I generally decline to take favored class options that grant you less than half of something. Thus, my half-elf summoner has never taken that favored class bonus (since I would basically get nothing for three levels, even though what I get at the 4th level would be really good).

Also, some race/class combinations have no alternative bonuses.

edit: Oh, here's a fun one: Net Adept. Now you can treat any thrown weapon as a one-handed reach weapon. Since a number of them are already also usable as nonreach melee weapons, it's a fairly easy (if weird) way to get inclusive reach.

And here we have a stinker! :-)

Another party trick on the table is to extend unarmed-strike-only feats to natural weapons or other weapons (it's in the close and monk groups).

The only thing there is that I noticed that alot of Feats using Unarmed Strike or Shields say things like 'when you make an unarmed strike' or 'when you shield bash', which even if the Feat now technically works with other weapons, you can't actually DO with other weapons. In other words, the Feats trigger NOT merely when you are using X weapon, but using X weapon in Y manner (a manner which other weapons can't do, e.g. Shield Bash). I'm not sure about RAW/RAI there though...

I definitely liked the aspect that Jason mentioned, making it so 'found' weapons that aren't the one you have invested deep into are more likely to be used rather than sold/scrapped... E.g. a Sunblade for example. Incidentally, it also makes the debate about Crit Rate vs. Damage Die mostly irrelevant, at least in regards to Feat Selection... Your Feats will work the same whether you are using a Scimitar Falchion or a Bastard Sword/Greatsword, so you can choose (and purchase) weapons depending on your opponent (e.g. Crit Immune or not) without worrying about whether your Feats work with it or not.

It does make me want to see more Feats dependant on specific Weapon Groups (whether or not you are a Fighter) and/or Damage Type. Well, OK, we probably don't need any more Feats in PRPG, but you get the idea :-)

You know the best part of it? When you manage to get Martial Mastery, you actually become competent in every weapon ever invented. Awesome.

Anyway, i think level 16 is still too steep as a prerequisite to actually be usefull. The main reason i see for a fighter to use it, barring some situational build, is for the Specializzation chain, that caps at 12. If you need the feat for your actual Awesome TWF build or something like that, waiting 16 level to actually play the character you want with the long sword + short sword combo or whatever is a bit too much.

You know the best part of it? When you manage to get Martial Mastery, you actually become competent in every weapon ever invented. Awesome.

I don't see how. It only works for specific weapon groups, not every weapon. You would have to invest in several proficiency feats to cover all the groups.

I don't see how that shield bashing feat, net feat, and what not would work with other weapons. They don't make you select a specific weapon like Weapon Focus does. They simply apply to one weapon. Therefore, I don't believe they really qualify for Martial Versatility.

I don't see how that shield bashing feat, net feat, and what not would work with other weapons. They don't make you select a specific weapon like Weapon Focus does. They simply apply to one weapon. Therefore, I don't believe they really qualify for Martial Versatility.

They're probably not intended to, and it would be sensible for Paizo to reword it as "choose one combat feat you know that requires you to specify a single weapon for it to apply to" or something similar if they don't want it to work that way. However, as it's worded now, it's "choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon". Net Mastery applies to a specific weapon: the net.

The only thing there is that I noticed that alot of Feats using Unarmed Strike or Shields say things like 'when you make an unarmed strike' or 'when you shield bash', which even if the Feat now technically works with other weapons, you can't actually DO with other weapons. In other words, the Feats trigger NOT merely when you are using X weapon, but using X weapon in Y manner (a manner which other weapons can't do, e.g. Shield Bash). I'm not sure about RAW/RAI there though...

Shield bash is on shaky ground - for example, Bashing Finish probably won't work (you get a "free shield bash", and other weapons don't have a shield bash option) but Shield Master ("You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon") certainly would. The wording on most unarmed strike feats is such that they still read the same when you substitute "temple sword" for "unarmed strike" or whatever, so that seems okay to me.

Incidentally, another fun one is Quarterstaff Master - turn any monk or double weapon into a one-handed weapon! Great for post-clarification armed monks. :)

Anyway, i think level 16 is still too steep as a prerequisite to actually be usefull. The main reason i see for a fighter to use it, barring some situational build, is for the Specializzation chain, that caps at 12. If you need the feat for your actual Awesome TWF build or something like that, waiting 16 level to actually play the character you want with the long sword + short sword combo or whatever is a bit too much.

Agreed, especially if the ability to extend weapon-specific feats like Quarterstaff Master or Sling Flail is unintended (and it probably is). Personally I'd peg it around level 9: it's not really all that powerful, but it's definitely something which seems like it should be for dedicated fighters instead of dippers.

Dekalinder wrote:

You know the best part of it? When you manage to get Martial Mastery, you actually become competent in every weapon ever invented. Awesome.

I don't see how. It only works for specific weapon groups, not every weapon. You would have to invest in several proficiency feats to cover all the groups.

Martial Mastery (Combat)

Weapn proficiency is a combat feat that apply to a specific weapon. As long as you are competent in a weapon, you are competent in all the weapon in the same group. Then
You are competent in all simple and martial weapon.
There is at least a single or a martial weapon in each group.
You are competent in all the weapon that are into a group.
This encompasses every weapon on the books.

Please note that this may be fun but is in no way actually overpowered for a level 16 fighter.

It doesn't work the way you think Dekalinder.

First, you don't have "proficiency feats" you just have proficiencies. There's a big difference there. You can't choose "martial weapon proficiency" with Martial Versatility or Martial Mastery unless you actually spend a feat slot to obtain said proficiency feat.

Second, even if your free proficiencies counted as the actual feats (which would be NUTS seeing as fighters can switch out their bonus combat feats during their career), it wouldn't help you, since you are already proficient in all martial and simple weapons for just being a fighter.

Third, there is no "proficiency feat," there is Simple Weapon Proficiency, Martial Weapon Proficiency, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency (with only the latter two being applicable choices, and the former two being moot choices). You can't apply Martial Weapon Proficiency to Exotic Weapons because they are invalid weapon choices for that feat (you need Exotic Weapon Proficiency for them).

To be proficient in every weapon in the game, you would have to take Exotic Weapon Proficiency several times (covering at least one exotic weapon for all the weapon groups that contain exotic weapons) AND THEN take Martial Mastery.

It doesn't work the way you think Dekalinder.

First, you don't have "proficiency feats" you just have proficiencies. There's a big difference there. You can't choose "martial weapon proficiency" with Martial versatility or Martial Mastery unless you actually spend a feat slot to obtain said feat.

Second, even if your free proficiencies counted as the actual feats (which would be NUTS seeing as fighters can switch out their bonus combat feats during their career), it wouldn't help you, since you are already proficient in all martial and simple weapons for just being a fighter.

Third, you can't apply Martial Weapon Proficiency to Exotic Weapons because they are invalid weapon choices for that feat (you need Exotic Weapon Proficiency for them).

To be proficient in every weapon in the game, you would have to take Exotic Weapon Proficiency several times (covering at least one exotic weapon for all the weapon groups that contain exotic weapons) AND THEN take Martial Mastery.

Half right. You're right on the first point: fighter proficiency is a class feature and not a pile of feats, so Martial Versatility doesn't work. However, Martial Versatility on a Martial Weapon Proficiency will give you proficiency with that weapon's entire group. The benefit of MWP is that you become proficient with that weapon, and Martial Versatility allows you to apply that benefit to all weapons in its group.

To use another example to illustrate: Suppose you took Weapon Focus (long sword) and Weapon Specialization (long sword), then took Martial Versatility (Weapon Specialization). The long sword and the great sword are both in the Heavy Blades group. The great sword is not a valid weapon choice for Weapon Specialization for you, because you don't have Weapon Focus in it. Would you argue that you shouldn't gain the benefits of Weapon Specialization on the great sword in that case?

You're right on the first point: fighter proficiency is a class feature and not a pile of feats, so Martial Versatility doesn't work. However, Martial Versatility on a Martial Weapon Proficiency will give you proficiency with that weapon's entire group. The benefit of MWP is that you become proficient with that weapon, and Martial Versatility allows you to apply that benefit to all weapons in its group.

Except you would never do this as Martial Versatility is a fighter only feat, and as a fighter, you are already proficient in all martial weapons.

To use another example to illustrate: Suppose you took Weapon Focus (long sword) and Weapon Specialization (long sword), then took Martial Versatility (Weapon Specialization). The long sword and the great sword are both in the Heavy Blades group. The great sword is not a valid weapon choice for Weapon Specialization for you, because you don't have Weapon Focus in it. Would you argue that you shouldn't gain the benefits of Weapon Specialization on the great sword in that case?

That's different. You're talking about prerequisites, not the feat's benefit. Martial Versatility and Martial Mastery would clearly grant the benefit to the greatsword in your example.

What I'm saying is you can't take Weapon Focus (dreams) because a dream is not a weapon, and Weapon Focus specifically states that it applies to weapons. Saying you could apply Martial Weapon Proficiency to an exotic weapon is just as illogical--and illegal.

Benly wrote:

You're right on the first point: fighter proficiency is a class feature and not a pile of feats, so Martial Versatility doesn't work. However, Martial Versatility on a Martial Weapon Proficiency will give you proficiency with that weapon's entire group. The benefit of MWP is that you become proficient with that weapon, and Martial Versatility allows you to apply that benefit to all weapons in its group.

Except you would never do this as Martial Versatility is a fighter only feat, and as a fighter, you are already proficient in all martial weapons.

Actually, there's quite a good reason to do this given the second point. The chakram, for instance, is a martial weapon that belongs to the heavy blades, light blades, and thrown group, so if you wanted to get proficiency with exotic weapons in all those groups at once, you might take Martial Weapon Proficiency: Chakram despite its apparent redundancy.

That's different. You're talking about prerequisites, not the feat's benefit. Martial Versatility and Martial Mastery would clearly grant the benefit to the greatsword in your example.

What I'm saying is you can't take Weapon Focus (dreams) because a dream is not a weapon, and Weapon Focus specifically states that it applies to weapons. Saying you could apply Martial Weapon Proficiency to an exotic weapon is just as illogical--and illegal.

I'm going to quote Jason Nelson earlier in this thread real quick here: "You don't have the feat WF (longsword). You are able to apply the benefit of the feat you DO have (WF (greatsword)) to all weapons in the same group, which includes longsword. While the mechanical benefits are identical to having WF (longsword), you still don't have the actual feat. "

You aren't getting the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (Bola), which as you correctly assess does not exist. You are applying the benefit of the feat you do have (Martial Weapon Proficiency (Chakram)) to all weapons in the same group. The benefit of the feat MWP (Chakram) is that you gain proficiency in that weapon. You apply that benefit to the bola, which is in the same group. Thus you have proficiency in the bola without having the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Bola), in the same sense that a fighter has proficiency in the longsword without having Martial Weapon Proficiency (Longsword).

Just a note to Dork,
It is not true to say only fighters can take the feat. There are archetypes that call out they may take feats as if a fighter of a certain level based on their own. Those non-fighter classes might not have martial weapon proficiency.

Actually, there's quite a good reason to do this given the second point. The chakram, for instance, is a martial weapon that belongs to the heavy blades, light blades, and thrown group, so if you wanted to get proficiency with exotic weapons in all those groups at once, you might take Martial Weapon Proficiency: Chakram despite its apparent redundancy.

...

I'm going to quote Jason Nelson earlier in this thread real quick here: "You don't have the feat WF (longsword). You are able to apply the benefit of the feat you DO have (WF (greatsword)) to all weapons in the same group, which includes longsword. While the mechanical benefits are identical to having WF (longsword), you still don't have the actual feat. "

You aren't getting the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (Bola), which as you correctly assess does not exist. You are applying the benefit of the feat you do have (Martial Weapon Proficiency (Chakram)) to all weapons in the same group. The benefit of...

Obviously, I don't see it that way. You aren't treated as having the benefits (that is, proficiency), you are treated as having the benefits of Martial Weapon Proficiency (not the feat, but the benefits of the feat). Since there is nothing to be gained by having the benefits of MARTIAL WEAPON PROFICIENCY (EXOTIC WEAPON), nothing changes, and you don't gain the proficiency (any more than you would if you chose Martial Weapon Proficiency: the color orange).

I hope I'm making myself clear, as I'm having difficulty phrasing it.

On the matter of weapon groups, it clearly stipulates that the weapon groups are those listed on page 45 of Ultimate Combat; i.e., heavy blades, light blades, bows, close weapons, monk weapons, etc.

Simple/martial/exotic are not weapon groups as found on page 45 of Ultimate Combat (they are categories of weapon), therefore they are not valid "weapon groups" for the purpose of the feat.

Also, on the matter of "hey, I can take Net Adept and apply it to any thrown weapon," I would opine that you are taking a large stretch with the phrase "feat that applies to a single weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus)."

You could argue that Net Adept works with nets, therefore it only "applies to a single weapon." I would hope that calling out Weapon Focus as a specific example is sufficient to demonstrate that the intent of the feat is to apply to any feat for which a single weapon must be specifically selected in order for the feat to apply to that weapon. Nomenclaturally, any feat that requires you to put the name of a specific weapon in parentheses after it (for example, Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Rapid Reload, Close-Quarters Thrower) is what is intended as "feat that applies to a single weapon." To use a specific example of what I meant by that phrase, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (net) would be valid, while Net Adept would not.

Perhaps this points up the near-impossibility of phrasing a rule in such a way that no one will propose an alternate interpretation or an attempted exploit for it without (or perhaps even with) extensive legalese appended.

However you play it, by all means have fun!

Just a note to Dork,

It is not true to say only fighters can take the feat. There are archetypes that call out they may take feats as if a fighter of a certain level based on their own. Those non-fighter classes might not have martial weapon proficiency.

Name one that doesn't already have martial proficiencies.

On the matter of weapon groups, it clearly stipulates that the weapon groups are those listed on page 45 of Ultimate Combat; i.e., heavy blades, light blades, bows, close weapons, monk weapons, etc.

Simple/martial/exotic are not weapon groups as found on page 45 of Ultimate Combat (they are categories of weapon), therefore they are not valid "weapon groups" for the purpose of the feat.

Also, on the matter of "hey, I can take Net Adept and apply it to any thrown weapon," I would opine that you are taking a large stretch with the phrase "feat that applies to a single weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus)."

You could argue that Net Adept works with nets, therefore it only "applies to a single weapon." I would hope that calling out Weapon Focus as a specific example is sufficient to demonstrate that the intent of the feat is to apply to any feat for which a single weapon must be specifically selected in order for the feat to apply to that weapon. Nomenclaturally, any feat that requires you to put the name of a specific weapon in parentheses after it (Weapon Focus, Weapon Specialization, Improved Critical, Exotic Weapon Proficiency, Rapid Reload, Close-Quarters Thrower) is what is intended as "feat that applies to a single weapon." To use a specific example of what I meant by that phrase, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (net) would be valid, while Net Adept would not.

Perhaps this points up the near-impossibility of phrasing a rule in such a way that no one will propose an alternate interpretation or an attempted exploit for it without (or perhaps even with) extensive legalese appended.

However you play it, by all means have fun!

Well, that clears up the intent behind one of the issues--though I think a poster reworded the feat earlier in the thread to prevent such abuse. It didn't take a page of legalese either.

You're right that developers can't account for everything gamers will do with their material, but now that you have the hindsight, and a good way to reword it, minor errata shouldn't be too much to ask.

Benly wrote:

Actually, there's quite a good reason to do this given the second point. The chakram, for instance, is a martial weapon that belongs to the heavy blades, light blades, and thrown group, so if you wanted to get proficiency with exotic weapons in all those groups at once, you might take Martial Weapon Proficiency: Chakram despite its apparent redundancy.

...

I'm going to quote Jason Nelson earlier in this thread real quick here: "You don't have the feat WF (longsword). You are able to apply the benefit of the feat you DO have (WF (greatsword)) to all weapons in the same group, which includes longsword. While the mechanical benefits are identical to having WF (longsword), you still don't have the actual feat. "

You aren't getting the feat Martial Weapon Proficiency (Bola), which as you correctly assess does not exist. You are applying the benefit of the feat you do have (Martial Weapon Proficiency (Chakram)) to all weapons in the same group. The benefit of...

Obviously, I don't see it that way. You aren't treated as having the benefits (that is, proficiency), you are treated as having the benefits of Martial Weapon Proficiency (not the feat, but the benefits of the feat). Since there is nothing to be gained by having the benefits of MARTIAL WEAPON PROFICIENCY in an exotic weapon, nothing changes, you don't gain the proficiency.

I hope I'm making myself clear, as I'm having difficulty phrasing it.

I think I'd have to side with RD on this one. Having the benefits of the feat "Martial Weapon Proficiency" doesn't help you when trying to use a bola (or any other exotic weapon), since it's not a martial weapon. There is no benefit to having martial weapon proficiency with an exotic weapon, so even though you do "get the benefit" of the MWP feat with other weapons in the chakram's group, it's a benefit that does nothing for weapons that aren't martial.

If you were, say, a cleric of a deity for whom chakram was a favored weapon, you could try to make the case that getting proficiency with the chakram is the same as having the feat MWP (chakram) and, if able to take this feat as if a fighter you could take it and get MWP in all the martial heavy blades and thrown weapons out there. That could work.

Likewise, if you took EWP (bola) along with MV/MM, you'd gain the benefit of EWP with every exotic thrown weapon, because that is what is required to use them proficiently.

I think I'd have to side with RD on this one. Having the benefits of the feat "Martial Weapon Proficiency" doesn't help you when trying to use a bola (or any other exotic weapon), since it's not a martial weapon. There is no benefit to having martial weapon proficiency with an exotic weapon, so even though you do "get the benefit" of the MWP feat with other weapons in the chakram's group, it's a benefit that does nothing for weapons that aren't martial.

See, that's interesting to me - I had been assuming that the Net Mastery thing was unintended (correctly, as it turns out) but the proficiency thing had looked like an intentional consequence given the statement that Weapon Proficiency working with it was intentional.

I would suggest an alternate wording that makes clear what does and doesn't work - something to the effect of "Choose a combat feat that requires you to select a weapon to which it applies. You can apply that feat's benefit to all weapons in the same weapon group that are normally eligible to be selected for use with that feat."

It doesn't take pages of legalese, and it closes both the Net Mastery/Unarmed Strike loophole and the omniproficiency loophole.

Don't mess with the Rules Lawyer From Hell(TM). :D

If you were, say, a cleric of a deity for whom chakram was a favored weapon, you could try to make the case that getting proficiency with the chakram is the same as having the feat MWP (chakram) and, if able to take this feat as if a fighter you could take it and get MWP in all the martial heavy blades and thrown weapons out there. That could work.

I'd be wary of allowing this if clerics gain proficiency, rather than the proficiency FEAT.

That's one short step away from treating proficiency as proficiency feats. If proficiency = feats, than fighters could retrain those proficiency feats that they never use, in effect gaining 5 new feats over everyone who didn't realize this exploit.

Don't mess with the Rules Lawyer From Hell(TM). :D

I rules-lawyer because I care. Better to spot these things before there's an argument at the table, right?

I also rules-lawyer because I think taking this feat with Hamatulatsu and using it to get Impaling Critical on shield bashes with ordinary shields would've been completely hilarious.

mdt wrote:

Just a note to Dork,

It is not true to say only fighters can take the feat. There are archetypes that call out they may take feats as if a fighter of a certain level based on their own. Those non-fighter classes might not have martial weapon proficiency.

Name one that doesn't already have martial proficiencies.

Monk

Monks have martial weapon proficiencies, of which short sword is one. You fail, mdt.

;P

Monks have martial weapon proficiencies, of which short sword is one. You fail, mdt.

;P

You fail Dork.

Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear.

Monk's are proficient with specific weapons, just like a rogue is, or a druid, or any other class that doesn't get blanket martial weapon proficiency.

:)

Reading helps you know, and knowing is half the battle!

Don't mess with the Rules Lawyer From Hell(TM). :D

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you were, say, a cleric of a deity for whom chakram was a favored weapon, you could try to make the case that getting proficiency with the chakram is the same as having the feat MWP (chakram) and, if able to take this feat as if a fighter you could take it and get MWP in all the martial heavy blades and thrown weapons out there. That could work.

I'd be wary of allowing this if clerics gain proficiency, rather than the proficiency FEAT.

That's one short step away from treating proficiency as proficiency feats. If proficiency = feats, than fighters could retrain those proficiency feats that they never use, in effect gaining 5 new feats over everyone who didn't realize this exploit.

Sure. That's why I said you could try to make the case. If I were the GM I wouldn't buy it, but I wouldn't laugh you off the table for making the attempt. :)

I wish Martial Versatility would work with 2 weapons of your choosing, but it still a step in the right direction. I will probably houserule it to work that way.

I will also probably drop Martial Mastery down to level 13, and drop the human prereqs for both of them, but that depends on what the other races get also.

+1

It is a badly written feat. Unclear and not very useful.

Waste a feat so I can get weapon focus longsword when I use a greatsword?

If I as a melee character could apply it to a bow it would be more logical and useful. If I use a greatsword as a fighter most of the time wouldn't I also spend some time practicing with a ranged weapon so I could be a versatile as a fighter?

I do love that Paizo giving the fighter some more love :-)
Fast Learner is really great and just what I've been waiting for.

Don't mess with the Rules Lawyer From Hell(TM). :D

Jason Nelson wrote:

If you were, say, a cleric of a deity for whom chakram was a favored weapon, you could try to make the case that getting proficiency with the chakram is the same as having the feat MWP (chakram) and, if able to take this feat as if a fighter you could take it and get MWP in all the martial heavy blades and thrown weapons out there. That could work.

I'd be wary of allowing this if clerics gain proficiency, rather than the proficiency FEAT.

That's one short step away from treating proficiency as proficiency feats. If proficiency = feats, than fighters could retrain those proficiency feats that they never use, in effect gaining 5 new feats over everyone who didn't realize this exploit.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that Fighters can only retrain their bonus feats. Even if the basic proficiencies counted as feats, Fighters would be unable to retrain them.

That said, since some classes get proficiency with certain simple weapons but not all simple weapons, it can be said that the proficiencies each class receives aren't in the form of feats, as there's no feat to get proficiencies with specific simple weapons.

So I take it that MV/MM aren't intended to allow using Dervish Dance with any 1-handable Heavy Blade?

So I take it that MV/MM aren't intended to allow using Dervish Dance with any 1-handable Heavy Blade?

That is correct.

Ravingdork wrote:

Monks have martial weapon proficiencies, of which short sword is one. You fail, mdt.

;P

You fail Dork.

Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear.

Monk's are proficient with specific weapons, just like a rogue is, or a druid, or any other class that doesn't get blanket martial weapon proficiency.

:)

Reading helps you know, and knowing is half the battle!

You should heed your own advice.

I never said they got blanket martial weapon proficiencies, just that they did get martial weapon proficiencies at all (of which the short sword is one).

:P

Jason, you didn't address the core original questing on the wording of Fast Learner.

Is it:
+1 skill point AND +1 Hit point
OR
Alternate Racial class trait

or is it
+1 Skill point, +1 Hit Point, Racial Class trait, pick 2 out of the 3?

As someone else pointed out, except for the stacking, the first interpretation is really nothing more then taking the toughness feat.

You'd swap the human skill point/level for Alternate Racial Class ability, make it up with Fast Learner, and choose +1 Hit point on the side, and you could still take Toughness on top of it.

I suppose it really doesn't matter what way you interpret it, if you can swap out the base human skill point/level, and you intend to stick with one class the whole way though. You basically just have to decide if you want alternate racial classes, and if you want hit points extra or skill points. However you parse it, it's basically a feat for an extra skill point or hit point a level for humans.

===Aelryinth

Dork, Jason pointed out that you'd still need a pre-req feat to use Martial Versatility on a weapon for something up a feat chain.

Thus, having WS(longsword) would NOT apply to a Greatsword, unless you already had WF(Greatsword), you still need WF as a pre-req for WS.

Which is why the feat underwhelmed me so much.

They did the same exact thing in 3.5 and the Warblade class with Weapon Versatility, although they also worded that badly, so your Spec feats and indeed, ANY feat that mentioned a weapon could transfer to any other weapon, resulting in dual wielding Heavy Crossbows Of Doom.

I'm seriously underwhelmed by the power of the later feat, especially at level 16. Basically, I get the Uber weapon, and now I have to blow yet another feat to use it because my spec tree is on a Greatsword? Why not just allow me to retrain all the feats in my greatsword? It's not like you're going to be keeping two incredibly expensive weapons around, it blows your WBL calcs.

And it requires something that's going to be as nominally useless as the first feat?

Both feats should be aborted and a no-req feat added that said: Weapon Group Mastery: Choose a Weapon Group. If you have a feat that applies to a weapon in that weapon group, it applies to all weapons in that weapon group (ex. Weapon Focus (longsword) would apply to heavy blades group).

This feat is intrinsically limited by the levels at which you gain the Spec Tree feats. It doesn't need a pre-req of levels.

==Aelryinth

i don't see fast learner as an either/or in terms of if you want the 'alternate bonus' or not... if you will ALMOST ALWAYS be choosing that every level you qualify, sure, it doesn't work that well.

you probably won't want the feat if you are interested in the 'alt bonus' for more than 1/2 your levels, but plenty of characters could take the 'alt bonus' for less than 1/2 their levels... the human cleric bonus to SR vs. outsiders is something that is still very useful at 20th level even if it's only +5 or +10 (instead of +20), and isn't really that useful until mid-high levels, so getting bonus HP and skill point is great for a cleric until that point. that's probably the best case though, honestly.

...I would have probably tossed in another bone with a free bonus Class Skill of your choice...

I'm just glad we're having this impassioned an argument about material that won't be released for another two months.

Except you would never do this as Martial Versatility is a fighter only feat, and as a fighter, you are already proficient in all martial weapons.

Please note the bolded bit Dork.

Just a note to Dork,
It is not true to say only fighters can take the feat. There are archetypes that call out they may take feats as if a fighter of a certain level based on their own. Those non-fighter classes might not have martial weapon proficiency.

Now, please read the response to your post (the one quoted up above, you know, the one with the bolded bit).

Name one that doesn't already have martial proficiencies.

Now, note this reply of yours. This is where you go off the rails. Either you are changing the goal posts on purpose, or you are still referring to your original post. If the former, it's bad behavior on your part. If the later, then you are still referring to your original statement, which was all martial proficiencies.

Monk
Martial Arts Master (Ex): At 4th level, a martial artist may use his monk level to qualify for feats with a fighter level prerequisite when those feats are applied to unarmed strikes or weapons with the monk special quality. This ability replaces slow fall.

You asked for one, again, referencing back to your original post. So I gave you one. A non-fighter class who uses their level as if they were a fighter for taking fighter feats. This class could indeed use the Martial Weapon Proficiency (Greatsword) along with Martial Versatility to get martial weapon proficiency with all weapons, which you poo-poo'd originally because all fighters already have full martial weapon proficiency.

Monks have martial weapon proficiencies, of which short sword is one. You fail, mdt.

;P

And here, you changed the goalposts fully, going from 'all martial proficiency' to 'any martial proficiency'. Do note that your change of goalposts still completely invalidates your original premise that nobody would want to use the feat as specified because they already have full martial weapon proficiency.

You fail Dork.

Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear.

Monk's are proficient with specific weapons, just like a rogue is, or a druid, or any other class that doesn't get blanket martial weapon proficiency.

:)

Reading helps you know, and knowing is half the battle!

My response, pointing out your moving of goal posts, and how it didn't match your original posting.

You should heed your own advice.

I never said they got blanket martial weapon proficiencies, just that they did get martial weapon proficiencies at all (of which the short sword is one).

:P

And this is you persisting in rejecting reality and substituting your own. Which brings us to this post, pointing out your original premise, how it was wrong, how you changed your goalposts, how you completely ignored the fact that your changed goalposts invalidated your own original supposition, and finally pointing out that like Adam Savage, you are rejecting reality and substituting your own heavily edited version of it.

:)

Was that Mythbusters or something there MDT?

(My Karate teacher said that any fight you can walk away from is fight you win.)

Can the Corsair archetype from Pirates of the Inner Sea use MM/MV with its "pirate weapon group?"

Chock it up to bad behavior and mirth.

Jason, you didn't address the core original questing on the wording of Fast Learner.

Is it:
+1 skill point AND +1 Hit point
OR
Alternate Racial class trait

or is it
+1 Skill point, +1 Hit Point, Racial Class trait, pick 2 out of the 3?

As someone else pointed out, except for the stacking, the first interpretation is really nothing more then taking the toughness feat.

You'd swap the human skill point/level for Alternate Racial Class ability, make it up with Fast Learner, and choose +1 Hit point on the side, and you could still take Toughness on top of it.

I suppose it really doesn't matter what way you interpret it, if you can swap out the base human skill point/level, and you intend to stick with one class the whole way though. You basically just have to decide if you want alternate racial classes, and if you want hit points extra or skill points. However you parse it, it's basically a feat for an extra skill point or hit point a level for humans.

===Aelryinth

I can't really address the RAI on that one, as the rules text for the Fast Learner feat is different from what I sent in.

If you want what is purely my opinion on the meaning of how it is phrased, I read it as a choice between:

1. hit point + skill point
2. alternate class feature

I don't think it is intended to be a "pick two of three" option, but that's just me.

Can the Corsair archetype from Pirates of the Inner Sea use MM/MV with its "pirate weapon group?"

That'd be a GM call. I haven't read the archetype, but if the "pirate weapons" group is presented as a weapon group for the purpose of weapon training (the fighter class ability), then it seems reasonable to allow it. On the other hand, if it's just a bunch of pirate-themed weapon (like, say, the weapon list of a ninja is a list of ninja-themed weapons but not actually codified as a fighter weapon training "weapon group"), then I'd say no.

Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

Can the Corsair archetype from Pirates of the Inner Sea use MM/MV with its "pirate weapon group?"

That'd be a GM call. I haven't read the archetype, but if the "pirate weapons" group is presented as a weapon group for the purpose of weapon training (the fighter class ability), then it seems reasonable to allow it. On the other hand, if it's just a bunch of pirate-themed weapon (like, say, the weapon list of a ninja is a list of ninja-themed weapons but not actually codified as a fighter weapon training "weapon group"), then I'd say no.

It's written as a weapon group that only the corsair fighter can use with fighter weapon training.

I'd say it sounds like a Corsair Fighter could use MM/MV with said group,
but those groups don't exist for anybody else to use (in combo with MM/MV in this case).

I decided to see what I could do with the proficiency exploit, so please...

*snickers*

Sorry, I can't refer to it as an "exploit" with a straight face. *ahem*

...So please meet Gudruun, Master of Chains, a poor bastard of a warrior raised by hobgoblins from infancy to be a ruthless killer.

He's reasonably tough, does decent damage, has a variety of tricks, covers all three weapon damage types, and knows how to use enough exotic weapons that he could be considered an exotic weapons master. Oh, and he wears a mask made from a hobgoblin's face.

Intended or not, I think I like where the feat stands.

EDIT: Somehow I "forgot" the racial prerequisite and originally posted a hobgoblin character. Fixed now.

I suggest doing the exact same thing to stat up Gogo Yubari.

Was that Mythbusters or something there MDT?

(My Karate teacher said that any fight you can walk away from is fight you win.)

Yeah,