Advanced Class Guide Preview: Warpriest

A favored weapon, by definition, is appropriate to hit your enemies with. Otherwise it would be blasphemy to cast spiritual weapon.

Scavion wrote:

Its a shame anchoring feats to the deity's favored weapon is a poor concept by flavor and gameplay standards.

Ummm, what?

This is another matter of internet forum metagame BS substituting itself for fluff.

Having the feat only apply to the favored weapon is all about flavor.

Well it could go farther with flavor and make it so that gods favoring weapons made more sense.

Examples:
Pharasma: Her favored weapon is the dagger. There is fluff stating that that dagger is for ceremonial purposes such as cutting umbilical cords, not for fighting. Someone fighting in Pharasma's name probably won't use a dagger, and instead use a real weapon. Last time I checked, daggers sucked against skeletons and liches too. Considering her fluff for the dagger, you'd expect her to not care what weapon is wielded because daggers used in her name are not for combat.

Rovagug: Rovagug wants to be freed and to destroy everything. His followers try to destroy things. Why would Rovagug ever favor any specific weapon? He wants everything destroyed, so wouldn't any weapon do as long as its used to kill people?

Shelyn: Shelyn's weapon is the glaive. Shelyn does not actually use the glaive, and doesn't even care about favored weapons. She guards that glaive because of the terrible evil it contains and tries to keep it away from all combat. So wouldn't her followers, using her as an example, never actually wield their glaives in battle?

Gorum: Gorum is the god of war, fighting, and combat stuff. How could he possibly only value one weapon? That is silly.

Achaekek: Achaekek is an intelligence 2 god who somehow managed to favor a sword. This sword was made after achaekek was ever created mind you.

If a god is going to favor a weapon, he should have a real reason. Simply stating that a weapon is favored is not fluff. The reasoning behind the favoring is.

And Pharasma is but one of many examples whereas Gorum demands that you treat every weapon with respect to its proper place on the battlefield. Not completely dedicate yourself to a single weapon.

Frankly, I don't see Pharasma begetting that many warpriests. (And you're right, many of them would use Sacred Weapon with a mace or the like.) They wouldn't take the favored weapon feat chain.

The greataxe is one of the smashiest of the core martial weapons. It's not favored by Rovagug himself, likely, but by his faithful. A favored weapon of 'gaping maw and spider legs' is less accessible.

Similar for Achaekek. He's the god of the Red Mantis, so his followers are Red Mantis who focus on Red Mantis weapons, and who get a sawtooth saber if they cast spiritual weapon.

Gorum wields a greatsword. His followers want to emulate that.

And Shelyn does use the glaive. She just doesn't get in fights that often. (She is not a god I would associate with having a lot of Warpriest followers.)

Adam, I'm not sure what your point is right now. Is it that feats tangentially related tot he Warpriest were poorly designed, or that the favored weapons lists should have been picked with more care?

The need for clerics (and inquisitors, warpriests, paladins, etc.) to have common rules means that certain bits of information about Gods have to be standardized. That will inevitably lead to certain corner cases or unintended interactions (e.g. Evil gods with the Sun domain). It works and makes sense in the majority of cases.

Frankly, I don't see Pharasma begetting that many warpriests. (And you're right, many of them would use Sacred Weapon with a mace or the like.) They wouldn't take the favored weapon feat chain.

Probably warpriest are very good undead hunters.

Ross Byers wrote:

Frankly, I don't see Pharasma begetting that many warpriests. (And you're right, many of them would use Sacred Weapon with a mace or the like.) They wouldn't take the favored weapon feat chain.

Probably warprist could be very good undead hunters.

So do Inquisitors.

Not gonna argue the individual gods, but I really disagree with what you said about Rovagug and the greataxe, Gorum, and Shelyn (Especially Shelyn. The Whisperer of Souls is bad news).

My point is that favored weapon fluff is barely fluff at all and basing powerful feats off of it is a bad decision. Favored weapons should mean something before being given powerful mechanics such as the new feats in ACG.

Some gods should have been given entire arrays of favored weapons. Some gods shouldn't even favor weapons. They should be given reasons why the weapon are favored.

Are we still talking about the game where weapon damage at higher levels is completely irrelevant because 2d4+33 and 2d6+33 is no difference at all?

Some gods should have been given entire arrays of favored weapons. Some gods shouldn't even favor weapons. They should be given reasons why the weapon are favored.

I agree with you on principle, but I'm not sure the mechanics can follow through, without making certain cleric class features and spells overly-long lists of exceptions. It certainly is too late to fix it now, with years of books published with a single favored weapon per deity and the necessity that spells like spiritual weapon get an answer.

(For instance, it probably would make sense to have Rovagug's favored weapon be 'bite', like how some monstrous gods have natural weapons as favored.But when Rovagug was one of the core 20 deities, and that was all we had, in 2007, it was important that he have a favored weapon accessible to humanoids. Especially as he was painted as the favored deity of Orcs (who love them some greataxes) for quite some time. Now that orcs have their own Gods, and can have divine casters who are not clerics anyway, that's less important. But we're stuck with it now. Just like how clerics don't need 3/4 BAB now that we have Inquisitors and Warpriests to carry the 'militant priest' torch, but it's too late to change that too.)

Ah, for the glory days of the Greyhawk Gazetteer, where a god could have multiple favored weapons (such as Heironeous, whose favored weapons were the battle axe and the longsword).

Are we still talking about the game where weapon damage at higher levels is completely irrelevant because 2d4+33 and 2d6+33 is no difference at all?

On the previous page the feat chain I am angry about has been described. I literally do not care about the damage dice. Do not make assumptions.

I am mad that my Warpriest of Pharasma who kills undead with an earthbreaker and a greatsword (Skeleton and zombie slayer!) is not being rewarded (being allowed to use the feat) for carrying out Pharasma's mission because he doesn't want to use a dagger.

I am mad that my inquisitor of Rovagug who is engaging in sabotage cannot use the feat with the longbow he is using to assassinate important figures before the rest of his cult storms the building.

Somehow fulfilling your gods mission is not as important as your weapon being favored, and that is what angers me.

Quote:

Some gods should have been given entire arrays of favored weapons. Some gods shouldn't even favor weapons. They should be given reasons why the weapon are favored.

I agree with you on principle, but I'm not sure the mechanics can follow through, without making certain cleric class features and spells overly-long lists of exceptions. It certainly is too late to fix it now, with years of books published with a single favored weapon per deity and the necessity that spells like spiritual weapon get an answer.

(For instance, it probably would make sense to have Rovagug's favored weapon be 'bite', like how some monstrous gods have natural weapons as favored.But when Rovagug was one of the core 20 deities, and that was all we had, in 2007, it was important that he have a favored weapon accessible to humanoids. Especially as he was painted as the favored deity of Orcs (who love them some greataxes) for quite some time. Now that orcs have their own Gods, and can have divine casters who are not clerics anyway, that's less important. But we're stuck with it now. Just like how clerics don't need 3/4 BAB now that we have Inquisitors and Warpriests to carry the 'militant priest' torch, but it's too late to change that too.)

Yeah, sorry if I sounded a little too angry or rude. I understand that its too late to go back.

I'd rather have favored weapons just grant proficiencies (or grant the use of weapons to existing abilities such as crusader's flurry). I just don't want them to be required to use entirely new abilities, such as the feats in ACG.

Examples:

Pharasma: Her favored weapon is the dagger. There is fluff stating that that dagger is for ceremonial purposes such as cutting umbilical cords, not for fighting. Someone fighting in Pharasma's name probably won't use a dagger, and instead use a real weapon. Last time I checked, daggers sucked against skeletons and liches too. Considering her fluff for the dagger, you'd expect her to not care what weapon is wielded because daggers used in her name are not for combat.

Ah. That nicely explains why her Deific Obedience enhances attack rolls with daggers.

Shelyn: Shelyn's weapon is the glaive. Shelyn does not actually use the glaive, and doesn't even care about favored weapons. She guards that glaive because of the terrible evil it contains and tries to keep it away from all combat. So wouldn't her followers, using her as an example, never actually wield their glaives in battle?

You do know that Shelyn has paladins? With, like a paladin code and everything? She also has a feat for her followers that only works with reach weapons, like the glaive? And that the only explicitly Shelynite paladin we have had depicted is shown carrying exactly one weapon: a glaive?

The Shelynite Forgepriest on page 131 is also bearing a glaive.

Adam B. 135 wrote:

Examples:

Pharasma: Her favored weapon is the dagger. There is fluff stating that that dagger is for ceremonial purposes such as cutting umbilical cords, not for fighting. Someone fighting in Pharasma's name probably won't use a dagger, and instead use a real weapon. Last time I checked, daggers sucked against skeletons and liches too. Considering her fluff for the dagger, you'd expect her to not care what weapon is wielded because daggers used in her name are not for combat.

Ah. That nicely explains why her Deific Obedience enhances attack rolls with daggers.

Adam B. 135 wrote:

Shelyn: Shelyn's weapon is the glaive. Shelyn does not actually use the glaive, and doesn't even care about favored weapons. She guards that glaive because of the terrible evil it contains and tries to keep it away from all combat. So wouldn't her followers, using her as an example, never actually wield their glaives in battle?

You do know that Shelyn has paladins? With, like a paladin code and everything? She also has a feat for her followers that only works with reach weapons, like the glaive? And that the only explicitly Shelynite paladin we have had depicted is shown carrying exactly one weapon: a glaive?

Those are mechanical reasons that show that people who wosship Shelyn favor the weapon that Shelyn holds (but does not use in combat). There is no actual fluff reason printed for Shelyn to favor a glaive. I am reading deity entries to Inner Sea Gods and not finding a reason for any deity to favor a specific weapon in combat.

I am finding fluff reasons for Rovagug to not have a favored weapon, and for it to be rare for their followers to even pick their weapons. Followers of Rovagug: 1. Destroy their findings willingly instead of use them. 2. Rely on raiding to get equipment (so getting a greataxe over a longsword is totally random to them). 3. Never craft their gear.

Lastly, in Rovagug's entry it specifically states "The god doesn't care what weapons his worshiper's use."

And of course people who believe in Shelyn will still fight. Why wouldn't they? I can't find a reason in her article for her to favor the glaive. The closest thing to a reason is that she holds (does not use. Holds.) a glaive.

I am not arguing that favored weapons should not exist. I am saying that basing powerful mechanics off favored weapons is dumb. Gods should care more about you pursuing their cause than wielding the weapon they think is cool.

I can craft the most beautiful shortsword in the multiverse and yet apparently Shelyn will not bless it. Meanwhile if some dude makes an ugly glaive he can suddenly take feats that show that Shelyn absolutely loves his ugly glaive because it is a glaive and being a glaive is what is important to Shelyn.

It's not about the deity caring, usually. It's about the followers caring. Shelynite priests practice fighting with glaives and carry glaives because they have a special meaning to them as a symbol of their deity.

An Abadarite won't try to use a crossbow in melee - It's the wrong tool for the job. But that doesn't mean he isn't better with a crossbow than a sword.

Also, feats and things don't necessarily reflect the physics of the game world, in particular. They can reflect the desires of the game designers. Which, in this case, is to provide a mechanical incentive to use the same weapon as if favored by their religion.

Your Pharasmin's earthbreaker is a better choice to use when pummel skeletons than a dagger, even if you apply the Weapon of the Chosen feats to the dagger. He doesn't need to take those feats.

The favored weapon is special because it is a symbol to the faithful. It doesn't mater if the god itself uses one weapon, no weapons, or many weapons. It's a symbol of faith and faith gives it it's power.

The god isn't blessing the weapon. Your belief is.

Still don't see why new mechanics are being used to furnish an outdated and ill conceived system just because "it's tradition."

The favored weapon is special because it is a symbol to the faithful. It doesn't mater if the god itself uses one weapon, no weapons, or many weapons. It's a symbol of faith and faith gives it it's power.

The god isn't blessing the weapon. Your belief is.

Except, many churches does not hav any special tenet in their deity favored weapon, it is just a weapon, in several cases just arbitralily choosed.

And I have already stated that I completely disagree with powerful and new abilites being given to favored weapons for reasons already stated.

"Somehow fulfilling your gods mission is not as important as your weapon being favored, and that is what angers me."

"My point is that favored weapon fluff is barely fluff at all and basing powerful feats off of it is a bad decision. Favored weapons should mean something before being given powerful mechanics such as the new feats in ACG."

"I'd rather have favored weapons just grant proficiencies (or grant the use of weapons to existing abilities such as crusader's flurry). I just don't want them to be required to use entirely new abilities, such as the feats in ACG."

If it was about the followers caring, then the feat would definitely apply to any weapon the character is wielding, because the follower should be caring more about fulfilling his god's mission/adhereing to their beliefs than having the exact weapon they like.

I would be able to pray, and have my Pharasman deific obedience apply to a blunt weapon because this is Carrion Crown book 6 and me, the other Pharasma worshippers, and Pharasma herself would agree than enhancing my club is the right decision because Liches are some of the worst violators of Pharasma's teachings.

I am trying to be vocal about this to show that at least some people are against this kind of stuff, and that maybe Paizo should be more considerate before they print material like that.

If the game designers want to print material that doesn't hold up to simple questions like "why is Pharasma blessing the dagger against the lich? Why do Gorum/Rovagug care?" then maybe they should print fluff to answer those questions, or stop printing feats that make us ask these questions.

The favored weapon is special because it is a symbol to the faithful. It doesn't mater if the god itself uses one weapon, no weapons, or many weapons. It's a symbol of faith and faith gives it it's power.

The god isn't blessing the weapon. Your belief is.

Well my belief in Rovagug tells me that any weapon I wield is given power because I am using it to destroy things. Destruction is what Rovagug, other Rovagug cultists, and I all believe in. We need to destroy. With any implement. Who cares if its an axe.

Adam B. 135 wrote:

This is an insult to all the people who argued against the original sacred weapon.

I realize that it might not work exactly the way you want, but an insult, really?

Pretending to listen to feedback and then passive aggressively discouraging the use of the feedback's result is pretty insulting, yes.

Especially when one of the developer's main praise for the class was "It can use these Feats".

And Shelyn does use the glaive. She just doesn't get in fights that often.

Source?

The only thing about her and the glaive that is written is that she's spent millenia freeing the trapped souls from it, because it traps the souls of anyone powerful it kills.

Somehow I doubt she actually uses it in combat, because the weapon itself is inherently evil (though it only eats souls, not drinks blood, so maybe I'm wrong).

(She is not a god I would associate with having a lot of Warpriest followers.)

Not sure why. As Deific Obedience perks go, she's got one of the most powerful for anyone with Smite. Which teh Warpriest can get through an archetype.

Though the archetype itself is a bit of an insult as well since it takes the "Requiring Cha in addition to everything else is bad" feedback and the "We want a Paladin of all alignments" feedback and goes "Yeah, well, you can't have both. Suck it."

Why are we talking about Golarion deities?
The warpriest is a Core class, meaning it is meant to be setting free, as are the feats being debated.

If you don't like Pharasma's favored weapon or whatever, then play in a different setting or make up your own.

The mechanics are not flawed.

Once again a Mashmallow man has been set up.

The mechanics are very flawed because they are based on a system called "deity favored weapon" which is flawed.

Why are we talking about Golarion deities?

The warpriest is a Core class, meaning it is meant to be setting free, as are the feats being debated.

If you don't like Pharasma's favored weapon or whatever, then play in a different setting or make up your own.

The mechanics are not flawed.

The mechanics are flawed and also Pathfinder Society very much cares about the Golarion deities.

Why are we talking about Golarion deities?

The warpriest is a Core class, meaning it is meant to be setting free, as are the feats being debated.

If you don't like Pharasma's favored weapon or whatever, then play in a different setting or make up your own.

The mechanics are not flawed.

The mechanics seemingly not working properly with the publisher's setting, that is the basis for all of their organized play, makes the mechanics appear pretty flawed to me.

master_marshmallow wrote:

Why are we talking about Golarion deities?

The warpriest is a Core class, meaning it is meant to be setting free, as are the feats being debated.

If you don't like Pharasma's favored weapon or whatever, then play in a different setting or make up your own.

The mechanics are not flawed.

The mechanics are flawed and also Pathfinder Society very much cares about the Golarion deities.

Therefore anyone who plays Pathfinder must adhere to PFS rules?

Just because something is a subpar choice for a super restrictive organized play does not mean it is a bad feat.

It's not the end of the world.

I am trying to be vocal about this to show that at least some people are against this kind of stuff, and that maybe Paizo should be more considerate before they print material like that.

If the game designers want to print material that doesn't hold up to simple questions like "why is Pharasma blessing the dagger against the lich? Why do Gorum/Rovagug care?" then maybe they should print fluff to answer those questions, or stop printing feats that make us ask these questions.

You are mixing the core rules, which are world neutral, with the campaign setting which is not. They listened during the play test and made the war priest favored weapon free. There is other feats that require a favored weapon i.e. Guided Hand. If you want a God that does not have a favored weapon, make one. The Gods and there faith have favored weapons for reasons.

As for Shelyn's Weapon

Shelyn’s holy symbol is a songbird with rainbow

feathers, and her weapon is the glaive Whisperer of Souls,
seized from her brother Zon-Kuthon and claimed as her
own. She keeps the weapon as a reminder of her brother’s
transformation and to show her worshipers that it is
sometimes necessary to fight for the things you love.

That right there is the reason her favored weapon is the glaive and it is a good one.

Read further, Brad, and you'll see why her followers actually USING one makes little sense.

I for one, don't want the mechanics of the game to be dictated by PFS. Or does no one else recall Crane Wing being the 'biggest problem child of PFS' and getting nerfed into the ground?

I for one, don't want the mechanics of the game to be dictated by PFS. Or does no one else recall Crane Wing being the 'biggest problem child of PFS' and getting nerfed into the ground?

While I agree with you on Crane Wing, and in general about PFS being an excuse to nerf things that are not broken, the context for my mentioning of PFS was different in this argument.

They asked "why are you using setting examples to explain why this mechanic makes no sense?"

My answer was "Because PFS using the setting."

I should have further elaborated that a lot of people use PFS rules and for a lot of people that is the only way they can get a game going.

Favored Weapon is a mechanic that is both good and bad in my opinion.

It lets classes like Cleric use weapons that they would otherwise not be proficient with for free (like a Katana), while also opening up cool mechanics for other classes (like Crusader's Flurry).

At the same time, some of the weapon choices for gods are really off. I can understand wanting Pharasma being tied with the Dagger for ceremonial purposes, but making it her favored weapon makes no sense considering a dagger is an awful weapon for fighting undead.

Honestly, when it comes to some of the problems I've seen in the game elsewhere, I have a hard time getting frustrated with the Favored Weapon mechanic.

Favored Weapon is a mechanic that is both good and bad in my opinion.

It lets classes like Cleric use weapons that they would otherwise not be proficient with for free (like a Katana), while also opening up cool mechanics for other classes (like Crusader's Flurry).

At the same time, some of the weapon choices for gods are really off. I can understand wanting Pharasma being tied with the Dagger for ceremonial purposes, but making it her favored weapon makes no sense considering a dagger is an awful weapon for fighting undead.

Honestly, when it comes to some of the problems I've seen in the game elsewhere, I have a hard time getting frustrated with the Favored Weapon mechanic.

Yeah, as I have said before in this thread:

"I'd rather have favored weapons just grant proficiencies (or grant the use of weapons to existing abilities such as crusader's flurry). I just don't want them to be required to use entirely new abilities, such as the feats in ACG."

Granting proficiencies is cool. It is when favored weapon is applied to other things that I object.

Again, this is the Feat that is apparently what at least one person at Paizo thinks makes the class worthwhile.

It's not just a Feat, apparently it's THE Feat for Warpriests.

I would like to direct everyone to page 43 of the CRB.

Also Rynjin and Scavion have it right.

We have a dev saying that the Warpriest is a stronger class than it seems because it can take this feat, similar to how Barbarians are only strong because of Rage Powers.

That and the Warpriest playtest thread showed the devs how much many players hate favored weapon restriction and the lack of a "Also works on Sacred Weapon" line was a huge slap in the face to the conclusions made in that playtest. One step forward (sacred weapon) two steps back (this feat chain).

I would like to direct everyone to page 43 of the CRB.

Also Rynjin and Scavion have it right.

We have a dev saying that the Warpriest is a stronger class than it seems because it can take this feat, similar to how Barbarians are only strong because of Rage Powers.

That and the Warpriest playtest thread showed the devs how much many players hate favored weapon restriction and the lack of a "Also works on Sacred Weapon" line was a huge slap in the face to the conclusions made in that playtest. One step forward (sacred weapon) two steps back (this feat chain).

I have a hard time understanding how a feat chain that came out before ACG is considered a slap in the face to the Sacred Weapon mechanic? It'd be one thing if it came out in the ACG, or afterward, but not if it came out before the ACG.

Insain Dragoon wrote:

I would like to direct everyone to page 43 of the CRB.

Also Rynjin and Scavion have it right.

We have a dev saying that the Warpriest is a stronger class than it seems because it can take this feat, similar to how Barbarians are only strong because of Rage Powers.

That and the Warpriest playtest thread showed the devs how much many players hate favored weapon restriction and the lack of a "Also works on Sacred Weapon" line was a huge slap in the face to the conclusions made in that playtest. One step forward (sacred weapon) two steps back (this feat chain).

I have a hard time understanding how a feat chain that came out before ACG is considered a slap in the face to the Sacred Weapon mechanic? It'd be one thing if it came out in the ACG, or afterward, but not if it came out before the ACG.

By the context of the posts, I believe the feat chain comes out in the ACG.

Insain Dragoon wrote:

I would like to direct everyone to page 43 of the CRB.

Also Rynjin and Scavion have it right.

We have a dev saying that the Warpriest is a stronger class than it seems because it can take this feat, similar to how Barbarians are only strong because of Rage Powers.

That and the Warpriest playtest thread showed the devs how much many players hate favored weapon restriction and the lack of a "Also works on Sacred Weapon" line was a huge slap in the face to the conclusions made in that playtest. One step forward (sacred weapon) two steps back (this feat chain).

I have a hard time understanding how a feat chain that came out before ACG is considered a slap in the face to the Sacred Weapon mechanic? It'd be one thing if it came out in the ACG, or afterward, but not if it came out before the ACG.

The feat we are discussing did come out in the ACG. It is a feat line that was supposedly intended for warpriests but only works on the deity's favored weapon. one feat in the chain allows them to reroll miss chances with the weapon while another part allows the Warpriest to roll 2d20 and pick the highest when making the attack action with the deity's favored weapon (and do something else I think).

The feat chain in question came out in the ACG.

And frankly, it's only a slap in the face if you absolutely insist that all mechanics should be equally available to all characters without regard to the in-game universe that the game designers want to reflect with their mechanics. This is not a position everyone agrees with. "I don't like this mechanic" is not the same as "the mechanic is bad," no matter how much you might want to believe otherwise.

I was under the impression that most people thought it was a bad thing for classes to be dependent on feats in order to be competitive. I must be crazy, right?

This is a Core book. It's not supposed to reflect ANYTHING about the in-game universe, at all. By the devs own admission. The Core line is supposed to be setting agnostic.

And even then, nobody's asking it be "equally available to all characters" we're asking for it to be equally available to all characters of the class it was designed for.

The feat chain in question came out in the ACG.

And frankly, it's only a slap in the face if you absolutely insist that all mechanics should be equally available to all characters without regard to the in-game universe that the game designers want to reflect with their mechanics. This is not a position everyone agrees with. "I don't like this mechanic" is not the same as "the mechanic is bad," no matter how much you might want to believe otherwise.

"Without regards to the in-game universe that the game designers want to reflect.."

You are right. They want to reflect the in-game world. Please read my posts and notice that I explain how these feats do not reflect the in-game world.

The feat chain in question came out in the ACG.

And frankly, it's only a slap in the face if you absolutely insist that all mechanics should be equally available to all characters without regard to the in-game universe that the game designers want to reflect with their mechanics. This is not a position everyone agrees with. "I don't like this mechanic" is not the same as "the mechanic is bad," no matter how much you might want to believe otherwise.

Mmm. No Im inclined to believe that tying one of the sole features that appears to make or break the class to an arbitrary weapon that you have no say in aside from choosing another deity and furthermore is poorly tied to actual fluff is a bad mechanic at worst and a flimsy one at best.

We had a discussion and playtested thoroughly. This was made pretty clear to the designers and they unbound sacred weapon. To then backstep and bind the feat acclaimed to make it all work out okay is very much a slap in the face.

How important are the feat for the warpriest?

How important are the feast for hte warpriest?

They're pretty good, and basically the one cool unique thing they have from what I can tell.

Read further, Brad, and you'll see why her followers actually USING one makes little sense.

Rynjin, I did read the rest of it and did not see a good reason for them not too. In fact found that a lot of adventures that are devoted to her actually carrie Gold-plated glaives. I could have missed something but at this point I do not think so.

Rynjin wrote:

Read further, Brad, and you'll see why her followers actually USING one makes little sense.

Rynjin, I did read the rest of it and did not see a good reason for them not too. In fact found that a lot of adventures that are devoted to her actually carrie Gold-plated glaives. I could have missed something but at this point I do not think so.

Seems to me that a devotee of Shelyn actually using a glaive is entirely missing the point of what the glaive represents.

It's like being so devoted to the idea of peace that you beat someone to death with a flag of truce. It's just wrong.

My bad on the feat chain thing, and clarifies my confusion. Given some of the posts in this thread, I had gathered the feats came out elsewhere and not in the ACG.