Pathfinder Player Companion: Weapon Master's Handbook (PFRPG)

I'm really happy with this book. I feel it's inspired a lot of thought into making some "off-meta" builds that are now more supported. Also I feel they gave a lot to help classes that get a lot of feats feel like they have good options to go into.

Owen, I was disappointed in the weapon masters handbook.

I'm obviously sorry you are disappointed. However, suggestions that change how core rules operate, such as changing Vital Strike so it works on a charge without any other player resource being spent on it, or giving every martial character weapon training as part of the base character classes, just aren;t going to happen in a Player Companion. These books are ways to contextualize the existing rules in Golarion-specific ways, and offer new campaign-specific options that work within the existing rule framework.

We're not going to overturn how the whole games work in a 32-page soft back.

There are, of course, options here that are more than a list of feats. Advanced weapon training specifically looked at a way to expand what kind of fighter builds a player can create without making the fighter give up feats. The divine fighting techniques offer different kinds of alternatives.The stamina and combat tricks boost feats characters already have.

But a straight redesign of martial classes that boosts their baseline power for no swap-out isn't something a Player Companion is ever going to do.

I'm really happy with this book. I feel it's inspired a lot of thought into making some "off-meta" builds that are now more supported. Also I feel they gave a lot to help classes that get a lot of feats feel like they have good options to go into.

I'm really glad you enjoyed the book!

If you alternate between strikes, and you DO lose your AC bonus, you would take a penalty to your AC if your strike drew an attack of opportunity or triggered a readied action. I would rather a rule be excessively clear than needlessly murky.

All they would need to say for that would be, "When making a full attack you gain the benefit of the improved shield bash feat."

Apparently the wording is there for if the rules every change so that the if the shield or Falcata ever become an off-hand only, or if PF implements handedness, that this archetype with these abilities would be untouched by that change.

I'm not Owen nor a representative of Paizo, but I wanted to address some of your concerns, Lou.

IMO it is just another book that is a list of feats for martial characters that require a large number of feats to take to get an an underwhelming ability. I see an overwhelming design bias by pazio vs. martial characters.

You're comparing apples to peaches. Feats typically give new actions and abilities to martials, but for spellcasters feats only augment the abilities they already have. Spellcasters have a limit on the number of spells they can cast and metamagic feats abide by those same limits. Even if you're a sorcerer, having Empower Spell means nothing if you're out of spell slots of a high enough level to cast an empowered spell. This means that if you're a 5th-level sorcerer, that Quicken Spell feat doesn't do a whole lot for you, and even if you're only using Widen Spell (a +1 spell level spell), you're only able to get two real uses per day out of those feats. Metamagic feats are only as strong A) what spells you're modifying and B) your ability to cast spells of those levels. On the other hand, there are a very small number of martial-oriented feats with daily limits; they're always available.

Also, I'm hurt that the advanced weapon trainings that I wrote for this book aren't considered nonfeat options to you. I worked really hard on those!

for instance compare the feats Maximize spell to weapon Specialization a caster can use a spell slot three levels higher to cast a spell that has all damage dice maximized to a feat that only fighters get to take that gives a flat +2 per hit.

When comparing standard action to standard action, sure, Maximized Spell is the clear winner. But over the course of an entire turn? Or an entire campaign day? And again, Maximized Spell is only as powerful as the single spell that you maximize it. At 10th level, you're casting 5th level spells and can maximize 2nd level spells. Is a maximized flame sphere (a 5th level spell) more powerful than a cone of cold spell? Depends on the situation.

Also, spellcaster feats have a hierarchy more like spells because they augment spellcasting, whereas martial options tend to be flat options that are available at every level. Weapon Specialization's +2 damage is more useful than Maximize Spell's adjustments at 5th level when Weapon Specialization becomes available because a 5th-level spellcaster only has 3rd-level spells (or 2nd level if he's a sorcerer), which means the best you're doing with Maximized Spell at that level is maximizing ray of frost for 4 points of damage as a 3rd level spell that requires an ranged touch attack roll. Weapon Specialization EASILY beats that.

I think some of these biases can be corrected easily. For instance give all martials and partial martial/casters weapons training. For instance give rangers weapons training at 7th level and Magus's weapons training at 9th level [back blade magi should get weapons training at 7th do to their cohesion with their weapon.]] make Weapon Specialization and the greater version Available to all martial's once they have weapons training and the second weapons training for the greater version.

How is letting all martial characters take fighter-only feats a fix to the system? All that does is leave the fighter further behind.

Owen the weapon masters handbook is not all bad I really like the Dwarven combat style I don't like that a racial combat style takes until level 7 to be had again casters only had to get to 5th to get fireball or lightning bolt and at 7th the firball gets 7d6 damage bias shown again.

A caster gets three, maybe four fireballs a day at 7th level. A dwarf with the full Dwarven Fury style chain has the benefits of those feats every round for every combat in every day. Martial options are good if you stop comparing them to spellcaster snapshots.

errata vital strike so it can be used on a charge. Why can casters move and cast a spell but martial's have to stay still to get a full attack it makes no sense it is much easier to move and swing a weapon

then concentrate move your hands and feet at the same time to cast a spell while moving.

The Player Companion's purpose is to supplement the Core Rulebook line with neat character options that have flavorful history and heritage in Golarion. Its purpose is not to errata the Core Rulebook or any other book in the core line. Doing so defeats the purpose of the hardcover products being "core" products. This comment would be better posted in the product threat to the Core Rulebook or in the Rules thread. (I do think that the Paizo boards could use a 'suggested errata' thread for stuff like this, though.)

Alexander, would it be overpowered for each race to gain a martial ability related to their race as they progress in levels and not have to take feats for them. I also would be in favor of spell casters having progressing options related to their race as they increase in levels.

That's true if combats in modules and adventures were not designed on the 10 minute combat where casters can nova and not have to worry about running out of spells. in 6 seasons of PFS I have never seen a full caster at 5th level + run out of spells.

Just so I do not seem anti caster, I think PFS has totally borked arcane casters by making staffs so expensive that I have never seen one in PFS below 11th level.

Comparing Maximize Spell to a combat is difficult because what Maximize Spell actually does is give you another way to spend a limited resource you already have.

Comparing Maximize Spell to a combat is difficult because what Maximize Spell actually does is give you another way to spend a limited resource you already have.

It also do so in an inefficient manner. In most cases, an Empowered, Intensified Spell is going to be more effective than a Maximized one for the same level cost.

Owen, I thought this book was awesome. Dwarves got an incredible buff with their fighting style. I've always wanted a more combat oriented Paladin and finally got it. I'm about to play a fighter using custom Caterpillar Gauntlets(made in the weapon section of your book)that uses the Style, weapon trick and advanced training techniques all wrapped in one. I thought you did great. I hope you get the chance to make more like this or maybe do an Ultimate Combat 2 at some point. Would love to see a Lizardfolk combat style or one that focuses on Sword and Board.

I'm hoping some good sword and board support comes in the Armor Master Handbook. Shields are already good if you want to hit an enemy with them but there's little reason to use a shield as a shield.

so if i read this right, my monk could get a sharding aomf to cange their flurry to a ten foot range attack? i bet i could get creative with that.

GM Aram Zey wrote:

Aelryinth wrote:

You'd get a situation like a bow and arrow. The net is going to be a +15 set of weapons...but the combined cost will be, what, 700k?

However, an interesting way to help keep the cost of wielding two weapons down by spreading the cost across the amulet as well.

==Aelryinth

I'm mainly asking because there appears to be some doubt as to whether or not this was intended.

As the guy who wrote it, it was not.

Until an Owen answer or an official Paizo FAQ happens (both of which supersede me), my suggestion would be to treat it like a magical bow and ammunition; enhancement bonuses don't stack, but special abilities would. Considering that the amulet of mighty fists is in general more expensive than the bow, this should be a relatively balanced way to handle it.

With that said, I would NOT allow the style feat to transfer enhancement bonuses, as that was NOT my intention. It was designed to work on class abilities and feats, not magic weapon bonuses.

I'm very interested in using the Ascetic Style feat line for an Esoteric Magus, and I'm hoping you can further clarify how these feats are intended to work. I've never made a character that uses unarmed strikes before, so part of my confusion may be my lack of familiarity with the feats that are related to such builds.

Ascetic Style
I think I understand the first part of this feat. You can apply feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite to your chosen weapon. The Stunning Fist feat, for example, has Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, so if my Magus had the Stunning Fist feat, then Ascetic Style would allow him to use Stunning Fist with his chosen weapon (say a nine-section-whip). The main source of my confusion is the second part of the feat that says that he can apply "effects that augment an unarmed strike, as if attacks with the weapon were unarmed attacks." Since Ascetic Form covers class abilities, I assume their effects are not covered by this statement. And you said it wasn't intended to apply to magical effects like those granted by an Amulet of Mighty Fists. So does this phrase only exist to cover the effects of feats like Weapon Specialization (unarmed strike) which do apply to unarmed strikes but do not have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite? If so, then this is a pretty nice feature for my Magus. At early levels he can select any feats that make his Improved Unarmed Strikes better and know that he will be able to apply all of them to his nine-section-whip later (whether they have IUS as a prerequisite or not).

Ascetic Form
I get that this feat lets apply class abilities that work with unarmed strikes to my chosen weapon. (This suggests to me that class abilities are not covered by the previous feat, Ascetic Style.) The Esoteric Magus has the Unarmed Spellstrike ability that normally limits Spellstrike to his unarmed strikes. If I am interpreting Ascetic Form correctly then my Magus would now also be able to use Spellstrike with a nine-section-whip. Additionally he has the Unarmed Strike class ability which grants him the Monk damage progression with his unarmed strikes. So by 12th level he is dealing 2d6 damage with his unarmed strikes. I would expect that Ascetic Form would now also allow him to deal 2d6 with his nine-section-whip. As a bonus Ascetic Form would now also let him use feats like Stunning Fist many more times a day. (At 12th level it would be 12 times/day rather than 3 times/day). All of this makes Ascetic Form really attractive for my character.

Ascetic Strike
If I'm correct that Ascetic Form already lets me apply Monk damage with my chosen weapon then this feat, which grants a reduced version of that, is pretty much useless for an Esoteric Magus. It would be pretty neat for a character that didn't already deal the full Monk damage.

As you can see, I'm really unclear about what each feat's limitations are supposed to be. I know that I raised a lot of issues, but anything that you can confirm, clarify, or correct would be much appreciated. I understand that anything you say about these feats isn't official, but I would find it valuable.

So first off using this feat with an unarmed strike class makes it work different than for another class, say wizard.

Ascetic Style

I think I understand the first part of this feat. You can apply feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite to your chosen weapon. The Stunning Fist feat, for example, has Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, so if my Magus had the Stunning Fist feat, then Ascetic Style would allow him to use Stunning Fist with his chosen weapon (say a nine-section-whip). The main source of my confusion is the second part of the feat that says that he can apply "effects that augment an unarmed strike, as if attacks with the weapon were unarmed attacks." Since Ascetic Form covers class abilities, I assume their effects are not covered by this statement. And you said it wasn't intended to apply to magical effects like those granted by an Amulet of Mighty Fists. So does this phrase only exist to cover the effects of feats like Weapon Specialization (unarmed strike) which do apply to unarmed strikes but do not have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite? If so, then this is a pretty nice feature for my Magus. At early levels he can select any feats that make his Improved Unarmed Strikes better and know that he will be able to apply all of them to his nine-section-whip later (whether they have IUS as a prerequisite or not).

So you're right about feats working.

Ascetic Form

I get that this feat lets apply class abilities that work with unarmed strikes to my chosen weapon. (This suggests to me that class abilities are not covered by the previous feat, Ascetic Style.) The Esoteric Magus has the Unarmed Spellstrike ability that normally limits Spellstrike to his unarmed strikes. If I am interpreting Ascetic Form correctly then my Magus would now also be able to use Spellstrike with a nine-section-whip. Additionally he has the Unarmed Strike class ability which grants him the Monk damage progression with his unarmed strikes. So by 12th level he is dealing 2d6 damage with his unarmed strikes. I would expect that Ascetic Form would now also allow him to deal 2d6 with his nine-section-whip. As a bonus Ascetic Form would now also let him use feats like Stunning Fist many more times a day. (At 12th level it would be 12 times/day rather than 3 times/day). All of this makes Ascetic Form really attractive for my character.

This doesn't cover allabilities that interact with unarmed strikes. This covers class abilities that can only be done with an unarmed strikes. Style strike and Pummeling style are examples of things that say, this only works with unarmed strikes. So style strikes can be done with your weapon since it's a class ability. Pummeling isn't covered so you still can't use a weapon with that.

Ascetic Strike

If I'm correct that Ascetic Form already lets me apply Monk damage with my chosen weapon then this feat, which grants a reduced version of that, is pretty much useless for an Esoteric Magus. It would be pretty neat for a character that didn't already deal the full Monk damage.

So Ascetic style lets you apply your Monk damage, but yes you are right that for a Monk it's not as useful, but for the wizard, he'll get a lot out of it. Plus maybe you wanted to be able to ignore still mind for that feat maybe?

Sorry to repeat myself, but:
Can anybody shed light on how Spear dancing works with magic weapons? As written, it is a bit unclear whether the off-hand attack made with the weapon's had would count as magical. It is also unclear whether you could enchant the haft of a polearm to gain those bonuses. Can you build a polearm as a double weapon? (and do you have to?)

There is a lot of useful information here, but I am interested in trying out a spear dancing character, which makes this question high on my list.

Thanks!

My biggest question is does Spear Dancing Spiral mean to say that the chosen weapon counts as a quarterstaff?

Because say that I wanted to take quarterstaff master, tripping staff, or tripping twirl. All these require weapon focus quarterstaff (the last also req specialization) and I've already taken weapon focus in a chosen spear to get the style.

Does my already selected weapon focus meet the prerequisite of the quarterstaff feats as if it were a quarterstaff?

Great book. One of our players took Flight Mastery with his dwarf Foehammer Fighter. Although technically his ability to fly is granted by his amulet of natural armor, the entire table unanimously decided that he's actually propelled by his magical hammer. Needless to say, now he has also a helmet with tiny wings and speaks in faux Old Norse. And we play Hammerfall whenever he takes to the skies.

Owen, AlexAug, we love you guys.

The book is missing two things:
A decidedly Rovagug divine style of combat.
A sword style that doesn't involve combat expertise.

I, for one, would love to see more divine fighting techniques. ^_^

There are a few PCs on next year's schedule where Divine Fighting Techniques might well make sense, so people's feedback on their popularity is quite useful.

I love the Divine Fighting Techniques and would love to see more. Especially Torag, Irori, and Gozreh from the core deities. I'd also like to see some of the uncommon ones, like Achaekek, Besmara, or Milani.

Maybe it's something that can be added for Inner Sea Faiths?

My personal feedback:

Great
Advanced weapon training is simply great for fighters, a lot of good options that look like they'll really give a nice edge to fighters. Bravo, well done, should be included in a main Pathfinder RPG book.

Item mastery feats opens up some pretty nice options in general, though it is extremely weird that BAB is your caster level. Since it's a spell-like ability, but doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity, would concentration checks be BAB + Con? And all the talk about willpower and then using Fortitude...ah, well, as weird as it is, it's still providing some much-needed benefits even if the flavor is a little hard to swallow, so it's still great.

Magic weapon abilities are mostly nice, I especially like driving, liberating, quaking, and sharding.

Weapon style feats are something I've been wanting to see for awhile, it's frustrated me for awhile that the style feats all require Improved Unarmed Strike when not all of them require using unarmed strikes, forcing me to invest in something I never intend to use. That said, need many more and I hope to see them in future publications...many weapon groups are still unrepresented. I'm also a little sad that the only option for a whip-user is Smashing Style, which while not bad seems, well, a weird pick for a whip user.

Weapon mastery feats are pretty cool indeed, wasn't a fan of all of them, but definitely some neat options, and I'm glad you opened them up to non-fighters at the cost of an extra feat, letting other people enjoy while giving fighters their edge.

Weapon tricks are wonderful. I hope to see more variants of this in the future, particularly one for unarmed strikes and natural attacks as well as thrown weapons, though I would also appreciate more specific ones like weapon trick (polearms), such as one for the double weapon group and perhaps spear weapon group. Some very cool options.

Nice, but...
Divine fighting Techniques certainly offer some interesting options, though I personally am not a huge fan of the alignment prerequisites. It's a bit frustrating that my chaotic evil Calistrian can't benefit from her divine fighting technique, and neither could a chaotic good one unless they were a cleric, inquisitor, or warpriest. Maybe a wider selection will make me more enthusiastic, but I wish it was within one step. Especially for those poor Abadarian paladins and Calistrian and Gorumite antipaladins.

Racial style feats are kind of a cool idea, but I would rather they originate from the race and not be restricted to them. But I'm not really a fan of most core races to begin with, so that might just be my personal thing. They're good and all, I'm just never going to get any use from them.

Eh...
Wasn't a fan of any of the archetypes myself, none of them really stood out to me.

The specific magic weapons...just ridiculously expensive as usual, so I doubt I'll ever use them. I like the Cailean Fighting Tankard, but that price...not to mention, if you use it with Cayden's diving fighting technique, do you use it as a light mace or a light hammer?

I'm just not a huge fan of the stamina/combat tricks system, most of the benefits seem minor, and that continues here. Alas.

Not really a huge fan of the weapon design system, though I guess it could come in handy if you wanted to design your own...I dunno, maybe I'd be more enthusiastic if I saw it in play.

Edit: Suffice it to say, though, I found this to be a really solid player's companion. Kudos.

Great book. One of our players took Flight Mastery with his dwarf Foehammer Fighter. Although technically his ability to fly is granted by his amulet of natural armor, the entire table unanimously decided that he's actually propelled by his magical hammer. Needless to say, now he has also a helmet with tiny wings and speaks in faux Old Norse. And we play Hammerfall whenever he takes to the skies.

Owen, AlexAug, we love you guys.

Please send some of that love to Crystal Fraiser and David Ross too! This book would not be as awesome as it is without them as well. <3

The book is missing two things:

A decidedly Rovagug divine style of combat.
A sword style that doesn't involve combat expertise.

I like Combat Expertise, and that sort of parry-counterattacking is how Medieval Martial Arts worked.

With sword style, the aldori sword lord is essentially hitting back if you miss or hit him. Can be interesting.

so if i read this right, my monk could get a sharding aomf to cange their flurry to a ten foot range attack? i bet i could get creative with that.

Wait, wait, wait. Does this actually work?

This special ability can be placed only on melee or thrown weapons. The wielder of a sharding weapon can make a special ranged attack with the weapon in place of any melee attack. To do this, the wielder goes through the motion of throwing the weapon without releasing it. The weapon splits off a duplicate of itself that flies as if thrown by the wielder at the intended target. The duplicate gains a range increment of 10 feet for this purpose, but uses the same proficiency and otherwise functions the same as the original weapon. The duplicate vanishes after hitting or missing its target.

I suppose you could 'throw' a punch more literally than usual?

Btw it's a ten-foot increment, so you can throw it further than 10ft at the cost of some accuracy. But... literally, we now have a way to do the hadouken at will!

Owen, please say this works! I would actually play non-spellcasting class now!

I keep forgetting to post this, but I do have one minor quibble about one of the Style chains.

Outslug Style doesn't work with the brawler fighter archetype. I've been planning out a brawler fighter for a while. The Style doesn't function for them to its full extent. It would be nice if the Close Combatant class feature were one of the class features listed in the Special part of the feat.

I know you can't be expected to take every single option into account. Still, it's a bit disappointing.

christos gurd wrote:

so if i read this right, my monk could get a sharding aomf to cange their flurry to a ten foot range attack? i bet i could get creative with that.

Wait, wait, wait. Does this actually work?

Note that I'm not making a FAQ or errata statement, just talking about my interpretation.

An amulet of mighty fists can be augmented with weapon special abilities that affect melee weapons.

Sharding is a weapon property that affects melee properties.

So you can put sharding on an amulet of mighty fists.

This means you can make a special ranged attack in place of melee attack. By throwing a duplicate fist. That may look weird, but anyone who has played fighting video games can envision it, I'm sure.

It's worth noting that when you throw a greatsword, you're throwing an improvised weapon unless you have Throw Anything or a similar ability. The same is true of fists. A fist is not a thrown weapon, so when you throw one, it's an improvised weapon. We know this because the ability says "as if thrown by the wielder."

Of course, Throw Anything fixes a lot of that.

Rocket Punch!

It makes me think of the Fighter ability from Kirby Super Star.

GM Aram Zey wrote:

christos gurd wrote:

so if i read this right, my monk could get a sharding aomf to cange their flurry to a ten foot range attack? i bet i could get creative with that.

Wait, wait, wait. Does this actually work?

Note that I'm not making a FAQ or errata statement, just talking about my interpretation.

An amulet of mighty fists can be augmented with weapon special abilities that affect melee weapons.

Sharding is a weapon property that affects melee properties.

So you can put sharding on an amulet of mighty fists.

This means you can make a special ranged attack in place of melee attack. By throwing a duplicate fist. That may look weird, but anyone who has played fighting video games can envision it, I'm sure.

It's worth noting that when you throw a greatsword, you're throwing an improvised weapon unless you have Throw Anything or a similar ability. The same is true of fists. A fist is not a thrown weapon, so when you throw one, it's an improvised weapon. We know this because the ability says "as if thrown by the wielder."

Of course, Throw Anything fixes a lot of that.

So a monk couldn't flurry with sharing unless they are a monk of the empty hand?(or make monk throwing fists as a custom weapon, which could be like detachable brass knuckles)

Now I'm curious whether a weapon with the throwing property has the same drawback of requiring Throw Anything. I'd never seen throwing treated that way, and without that post, I'd have assumed the same was true of sharding weapons.

Perhaps this is something that needs its own thread over in Rules Questions, for a fuller discussion (and potential Design Team attention).

(I hope this doesn't come back on Mr. Stephens. Thank you for your helpful comments!)

A fist is not a thrown weapon, so when you throw one, it's an improvised weapon.

This may be the greatest sentence I've ever seen on the Paizo boards.

Now I'm curious whether a weapon with the throwing property has the same drawback of requiring Throw Anything. I'd never seen throwing treated that way, and without that post, I'd have assumed the same was true of sharding weapons.

Perhaps this is something that needs its own thread over in Rules Questions, for a fuller discussion (and potential Design Team attention).

(I hope this doesn't come back on Mr. Stephens. Thank you for your helpful comments!)

That's a good point.

The duplicate gains a range increment of 10 feet for this purpose, but uses the same proficiency and otherwise functions the same as the original weapon.

Whether they are improvised weapons or not, this line states that if you are proficient in the original weapon, you are proficient with the shards. So Owen's observation only really creates a question about weapons with the throwing property, or sharding weapons that you are not proficient in. And since you are always proficient in unarmed strikes, hadouken away! You still need improved unarmed strike to do lethal damage as per normal unarmed strikes.

In fact "otherwise functions the same as the original weapon" should mean that you can also use flurry of blows and style feats with the shards.
Dragon-style flurry of blows with sharding AoMF: Tenma gou zankuu!!!
Pummeling-style flurry of blows with sharding AoMF: Shinkuu hadouken!!!

I keep forgetting to post this, but I do have one minor quibble about one of the Style chains.

Outslug Style doesn't work with the brawler fighter archetype. I've been planning out a brawler fighter for a while. The Style doesn't function for them to its full extent. It would be nice if the Close Combatant class feature were one of the class features listed in the Special part of the feat.

I know you can't be expected to take every single option into account. Still, it's a bit disappointing.

The Brawler Fighter actually gets very little from this book I think, which is disappointing. The downside of Weapon Training being a desirable class feature now is that Close Combatant not counting as Weapon Training actually hurts.

Kalindlara wrote:

I keep forgetting to post this, but I do have one minor quibble about one of the Style chains.

Outslug Style doesn't work with the brawler fighter archetype. I've been planning out a brawler fighter for a while. The Style doesn't function for them to its full extent. It would be nice if the Close Combatant class feature were one of the class features listed in the Special part of the feat.

I know you can't be expected to take every single option into account. Still, it's a bit disappointing.

The Brawler Fighter actually gets very little from this book I think, which is disappointing. The downside of Weapon Training being a desirable class feature now is that Close Combatant not counting as Weapon Training actually hurts.

Its true. When you're designing an all-new class option, you have to start broad to make sure the option fits the class and then trickle down into specific archetypes and options. Perhaps if Owen gets enough feedback, then somewhere down the line something can be written that helps the fighter archetypes that trade weapon training for a more specialized weapon training (which is basically what the archer and brawler do; they still get weapon training the mechanic, but only with one group and with a different name).

If you're not playing in PFS, I would say that it is a perfectly acceptable house rule to treat the brawler and the archer and similar archetypes that hyper specialize their weapon trainings as weapon training and the weapon master archetype for the purpose of selecting the Advanced Weapon Training feat.

I'll be keeping that response in my back pocket if the opportunity to make such a character in a home game arises; I'd petition for an FAQ change but the current rules are quite clear. I just don't like them. :V

What's really annoying is that some archetypes that have hyper specialized weapon training like dragoon do count as weapon training while archer and brawler don't

I do wish that Martial Focus counted as weapon training for style feats in addition to mastery feats to give non-fighters and fighter who traded weapon training more options with the styles.

A key design goal of advanced weapon training was to provide options for core fighters, and a strong part of their balance was the fact they can't be taken by a broad range of characters. The more different builds you allow to take something, the more carefully you have to check for every conceivable interaction of options. In this case, I intentionally decided to allow advanced weapon training push the envelope, which required it to keep a narrow scope.

Martial Focus allows characters to access Weapon Mastery Feats, because those are feats, rather than alternate class features. Advanced weapon training is closer to a set of specific fighter talents, and I'm comfortable keeping them tightly as fighter-options with just a *very* few exceptions. Even excluding archetypes that have given up weapon training was by design. I'd rather weapon training get much more flexible, but only for people who already have it, than create a whole new subsystem for everyone to become better combatants.

Otherwise to avoid power creep, advance weapon training would have to be less flexible.

Of course, play style has a major impact on how various rules systems actually impact games. I encourage people to do whatever makes sense for their home campaigns, but those choices often won't make sense for the baseline game as played by everyone else.

To be clear, I was only looking at the Outslug Style feats, made for brawlers and fighters (but not brawler fighters). I wasn't asking for advanced weapon training or any of the other stuff meant for core fighters. Sorry if I didn't bring that across.

Another point that can be made: archetypes like the brawler and the archer usually trade each iteration of weapon training for something different; few archetypes (aka none that I can think of or find with a Kreighton's perusal) are a straight down-grade for the fighter archetype in question.

For example, the archer fighter gets a weapon training-like bonus in exchange for weapon training 1, then gets a new ability when she gains weapon training 2, then another ability when she gains weapon training 3, and so on. In this aspect, the archetype sort of DOES get advanced fighter trainings; they're just predetermined for her as part of the archetype.

I don't comment on these boards ever, though I browse them quite a bit. However, I have enjoyed this book so much that I have to tell you.

I love the Divine Combat Techniques (Especially Cayden's), the weapon tricks, the various fighting styles, and advanced weapon training.

Good job, guys! I hope for more of this kind of content.

Good job, guys! I hope for more of this kind of content.

Thanks for the feedback!

I enjoyed the various bits I saw in it that could be made to work for Aldori swordlords. I always enjoy new information on them.

I also find something amusing in the idea that the 'best' Aldori will probably be made with the fighter class and an archetype, while the more heavily armored Taldan rondelero has a swashbuckler archetype.

Overall this has to be my favourite Player Companion. The only "complaints" I have are more nitpicking; one's the fact that there's a missed opportunity of including firearms in the weapon design rules. While I'm aware that it was a choice based on conserving space (let's face it, this book is chock-full of options for weapon wielding characters already), at least in part, because I'm also aware that firearms are a contentious inclusion in fantasy settings so that almost certainly was another factor for the exclusion. However, despite being aware of these factors (space and contentiousness of concept) I still really want to see official rules on how to adjudicate creation of custom firearms. It's lack limits the possible concepts available to be made with the system. A simple example would be that it is downright impossible to make many weapons from the series RWBY using the weapon design guidelines as almost all of them have one or more forms in which they function as firearms. Other examples can include weapons such as the gunlance from Monster Hunter.

The other is that there isn't any sort of support in the weapon design guidelines for modal weapons a la the official stats of the meteor hammer (which has two modes: "meteor" mode treats it as a double weapon while "fortress" mode grants reach and a minor shield bonus to AC). Again, I'm aware that space is always an issue when it comes to player companions, but it was a little disheartening to see I couldn't make any of the trick weapons from Bloodborne using the system as currently presented. As you can tell this is a system that I have been wanting for quite a while, and while I can understand the reasons for the current limitations on it, I am very eager to see the weapon design system expanded to include more possibilities.

Overall this has to be my favourite Player Companion. The only "complaints" I have are more nitpicking; one's the fact that there's a missed opportunity of including firearms in the weapon design rules. While I'm aware that it was a choice based on conserving space (let's face it, this book is chock-full of options for weapon wielding characters already), at least in part, because I'm also aware that firearms are a contentious inclusion in fantasy settings so that almost certainly was another factor for the exclusion. However, despite being aware of these factors (space and contentiousness of concept) I still really want to see official rules on how to adjudicate creation of custom firearms. It's lack limits the possible concepts available to be made with the system. A simple example would be that it is downright impossible to make many weapons from the series RWBY using the weapon design guidelines as almost all of them have one or more forms in which they function as firearms. Other examples can include weapons such as the gunlance from Monster Hunter.

The other is that there isn't any sort of support in the weapon design guidelines for modal weapons a la the official stats of the meteor hammer (which has two modes: "meteor" mode treats it as a double weapon while "fortress" mode grants reach and a minor shield bonus to AC). Again, I'm aware that space is always an issue when it comes to player companions, but it was a little disheartening to see I couldn't make any of the trick weapons from Bloodborne using the system as currently presented. As you can tell this is a system that I have been wanting for quite a while, and while I can understand the reasons for the current limitations on it, I am very eager to see the weapon design system expanded to include more possibilities.

If you don't mind homebrew, Lemmy's Custom Weapon Generation System might be worth considering for your own homebrew purposes.

I, for one, would love to see more divine fighting techniques. ^_^

Personally not a fan, mainly because I don't use the Golarion setting and it is very Golarion specific. I run a Realms game and the Golarion ---> Realms deity conversion is difficult.

It would fit better in a Campaign line product as opposed to Companion line

I just got the Weapon master handbook, it's awesome, but the Rondelero Flexibility ability has me really confused. The Rondelero fighter archetype has a very similar ability, minus the keeping buckler AC, but I feel it's been "established" that the ability doesn't actually DO anything, since you can already alternate between weapons and not take 2WF penalties. BUT since the ability was printing again I am super curious if it's actually supposed to mean anything. Or does the fighter's really do nothing and the swashbuckler's really just saves you a feat to keep ac? Does anyone know more about this?

It's just.... a really, really bad archetype.

...seriously, you guys are just trolling us, right?

Kalindlara wrote:

I, for one, would love to see more divine fighting techniques. ^_^

Personally not a fan, mainly because I don't use the Golarion setting and it is very Golarion specific. I run a Realms game and the Golarion ---> Realms deity conversion is difficult.

It would fit better in a Campaign line product as opposed to Companion line

The Companion line has always been Golarion-specific. I understand your point, though. ^_^

While some of them don't work outside Golarion (Cayden Cailean), others seem like they'd fit just fine elsewhere. Iomedae's style seems like a good fit for Torm, for example. (Is he still a deity? All my knowledge is from the 3e era.)

It would fit better in a Campaign line product as opposed to Companion line

Both are Golarion-specific, with the difference being that the Pathfinder Campaign Setting line is primarily written for GMs, while the Pathfinder Player Companion is written with, well, players in mind.

The key point here being that they're both Golarion-specific, and sometimes you get things that don't quite mesh with other settings. If this proves popular, I'm quite sure Paizo will stick to what works for their setting first and foremost.

It won't always work for everyone, especially if your focus settingwise is something other than Golarion, but you can't fault them for catering primarily to gamers who use Golarion as their setting.

gisher wrote:

Ascetic Style

I think I understand the first part of this feat. You can apply feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite to your chosen weapon. The Stunning Fist feat, for example, has Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, so if my Magus had the Stunning Fist feat, then Ascetic Style would allow him to use Stunning Fist with his chosen weapon (say a nine-section-whip). The main source of my confusion is the second part of the feat that says that he can apply "effects that augment an unarmed strike, as if attacks with the weapon were unarmed attacks." Since Ascetic Form covers class abilities, I assume their effects are not covered by this statement. And you said it wasn't intended to apply to magical effects like those granted by an Amulet of Mighty Fists. So does this phrase only exist to cover the effects of feats like Weapon Specialization (unarmed strike) which do apply to unarmed strikes but do not have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite? If so, then this is a pretty nice feature for my Magus. At early levels he can select any feats that make his Improved Unarmed Strikes better and know that he will be able to apply all of them to his nine-section-whip later (whether they have IUS as a prerequisite or not).

So you're right about feats working.

Effects are anything that MODIFIES unarmed strikes. So the monk's scaling unarmed strike damage has been clarified as an effect, so if you're a Monk, your weapon can do your scaling unarmed strike damage. So by 12th level you are dealing 2d6 damage with your unarmed strikes. Ascetic Style would now also allow you to deal 2d6 with your nine-section-whip.

Thanks! So this is broader than I thought. After reading your response, I was able to find the Feral Combat Training FAQ confirming that the increased damage counts as an effect that augments an unarmed strike. So this feat gets me most of what I would want as an Esoteric Magus. Excellent!

gisher wrote:

Ascetic Form

I get that this feat lets apply class abilities that work with unarmed strikes to my chosen weapon. (This suggests to me that class abilities are not covered by the previous feat, Ascetic Style.) The Esoteric Magus has the Unarmed Spellstrike ability that normally limits Spellstrike to his unarmed strikes. If I am interpreting Ascetic Form correctly then my Magus would now also be able to use Spellstrike with a nine-section-whip. Additionally he has the Unarmed Strike class ability which grants him the Monk damage progression with his unarmed strikes. So by 12th level he is dealing 2d6 damage with his unarmed strikes. I would expect that Ascetic Form would now also allow him to deal 2d6 with his nine-section-whip. As a bonus Ascetic Form would now also let him use feats like Stunning Fist many more times a day. (At 12th level it would be 12 times/day rather than 3 times/day). All of this makes Ascetic Form really attractive for my character.

This doesn't cover all abilities that interact with unarmed strikes. This covers class abilities that can only be done with an unarmed strikes. Style strike and Pummeling style are examples of things that say, this only works with unarmed strikes. So style strikes can be done with your weapon since it's a class ability. Pummeling isn't covered so you still can't use a weapon with that.

The Esoteric's Spellstrike does only interact with unarmed strikes, so under your interpretation I would be able to use it with my nine-section-whip. But I am not clear why you are concluding that it "covers class abilities that can only be done with an unarmed strikes." The feat description says "You can use the chosen melee weapon with any class ability that can be used with an unarmed strike, such as an unchained monk’s style strike ability." The word "only" doesn't appear at all, and neither do any similar restrictions. So it seems to me that a class ability that could be applied to other types of attacks in addition to unarmed strikes could be applied to the chosen weapon. (BTW, which class has the "Pummeling" class ability? I couldn't find it.)

gisher wrote:

Ascetic Strike

If I'm correct that Ascetic Form already lets me apply Monk damage with my chosen weapon then this feat, which grants a reduced version of that, is pretty much useless for an Esoteric Magus. It would be pretty neat for a character that didn't already deal the full Monk damage.

So Ascetic style lets you apply your Monk damage, but yes you are right that for a Monk it's not as useful, but for the wizard, he'll get a lot out of it. Plus maybe you wanted to be able to ignore still mind for that feat maybe?

Huh. I never looked at Monastic Legacy before (having never played a Pathfinder Monk). How would that work with an Esoteric Magus? I already count my class levels as Monk levels for purposes of unarmed strike levels, but they aren't actual Monk levels. So if a 10th level Esoteric Magus took Monastic Legacy would his unarmed strikes deal damage as a 10th level Monk or a 15th level Monk (10 effective levels from his class + 5 more from half his class level)?