[playtest report] Human martial weapons and other issues


Playtest Reports


So I've started my new Cotct campaign using the Beta rules. One of my players are playing a human sorcerer (draconic bloodline) and has chosen the glaive as his martial weapon. All the players are level one and the rest of the groups consists of a rogue, a soulknife (using an unofficial pathfinder update I found online) and an NPC cleric of Sarenrae.

During the first encounters it became apparent that the sorcerer was the one that did best in combat even without resorting to spells, the glaive game him a definite edge with its reach and high damage potential. Also the sorcerer had a fairly high strength score (14).

The rogue did get to shine as he single-handily sneaked up on an enemy half-orc fighter and took him out with one well placed sneak attack with his rapier.

The soulknife did reasonably well and the NPC cleric kept the party going with her channeling and healing domain powers.

My main concern is that the Sorcerer actually preferred to stay in melee using the glaive instead of casting spells, also I think the flavor of certain classes changes when they are allowed to use martial weapons, especially wizards and sorcerers. I think it was cool when elves were the only arcane casters allowed to use longswords and bows proficiently without multiclassing. I'm not sure the human race even need the weapon proficiency ability, I think they are just as good compared to the other races without it.

Scarab Sages

I thought they pulled that from the humans pretty soon into the Beta-testing? I don't check up on things with any reasonable frequency, but I believe this is out now. You want a martial weapon, use a feat -- like the bonus human feat you're already getting.

I'd agree that humans get enough bonuses already, this one wouldn't be missed.


And why is this a problem if your player is having fun? Trying to lock him down into a fixed "Role" is the purview of 4th Ed, why are you trying to take away from his flexibility and choices?


Asturysk wrote:
And why is this a problem if your player is having fun? Trying to lock him down into a fixed "Role" is the purview of 4th Ed, why are you trying to take away from his flexibility and choices?

The only problem with it now is that he far outshines the soulknife and rogue in melee, but I don't think this will last long. Otherwise it just feels wrong somehow, guess I'm just to used to casters sucking in general when it comes to melee.


Michael Suzio wrote:

I thought they pulled that from the humans pretty soon into the Beta-testing? I don't check up on things with any reasonable frequency, but I believe this is out now. You want a martial weapon, use a feat -- like the bonus human feat you're already getting.

I'd agree that humans get enough bonuses already, this one wouldn't be missed.

Really?, They removed the bonus martial weapon? Has this changed in the Pdf or is it just something that was posted here?

Liberty's Edge

Mortagon wrote:
Michael Suzio wrote:

I thought they pulled that from the humans pretty soon into the Beta-testing? I don't check up on things with any reasonable frequency, but I believe this is out now. You want a martial weapon, use a feat -- like the bonus human feat you're already getting.

I'd agree that humans get enough bonuses already, this one wouldn't be missed.

Really?, They removed the bonus martial weapon? Has this changed in the Pdf or is it just something that was posted here?

It is still in my Beta. I think he's thinking of Half-Elves in the Alpha, they lost it after the first update.


Mortagon wrote:
One of my players are playing a human sorcerer (draconic bloodline) and has chosen the glaive as his martial weapon. All the players are level one

I agree that it's kinda odd...but your Sor will quickly revert to casting spells as the primary combat option after a level or two. It's one way the arcanists can avoid complete uselessness after running off their paltry allotment of spells at 1st or 2nd level.

Besides, it's just the aspects of the weapon, not the character itself that is making the splash. At 1st level the attack bonuses between classes are minimal, especially considering the Sor has a Strength of 14.

I'd say, let the Sor have some short-lived melee fun and wait until levels 3-4 where the other classes melee bonuses start to add up.

Scarab Sages

If you're worried about a sorcerer doing well in melee...give me a break. The guy starts with a BAB of +0, and sacrificed scores in other abilities (assuming point buy) to get that 14 strength. Let him have his +2 to hit and actually do some damage, casters have so little to do normally at early levels that it's FINE if he does well. If he's outtanking the tanks, then sorry, but the tanks definitely did something wrong in their build. Most of the tanks I see have a +4 or higher to hit at level 1, and will easily surpass him in a few levels (remember, his BAB only goes up every other level).

So he's doing better at level 1, being a 'different' kind of sorcerer. Let him. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just a unique build.


Karui Kage wrote:

If you're worried about a sorcerer doing well in melee...give me a break. The guy starts with a BAB of +0, and sacrificed scores in other abilities (assuming point buy) to get that 14 strength. Let him have his +2 to hit and actually do some damage, casters have so little to do normally at early levels that it's FINE if he does well. If he's outtanking the tanks, then sorry, but the tanks definitely did something wrong in their build. Most of the tanks I see have a +4 or higher to hit at level 1, and will easily surpass him in a few levels (remember, his BAB only goes up every other level).

So he's doing better at level 1, being a 'different' kind of sorcerer. Let him. There's nothing wrong with that, it's just a unique build.

I'm not worried, it just felt odd at the time, in retrospect I have now began to think it might be a good thing, allowing for some "gish" like characters even at low level.

The only gist is that I think humans have enough abilities already and might be stepping on the toes of the other races that grants racial weapon proficiencies.

Scarab Sages

Considering humans only really get to use their free weapon prof. if they pick a non-martial class (something that doesn't already get all martial weapon profs) I think it's fine. Other races can get exotic weapons as martial weapons, so it seems fair that a human can get a single martial weapon prof.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16

Your Player's character won't be an isolated case. The Draconic and Abyssal bloodlines can make for some fairly effective melee sorcerers. Slap Enlarge Person on him and watch him go!

--Vrockingly Strong Mints!


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path Subscriber

It won't last. As soon as the sorc acquires enough spell slots and known spells, they'll take it easy on the melee side of things because they find something better to do.

Realistically, we're talking about something any 3.5e sorc could do at the cost of one feat. The fact that they built the character with a +2 Str modifier shows you they already paid some price to make this a more melee-oriented sorc.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Actually, if you are still worried, have opponents close with that Sorcerer.

He/she will quickly find that a Glaive cannot be used against an adjacent opponent - and then the Armor Class will be an issue.


Actually, I like this ability.

I've houseruled it to make it useful when you play a class that gets all martial weapons.

If you're a human fighter, for example, getting a proficiency with one martial weapon when, as a fighter you are automagically proficient with every martial weapon, is a racial feature you cannot make use of.

I don't like useless baggage, even if it is only situationally useless.

So my houserule is that if you're a human with a martial class, instead of learning one martial weapon, you can learn an exotic weapon instead.

This is no more imbalanced than letting all martial dwarves be automagically proficient with dwarven waraxes, which is alredy set as an acceptible precedent.


primemover003 wrote:

Your Player's character won't be an isolated case. The Draconic and Abyssal bloodlines can make for some fairly effective melee sorcerers. Slap Enlarge Person on him and watch him go!

--Vrockingly Strong Mints!

Ha ! I had some lowly Abyssal enemy sorcerer NPCs with 10 strength do most of their damage in combat by clawing away as well. They couldn't hit with ranged touch attacks for their lives (RoE, etc.) and finally got based and when they did it was CLAWLICIOUS !

Scarab Sages

DM_Blake wrote:

Actually, I like this ability.

I've houseruled it to make it useful when you play a class that gets all martial weapons.

If you're a human fighter, for example, getting a proficiency with one martial weapon when, as a fighter you are automagically proficient with every martial weapon, is a racial feature you cannot make use of.

I don't like useless baggage, even if it is only situationally useless.

So my houserule is that if you're a human with a martial class, instead of learning one martial weapon, you can learn an exotic weapon instead.

This is no more imbalanced than letting all martial dwarves be automagically proficient with dwarven waraxes, which is alredy set as an acceptible precedent.

However, the dwarf's ability is useless with non-martial classes. So it balances out.

Human's weapon training = Good for all non-martial classes.
Non-human weapon trainings = Good for all martial classes.

It's like a half-feat. I think it's just fine. Humans get a single free martial weapon proficiency, non-humans get to treat some exotic weapons as martial (but not necessarily gain proficiency).


Lord Fyre wrote:

Actually, if you are still worried, have opponents close with that Sorcerer.

He/she will quickly find that a Glaive cannot be used against an adjacent opponent - and then the Armor Class will be an issue.

It won't matter if enemies close in on him because he can use his "draconic claws", which threaten 5 foot.(as 'Primemover003' pointed out) He may have to hold the Glaive in one hand(only 1 claw attack) or drop it(free action), but he will still threaten 5 foot. Depending on circumstances (positioning) he could just 5 foot step back and swing the Glaive. I have no doubt what-so-ever the player in question knew exactly what he was doing.

This is the same principal used by having a Monk proficient with a Glaive or a Bow, get as close as you like, then it's time for Flurry, while STILL holding said 2-H anded weapon in both hands. (ANY part of their body is a weapon)

As was pointed out in another thread during CASTER PLAYTESTS, a melee Sorcerer IS A TRAP! You might look cool for the first 5-6 levels, but your BAB and Health are not going to be sufficient to keep you on the front lines for much longer, short of buffing yourself for 2-3 rounds. (Truestrike, Bull's Str., Bear's End., Cat's Grace, Mage Armor, Shield, etc...)


Oh he knew what he was doing when he made this character, but he did it for two reasons only. 1)Style and 2)survivability at low levels. The character is level 5 now and he has barely used the Glaive at all the last two levels. Shocking grasp seems to be his new weapon of choice.


Mortagon wrote:
Asturysk wrote:
And why is this a problem if your player is having fun? Trying to lock him down into a fixed "Role" is the purview of 4th Ed, why are you trying to take away from his flexibility and choices?
The only problem with it now is that he far outshines the soulknife and rogue in melee, but I don't think this will last long. Otherwise it just feels wrong somehow, guess I'm just to used to casters sucking in general when it comes to melee.

What level was this game? Had to be low. Right ???


Studpuffin wrote:
Mortagon wrote:
Michael Suzio wrote:

I thought they pulled that from the humans pretty soon into the Beta-testing? I don't check up on things with any reasonable frequency, but I believe this is out now. You want a martial weapon, use a feat -- like the bonus human feat you're already getting.

I'd agree that humans get enough bonuses already, this one wouldn't be missed.

Really?, They removed the bonus martial weapon? Has this changed in the Pdf or is it just something that was posted here?
It is still in my Beta. I think he's thinking of Half-Elves in the Alpha, they lost it after the first update.

While it is in the beta, much like the updated paladin, barbarian and animal companions this has changed. This is now gone. It is in your pdf same as the old barbarian and paladin but Jason has said it is gone and will not be in the finished book.


seekerofshadowlight wrote:

While it is in the beta, much like the updated paladin, barbarian and animal companions this has changed. This is now gone. It is in your pdf same as the old barbarian and paladin but Jason has said it is gone and will not be in the finished book.

Can you please redirect me where to look to this? I've tried to find this change in the forums, but I wasn't able to find anything (perhaps it's hidden among other posts, like the 'no more critical hit immunities' rule? )...


I'll see what I can do, yeah they are in thread, spread about, the crit immunity only apply s if ya have no organs , weak spot or body...oozes, ghosts, elemental and the like.

Also yeah jason has said a few times the free weapon prof for a human is gone

I'll search and see if I can find the post...some one made a whole thread with links...think it was Charles evens...I might be wrong


Hmm.

He suggests he's thinking about it here.


Hah! found it 7th post down


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
Hah! found it 7th post down

Thank you for your efforts, seekerofshadowlight ! It was very well hidden !


YW, I will have the other one linked up later. I found it but did not have time to link it was in a hurry


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
YW, I will have the other one linked up later. I found it but did not have time to link it was in a hurry

Ok, I've finally found it again here (one of the posts I made... ironical, isn't it ?).

Not easy to find, if you ask me...


heh , funny huh. Yeah I wish I had bookmarked some of that. it is cool to see how feedback on somethings such as human weapons helped shape things


I can see where this board is going and i thought i would throw some ideas and a little hate speak, but bear with me for a second.

The idea of giveing one martial weapon prof to a class that would not normaly have it, i find builds a little flavor.The growing trend in this and other pen and paper (not game box or key board) is numbers, numbers, numbers.
If the figher class is not hitting 5d20 for damage, then the build is bad. If the magic class can't use all the possable spells at level 10, the system is broken. If the races are not even down the middle, and do not get anymore or less skills, feats or abilties, then there needs to be in writeing changes.

I am not about any of that, and as far as i am consured, it should be about FUN... you know that magic word that people will pay money for....
If the little old ( mostly old ) wizard player wants to carry a great sword around..... well why not, he might use it?
If the figher player wants to take unarmed strike, becase he views his PC as a bare fist fighter, are we going to tell them they are wrong?

I see all the messageboards give point and point and point for bad builds, bad combat and race A getting more feats then race B. I do see alot of the same people complaining more then fix things, so lets play a little game then.

Every one roll one (1) dice, and take that one roll and use it for ever.
I have seen the best builds come from bad rolls, none-normal builds and different plays on the in word books.
If i remember one of the most famous, his name was Drizzt.

Hope i threw a bone to someone.
p.s. i rolled a 1d20=10


seekerofshadowlight wrote:
While it is in the beta, much like the updated paladin, barbarian and animal companions this has changed. This is now gone. It is in your pdf same as the old barbarian and paladin but Jason has said it is gone and will not be in the finished book.

Wait... Humans lost the Martial Weapon Training?

What the hell?

I keep losing my interest for the final rules...

I mean, the Barbarian losses Rage Points (Note: I understand the reason behind it), so instead of using glass beads to track your raging powers for the day, you have to rely on arbitrary GM rulings for when some powers "refresh." "Has it been a minute yet? How about now? Now? Has it been a minute yet now? Well?"

And now we are encouraging multi-classing again.

Now if you have a character concept the revolves around a martial weapon (such as a Sorcerer and an Earthbreaker) you are back to probably taking one level of Fighter for it. Oh sure, people can say why not just take a feat for it, but one level of Fighter gives you so much more than a feat for a (comparatively) small penalty. (Greater Hit Die, proficiency with all martial weapons, proficiency with all armor [might not be usefull, but you still get it], AND a bonus Combat or Fighter feat. potential more class skills - All this for the mere loss of one caster level, or the delay of some class powers one level.)

I am afraid to even look at the Paladin and Animal Companion rewrites...

What a sad realization this day has brought me...


well one of the issues was people whining over melee classes getting nothing from it...like drawf, elf, and half orcs get anything from there's if they take a melee class.

I am fine with this going. It caused more whining and arguing then it helped. To me fixing the martial weapon feat to be broading like a type of weapon[swords, axes, pole arms] fixes the multi-classing issue


Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Disenchanter wrote:
seekerofshadowlight wrote:
While it is in the beta, much like the updated paladin, barbarian and animal companions this has changed. This is now gone. It is in your pdf same as the old barbarian and paladin but Jason has said it is gone and will not be in the finished book.

Wait... Humans lost the Martial Weapon Training?

What the hell?

I keep losing my interest for the final rules...

I mean, the Barbarian losses Rage Points (Note: I understand the reason behind it), so instead of using glass beads to track your raging powers for the day, you have to rely on arbitrary GM rulings for when some powers "refresh." "Has it been a minute yet? How about now? Now? Has it been a minute yet now? Well?"

And now we are encouraging multi-classing again.

Now if you have a character concept the revolves around a martial weapon (such as a Sorcerer and an Earthbreaker) you are back to probably taking one level of Fighter for it. Oh sure, people can say why not just take a feat for it, but one level of Fighter gives you so much more than a feat for a (comparatively) small penalty. (Greater Hit Die, proficiency with all martial weapons, proficiency with all armor [might not be usefull, but you still get it], AND a bonus Combat or Fighter feat. potential more class skills - All this for the mere loss of one caster level, or the delay of some class powers one level.)

I am afraid to even look at the Paladin and Animal Companion rewrites...

What a sad realization this day has brought me...

A minute is not really all that arbitrary. It's ten rounds, no more, no less. Personally I'd prefer the rage point rules, but I can live with the updated rules, too. We haven't tested those, though.

I have no problem at all with the removal of the Martial Weapon Training ability for humans.

You should take a look at the updated paladin and animal companion though, both are superior to the version in the Beta PDF/book.


Kail'ar wrote:
If the little old ( mostly old ) wizard player wants to carry a great sword around..... well why not, he might use it?

The new Wizard player in my group very much *does* use his Greatsword - with Hand of the Apprentice! So effective I started asking him if he planned on casting any spells again.


Majuba wrote:
Kail'ar wrote:
If the little old ( mostly old ) wizard player wants to carry a great sword around..... well why not, he might use it?

The new Wizard player in my group very much *does* use his Greatsword - with Hand of the Apprentice! So effective I started asking him if he planned on casting any spells again.

I thought you were limited to a 5lbs limit. As per the spell mage's hand. That rules out the greatsword unless made of mithril. In which case, in lower levels, that's a large part of the wealth the character has. By lev 5 where it becomes a smaller amount (in %), the spellcaster has usually a better use for a standard action. balances just fine IMO.

I don't think they should remove the martial prof. bonus for humains. Otherwise the universalist's 1st level power gives a nice trick to elves but not much to the other dominant wizard race.


Majuba wrote:
Kail'ar wrote:
If the little old ( mostly old ) wizard player wants to carry a great sword around..... well why not, he might use it?
The new Wizard player in my group very much *does* use his Greatsword - with Hand of the Apprentice! So effective I started asking him if he planned on casting any spells again.

Not to nitpick, and I agree with the "let him do it because it's fun" crowd, but I don't think Hand of the Apprentice can wield a greatsword.

Pathfinder Beta, Hand of the Apprentice wrote:

As a standard action, you can summon a ghostly hand to do your bidding. This functions like mage hand, with the following changes. When summoned, the hand can draw a weapon (including a magic weapon) on your person as a free action, so long as you are proficient in it. The hand can be directed to make a single attack against a foe within 30 feet, using your base attack bonus, plus your Intelligence modifier on both attack and damage rolls. The hand does not threaten foes and does not make attacks of opportunity. You must concentrate on the hand each round or it winks out, returning any item held to you before

it disappears.
Pathfinder Beta, Mage Hand wrote:
Target one nonmagical, unattended object weighing up to 5 lb.
Pathfinder Beta, Weapons Table wrote:
Greatsword 50 gp 1d10 2d6 19–20/×2 — 8 lb. Slashing

Based on this, Hand of the Apprentice works exactly like mage hand except it can draw an attended weapon (mage hand cannot) and it can draw a magic weapon (mage hand cannot) and you can attack at a range up to 30' (mage hand has only a 15' range) using your INT Mod as +hit and +damage (mage hand gets no bonus and is not entirely clear if you can even use it to make attacks).

Those are the only exceptions listed. There is no mention of an exception for the weight limit imposed by mage hand, which is 5 pounds. The greatsword weighs 8 pounds, therefore mage hand cannot pick it up and, based on the text, neither can Hand of the Apprentice.

Unless someone official has posted an errata somewhere changing one of these rules?

If not, then either:
1. (good) Tell your player his mage violates the laws of magic, laugh about it, then houserule a change to the laws of magic and keep having fun with it.
2. (neutral) Tell your player his mage violates the laws of magic, sympathize about the necessary change, then retcon him to choose longsword as his weapon since it weighs just 4 pounds.
3. (evil) Tell your player his mage violates the laws of magic, rub your hands gleefully as you pronounce his sentence, then demand he must wield his greatsword like everyone else, in their own two hands, using STR Mod for his +hit and +damage.

So pick which alignment fits your DMing style get to it.

As a side note, the ability is Hand of the Apprentice, based off of Mage Hand. Neither of those are plural. Had it been Hands of the Apprentice or Mage Hands, using a 2h weapon would make more sense. Just curious, does your player's wizard require Monkey Grip to use the greatsword one-(mage)handed? :)

Edit: Jellyfulfish beat me to the punch by one minute, but I think I provided a more compelling evidence trail...


I see that alest one person agrees with me about have a bit of fun. I do not think i will agree with 4thE that a figher is now a tank and a wizard/magic user is not someone that has spent years of training to throw a life saveing bolt of lighting or fire ball 2 times a day. But is now a pump shotgun/fireball thrower with feet.

This is not 4th,this is Pathfinder we are talking bout, and i would hope that something like giveing human player a chance to use ONE better weapon in a none martial class. I can't see this being an end all, no fun game now. I see it as being the chance to add some roleplaying to a game that so many still look at as a big system that needs to be fair and even.

I can't see that at all. Human being a short lived spot on the history of a single dwarf or elf, i could live with human picking up a longsword over his short life and learning to use it. To add to that, i could understand an elf, dwarf, gnome and halflies ( elfs or orcs or shorties) all picking up a skill, feat or hell even a little lighter that shoots happness and sunshine if it brings a little fun back to the game.

I really do home some day people will play a game to have fun and do something a little crazy, like save a priness from the dragon with a wizard weilding a greatsword or a fighter rideing a paper swan with crazy stats, just for the hell of it.I might be fun.

Hope to hear more.
Kail'tar


The sorcerer wielding the glaive as mentioned in the original post has now reached level 5 an has barely used his glaive in about two levels. It's a nice bonus at lower levels but soon outgrows its usefulness. I don't think removing this particular ability will make humans less of an option. The bonus feat and extra skill point is pretty good already.


Mortagon wrote:
The sorcerer wielding the glaive as mentioned in the original post has now reached level 5 an has barely used his glaive in about two levels. It's a nice bonus at lower levels but soon outgrows its usefulness. I don't think removing this particular ability will make humans less of an option. The bonus feat and extra skill point is pretty good already.

Pretty well as expected there. that's about the time the 3/4 BAB characters start feeling the pain vs fighters and the like in melee, unless they're specialized melee-locks.


Darwin wrote:
Pretty well as expected there. that's about the time the 3/4 BAB characters start feeling the pain vs fighters and the like in melee, unless they're specialized melee-locks.

He's still the main melee damage dealer of the group, with mage armor, shield and shocking grasp he makes a terrifying melee combatant. He does have pretty high physical abilities for a sorcerer, and the HP boosts and draconic bloodline helps a lot. He's planning on taking a few levels of dragon disciple to become an even better melee combatant.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I must add to the latest post that some Sorcerer bloodlines are designed for a melee caster (Abyssal/Draconic) and the gap between the fighter and the melee sorcerer will be closed at lvl 12+ when the Transformation spell comes available.
But i must also admit, that one fighter lvl increases the effictiveness greatly.

But it is the same with comabt clerics, which take over the role of the main melee fighter at lvl 9+ when Divine Power and Righteous Might kick in.


Hargor wrote:

I must add to the latest post that some Sorcerer bloodlines are designed for a melee caster (Abyssal/Draconic) and the gap between the fighter and the melee sorcerer will be closed at lvl 12+ when the Transformation spell comes available.

But i must also admit, that one fighter lvl increases the effictiveness greatly.

But it is the same with comabt clerics, which take over the role of the main melee fighter at lvl 9+ when Divine Power and Righteous Might kick in.

I'm not entirely disagreeing, but you have seen the new versions of those three spells yes?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I read all spell descripitions of teh three spells and Transformation hast the least changes from SRD 3.5.

The Devine Power and Righteous have tuned down but still have their impact on the fighting power of a combat orientated cleric.

Except the Barbarian all other melee classes can't raise their damage output defensives and last but not least range of their melee attacks like a cleric.
And the Barbarian sacrifices defence for his powers.


Hargor wrote:

Except the Barbarian all other melee classes can't raise their damage output defensives and last but not least range of their melee attacks like a cleric.

And the Barbarian sacrifices defence for his powers.

True - though it takes a little while w/out prep time, and can only be done so many times per day.


Well our house rules we have changed a few things being argued about here, regardless of what the final rules will say:

#1) we got rid of hand of the apprentice. We use mage hand just like hand of the apprentice, and it can weild ANY weapon the caster has proficency with.
#2) we got rid of ranged ledgerdemain (arcane trickster) any wiz/rog build can do that with mage hand and skill use.
(Btw universalist wizards dont get anything in return for loosing hand of the apprentice, just that anyone with mage hand, basically HAS hand of the apprentice)

So basically, we do have arcane spellcasters running around using melee weapons. And yes they DO run out of spells,and yes they are STILL in adventures.

(we also have no bags of holding, and no rope trick spells and we are talking about, just today, eliminating the existance of any magical flight whatsoever)


Mortagon wrote:

So I've started my new Cotct campaign using the Beta rules. One of my players are playing a human sorcerer (draconic bloodline) and has chosen the glaive as his martial weapon. All the players are level one and the rest of the groups consists of a rogue, a soulknife (using an unofficial pathfinder update I found online) and an NPC cleric of Sarenrae.

During the first encounters it became apparent that the sorcerer was the one that did best in combat even without resorting to spells, the glaive game him a definite edge with its reach and high damage potential. Also the sorcerer had a fairly high strength score (14).

The rogue did get to shine as he single-handily sneaked up on an enemy half-orc fighter and took him out with one well placed sneak attack with his rapier.

The soulknife did reasonably well and the NPC cleric kept the party going with her channeling and healing domain powers.

My main concern is that the Sorcerer actually preferred to stay in melee using the glaive instead of casting spells, also I think the flavor of certain classes changes when they are allowed to use martial weapons, especially wizards and sorcerers. I think it was cool when elves were the only arcane casters allowed to use longswords and bows proficiently without multiclassing. I'm not sure the human race even need the weapon proficiency ability, I think they are just as good compared to the other races without it.

The damage difference between the glaive and the long spear is one point on average. I don't see the big deal really.

Me I'd use the martial feat for long bow if I were him. Taking the archer feats helps some with ranged touch attacks and being a decent archer always will come in use even at high levels even if just to conserve spells in an encounter that they aren't needed.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Playtest Reports / [playtest report] Human martial weapons and other issues All Messageboards
Recent threads in Playtest Reports
Rangers