Well, there's a very simple explnatation for why they might change to a silver standard. There's simply not that much gold around to cover all the economic transactions requiring them going around, so the various kingdoms, in order to avoid crashing their economies, decided to change the values of the coin denominations.
It is pretty obvious that they got going coin denominations, with how the copper coin is worth 1/10th of a silver going without being enourmous relative to the silver coin
Mmh, in my opinion crossbows should start out being a little bit stronger than bows, but doesn't scale with player attributes as they are mechanic, not muscle powered. Crossbows would however be able to be built to be more sniper like weapons if one puts a focus on it, with the exception of the repeating crossbows.
Other than that yeah, Bows should be able to become more powerful than most crossbows as a generalists weapon, whilst the crossbows (not counting repeating crossbows, which probably get passed by when the archer gets the feat that allows him to shoot without having to spend an action to reload) become more of a marksman weapon.
Historical note: The repeating crossbow was actually initially considered too weak to be a weapon of war in its homeland of China, more of a weapon of home defence or hunting, until people started putting poison on its tips, and realized that the sheer number of bolts was good on it's own anyway
I guess there's also the question if something that has no concept of honor, or nothing resembling common conception of it, like a beast, or monster, can be treated with honor. In my eyes, if it's a duel with a enemy champion, the fight should be honorable and fair. If it is against a great monster, like a dragon or demon, who have no code themselves, the rigors of honor is a lot more loose.
All about context
Reject My Paladin Compromise, and Then Talk About What Martial Characters Should Be Capable of Please
I would personally like Fighters to become like legendary heroes, such as Achilles, Cu Chullain, Beowulf and such people. Capable of doing what most others can, just much better. Like Cu Chullain holding off an invasion force by himself (imagine 300, where the spartans are just 1 guy), and killing a dude by of-handedly throwing an apple through his head. Beowulf wrestling an invulnerable monster and ripping off it's arm with his bare hands. That's the kinds of stuff I want high level fighters to be able to do. Not s much Wuxia, as mundane, but to extreme levels
And there has been many cases in myth where supposedly honorable characters have used a variety of poisons to defeat a foe. In Japan for example getting the monster really drunk before attacking it was really popular, as seen with Susannoo and Orochi, and the slaying of Shuten Doji, where the heroes used barrels of alcohol to poison the monster.
I feel like the difference between the two classes are like this:
And before D&D Paladin referred to Late Roman and early medieval Frankish palace guards and officials (the schola palatinae who replaced the Praetorians, and the palatine who was a high ranking government official) as well as Charlemagne's 12 mythical companions (who were specifically The Paladins, written as we do today) that didn't really have much to do with being Holy warriors.
Conceptually Templar, or some other reference to the knightly crusader orders would be closer to what a paladin actually is, but Gygax decided on Paladin and changed its meaning.
As for the Sorcerers niche. I personally think a bigger focus should be put on their bloodlines, the source of their power, and give them access to more unique and powerful abilities. Of course with some choices so two Sorcerers can grab the same bloodline and still have variety.
Arcanist/5e style for sure. Less bookkeeping, and more fun as the wizard don't have to worry about choosing the wrong amount of various spells and being useless. Also Vancian spellcasting never made sense to me (how the f*#! do you just forget a spell after you've cast it?).
"Open" spellcasting also opens things up more for variant rules such as "Mana".
From what we've seen so far what Archetypes does is add more feats that you can buy
Well, it is quite possible that kinda stuff might be cantrips, at least Unseen Servant
Personally, I despise the idea of being restricted by having to prepare or learn certain spells at certain levels. Overcasting a spell to me is more that you just pump extra power into the spell, no fancy new gestures or reagents, you just add more raw power. At least for the scaling stuff like Fireball
Well, even if technically stopped a powerful enough blow is still going to deliver blunt force trauma that can cause damage, to a much lesser degree than otherwise.
That and past 10+ even fighters seem to become superhumanly powerful warriors that it is not inconceivable that they'd manage to cause serious damage, even through armor
Not denying that. Cuts were practically useless against most armor (unless you had a big axe, which due to the top heavy balance also delivered a lot of blunt force trauma), but they were more efficient against unarmored opponents. Which is why I suggest giving blunt/spiked weapons like maces and war hammers (look up bec-du-corbin) an innate armor penetrating capacity
Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:
Well, bashing can break bones sure, but slashing severs arteries, muscles and possibly bone as well. That's not to say bashing can't cause internal bleeding, or crush internal organs, but it requires more force
In my experience, it kinda is (SCA and HEMA). Sure, you can shove and strike with the butt end of the weapon, but with drastically decreased power due to less leverage, especially since the enemy has gotten too close for the use of the striking end. Not to mention that the striking end can have up to around a pound of metal at the end which can throw balance out of whack and acts as a counterweight against swinging with the butt end.This is just further compounded with pikes due to their enormous length.
It is however not impossible to use them at close range, someone skilled enough can quickly change grip (shifting their hands towards the striking end of the weapon) to quickly adjust to close quarters. Which is why I suggest a feat, or maybe part of the Polearm Weapon Proficiency, to be able to counteract the close combat penalty.
There was a reason why soldiers with polearms generally carried a sidearm, such as a dagger, axe or sword for when the enemy got too close
Well, considering that IIRC someone who got a high Proficiency in Athletics might be able to jump 30 feet or more in the air, someone who got Legendary Proficiency in a weapon type might be able to bat aside a fireball or other projectile spell the wizard is shooting at them.
So don't think "Just very good", think superhumanly good
That would also indeed be excellent. Being able to make more use out of what the weapon is good for and maybe combat it's weaknesses.
Also had idea for more in-depth specialization for the spears and polearms. Could, for example, have spears dealing slightly less damage than say a glaive or halberd, but being able to be wielded in both one hand and two. Glaivesand halberds deal the most damage, but has the same range as a spear and must be used with both hands, and a pike deals about as much damage as a spear, but has even further reach and must be used with both hands
Please, please, Paizo, let all weapons in the CRB be balanced and have their own role and purpose!
Maces and warhammers were designed to be armour piercing weapons to defeat the increasingly heavy armour of the medieval period, so maybe let them ignore varying degrees of AC granted by armour. As blunt trauma was generally less lethal than a deep cut or stab, they could still have slightly lower damage
Swords were versatile, excellent on both attack and defence, and swifter than many other melee weapons. So maybe they could have the Agile quality that we've seen that reduces the penalty for multiple attacks, or maybe allow for Dex to hit as a default.
Axes meanwhile sacrificed defence for raw attack power so they ought to deal more damage per hit than a sword, but leave the user more vulnerable.
The big benefit of daggers are already pretty obvious. They are probably the best weapons when you want something sneaky, and when grappling (Maybe give them armour piercing much like the maces when that happens, as they were often used to target the weak spots in a knights armour). This of course at the cost of damage potential, making them excellent backup weapons.
Bows could be fast and deadly in the hand of a strong and skilled wielder, but that's the key, a strong wielder. Thus I ask you to make composite bows the default, letting the user add both Dex and Str to their damage.
Crossbows meanwhile, due to relying on mechanical power and not muscle strength and as such should have high basic damage dice, especially compared to bows, but at the cost of having to spend actions on reloading.
These are my wishes at least.
The idea of paladin/templar as an archetype that can be used by various