|
hey Ya'll
I've had a concern about weapon proficiencies and categorization for a long time. I had my GM bring it up when he went to the Piazo con up in the PNW. He said one of the game designers acknowledged it was an area of concern, but they didn't have the time/resources to rework the section.
My primary concern is that some of the weapons are categorized as "exotic" because they are from "exotic" places, while other weapons are "exotic" because they are better weapons than the rest.
Let us take the kama for starters. Exotic weapon, same stats as a sickle, which is a light melee weapon. Oh, except a sickle costs 3X as much for some reason... So this weapon seems to be in the "exotic" list because it's from an "exotic" location. Here's my primary concern with this. For some cultures (Tian Xia in this instance) the kama should be an light melee weapon. Matter of fact, they should consider a western "sickle" as an exotic weapon along with a whole host of other "western" weapons that they wouldn't have in their culture.
Now, lets talk about the scimitar. This weapon is a one handed melee weapon. Arguably, stat-wise, it could be an "exotic" weapon. And as far as culturally exotic, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're basing the entire weapon table off of what was historically medieval european cultures, than the scimitar should definitely be "exotic".
By now, I'm hoping you understand my point.
A "simple" solution to the problem would be to re-categorize weapons by stats as simple, martial, exotic, etc... But I have a feeling there is some opposition to this method and maybe some debate as to what should qualify weapons for the different categories.
And lastly, I would like to BEG!!! Pathfinder to help make this change official so that I don't have to argue with my GM who wants to be all RAW all the time.
Any input/insight is appreciated!
Now, lets talk about the scimitar. This weapon is a one handed melee weapon. Arguably, stat-wise, it could be an "exotic" weapon.
Huh? No. It does 1 step less damage than a longsword in exchange for +1 threat range, and it's functionally identical to a rapier except that rapiers can be used with Weapon Finesse and do Piercing instead of Slashing.
And as far as culturally exotic, correct me if I'm wrong, but if we're basing the entire weapon table off of what was historically medieval european cultures, than the scimitar should definitely be "exotic".
Also no. Scimitars were used extensively in the Mediterranean region since long before Medieval times.
A "simple" solution to the problem would be to re-categorize weapons by stats as simple, martial, exotic, etc...
For the most part, they're already done this way. The exception is the monk weapons.
Well if you really want to be Region Specific you could for instance rule as a DM that weapons to specific regions are downsized a category (for instance in far eastern settings, formerly Exotic Weapons not count as Martial Weapons and certain "Western" weapons are moved up to being Exotic from Martial)
But besides that, the 'Exotic' weapons are classed as 'Exotic' because they are considered to be difficult to weild or need special skill to use, take the 'Bastard Sword' - without the feat you HAVE to use it 2 handed to avoid a penalty, with the Feat it represents training in the weapon and allows you to use it one handed. Plus Exotic Weapons have better damage, better threat ranges or special qualities that Martial/Simple weapons dont.
|
|
OK. Partially my bad on the scimitar part, but from what I read about the history, it would still be an "exotic" weapon for most of europe. From what I read, it made it as far as parts of what is now Germany, but was not a widely used weapon in any parts of Europe, which is kind of my point about "exotic" weapons.
I have no problem with weapons like the bastard-sword being exotic, it seems to give a decent advantage.
And I did mean rapier when I was talking about scimitar. It seems almost the exact same as a scimitar, except you can finesse it, which in my book qualifies it for "exotic" for power-level rather than region.
I also, personally, think spiked-chain should be removed from "exotic" because it doesn't have reach, and I think if regular x-bows are simple weapons than the hand x-bow and repeating x-bows should be martial, not "exotic", seems like they get designated "exotic" more because it would be difficult to find them rather than hard to use.
I don't like the idea of being "region-specific" because really, a kama is a sickle and nunchaku are a flail. No matter where you go, seems like it would be fairly easy to use a sickle or flail...
Like I said, weapons already are grouped by power level for the most part. You can actually see this by comparing various weapons to a sickle or dagger and realizing that there are actually nine categories of weapons, not three: simple light/one-handed/two-handed, martial light/one-handed/two-handed, and exotic light/one-handed/two-handed. If you treat a weapon as being built with a point-buy system and plot it out, you quickly see that light weapons are the most "expensive" (presumably because they get bonuses to Sleight of Hand and can be finessed), damage dice and critical modifiers are more "expensive" than special properties, and Simple weapons are more "expensive" (or have fewer points to spend, whichever way you want to look at it) than Martial weapons, which are more expensive/have fewer points than Exotic weapons.
There are some weapons that don't fit perfectly, as I already pointed out. The "monk" special property is inordinately "expensive" except for the quarterstaff, for example, leading to most of them being Exotic.
|
OK. Partially my bad on the scimitar part, but from what I read about the history, it would still be an "exotic" weapon for most of europe. From what I read, it made it as far as parts of what is now Germany, but was not a widely used weapon in any parts of Europe, which is kind of my point about "exotic" weapons.
Well, sort of. Weapons that would could be functionally scimitars (Makhaira, falacta, kopis) appear all over the mediterranean europe in antiquity. But sabre/scimitar like weapons appeared in europe with the arrival and settlement of the Hungarians and were popular through out eastern europe.
I have no problem with weapons like the bastard-sword being exotic, it seems to give a decent advantage.
Well, sort of again. The bastard-sword is in the exotic category due to its one handed nature requiring some hefty traing, but it can be used as a martial weapon two-handed.
And I did mean rapier when I was talking about scimitar. It seems almost the exact same as a scimitar, except you can finesse it, which in my book qualifies it for "exotic" for power-level rather than region.
I really haven't seen a good reason, at least IMO, why the scimitar shouldn't be finesseable. I'm kind of coming at this from the opposite end here, but I would really rather see the scimitar as a finesse weapon.
I also, personally, think spiked-chain should be removed from "exotic" because it doesn't have reach...
I personally think the weapon is silly, I think it deserves an exotic spot due to its quirkiness. I love the idea of someone showing up with a spiked chain and someone giving them a puzzling stair but still finding themselves facing a very flexible opponent. I still think it falls on the exotic end of the power curve too, its still very versatile which is very good.
I don't like the idea of being "region-specific" because really, a kama is a sickle and nunchaku are a flail. No matter where you go, seems like it would be fairly easy to use a sickle or flail...
Some weapons could get recategorized, I agree. Why should there be a difference between a butterfly sword and a longsword?
|
|
And AGAIN, I don't have any issues with the items that are categorized by power rather than culturally exotic. I'm not talking about all the weapons that ARE categorized properly, I'm talking about the ones that are NOT, like you say, mostly monk weapons. And if you'd like to talk about the quarterstaff, from my understanding the difference between the european version and the asian one was pretty significant.
In a game world that seems to be as culturally diverse as pathfinders world, it seems silly that those "exotic" weapons are marked that because they are essentially weapons from the far-east.
Going back to the scimitar. Again, I read a few different sources on its history and for the most part, it's a Persian weapon. Yes, it was used in Europe, no where near as much as something like the longsword, rapier, crossbow, etc, etc... If you don't think my example of the scimitar is great, well, there's always the kukri, that was never used anywhere close to medieval Europe.
I really think the monk weapons, as well as the hand/repeating xbows and the spiked chain should be re-categorized, because the power of the weapon doesn't fit with the category they are in.
I haven't seen the butterfly sword in any PF book, I would put it in a category based upon power level, not cultural exoticism. Seems like most of the racial weapons got placed in exotic because they are powerful weapons in their own right. So if the butterfly sword has stats like an longsword, it should be in the martial weapons category.
|
|
I chose Butterfly sword because its a monk weapon. Butterfly sword was a weapon in oriental adventures (i think) that a monk was proficient with that was just a longsword for all intents and purposes. 1d8, 19-20 threat, slashing. They required seperate proficiencies though. Goofy, really, to give that to a monk when they're not proficient with longswords. It gives me a headache.
The scimitar was Persian in origin, yes, or possibly Indian... whatever... but there have been many weapons of scimitar-like quality that have been copied for use of the cavalry forces of the world. Arabs carried it into the mediterranean and it found homes in the hands of sicilians, italians, greeks, and spaniards. More sabre-like weapons were present in the regions along the Danube, the Ukrainian steppe, and poland. In fact the word Scimitar comes from Polish originally.
The kukri is a good example. In all editions (including 3.0 but not 3.5) it was an exotic weapon. It was changed in 3.5 since so many people just bought small sized scimitars instead of Kukri's (back in the days before size penalties on weapons). Those small scimitars really just filled a placeholder that earlier editions hadn't taken into consideration. As a result, they moved Kukri onto the martial list.
There are some minor differences with the monk weapons, but overall I see your point. Weapons that function exactly the same from culture to culture should really be combined. If you're proficient with a sickle why not a kama?
However, PFCCS does assume a European-oriented cultural landscape with a middle-eastern/African periphery. It has to make *some* default assumptions.
Exotic was an unfortunate choice of terminology and the exotic category contains the good weapons (possibly worth burning a feat to access) and the relatively crap monk weapons.
It's a pretty simple formula
Light Simple d6 x2
1hand Simple d8 x2
2hand Simple d10 x2 (Note: The Greatclub should actually be a 2hand Simple weapon not a Martial Weapon)
Light Martial d6 x3
1hand Martial d8 x3
2hand Martial d12 x3 (Notice that the 2hand martial gets a 2 step bump- mainly to compensate for a lack of shields)
Light Exotic d8 x3 (Note: There are no standard weapons in this category only lame monk weapons - but a Small Dwarven WarAxe would fit here)
1Hand Exotic d10 x3
2Hand Exotic 3d6 x3 (Also no examples here but this would fit)
19-20/x2 is equivalent to x3
18-20/x2 is equivalent to one decrease in damage die
x4 is equivalent to one decrease in damage die
Reach is equivalent to 1 damage die
Thrown is equivalent to 1 damage die
Trip/Disarm/Brace are equivalent to .5 damage die each
Double Weapon is equivalent to 2 damage dice
A few of the martial two-handed weapons (Falchion and Greastsword) are better than this formula because they use 2d4 or 2d6 but it's a fairly minor improvement of average damage.
Honestly monk weapons should be incorporated into the simple weapon categories Nunchuku are the only slightly undercosted weapon in this category - this could be corrected by removing the disarm quality.
Spiked Chain needs to be revised heavily. It's ridiculous to expend a feat on it currently and it's 3.x incarnation was too good.
Personally I'd go with Two-Handed Martial Weapon 2d4 x2 Standard Reach (not super-special Reach), Trip, Disarm, Finesseable.
Light Exotic d8 x3 (Note: There are no standard weapons in this category only lame monk weapons - but a Small Dwarven WarAxe would fit here)
1Hand Exotic d10 x3
2Hand Exotic 3d6 x3 (Also no examples here but this would fit)19-20/x2 is equivalent to x3
Sawtooth Sabre fits the 1d8 light exotic weapon, since you count 19-20/x2 as a x3...