I love weapon groups.
They really do make more sense. If I know how to fire a short bow, I know how to fire a long bow. I might not be up on the longer ranges, but I can pick that up with some practice. There's nothing mechanically different between the two. Same with a longsword and bastard sword and great sword. All three are slashing weapons.
Feats for Weapon Proficiency bothered the crap outta me back in 3.0. Then I got over it. The way I did that was pretty simple if you want to use a weapon sweet fine, is your class proficient with it? No ok you gotta get someone who DOES know how to use it to teach you. Sweet you got a Teacher you got the Weapon, now spend some time learning it.
Pretty much to save time and as it's a fantasy setting if you took 1 day a week or spent an entire week a month training with your teacher you would get the weapon proficiency for free in a 1 year IN GAME time. Yes I realize that could lead to the "Why can't I train for the Atheletic feat!" I just informed my table that it only applied to Weapons as otherwise it could lead to some unbalancing factors. OR if they really wanted to open that can of worms then any NPC also had the option to inflate their feats, for some reason my table opted to just leave it at weapon profs....
Can't imagine why I was finally going to get more feats on my villains :(
Cartigan has made a very valid point: burning a feat should grant you some sort of mechanical advantage. That's what feats do. I understand that one might claim, "Exotic weapons are by definition different; you're spending the feat to be different." Still, I can't think of a single feat that doesn't offer some sort of mechanical advantage.
Um...no he is not.
Exotic Weapon Prof does have a mechanical benefit...it gets rid of the -4 Non-prof penalty.
I am glad the exotic weapons are require a feat to take because really I don't want a game where everybody is running around with silly weapons no one really used as weapons because of the level of training required. If you want to play x weilding guy...invest in training seems perfectly fine with me.
Now I am not saying some weapons don't need to be changed....but I personaly like the simple, martial, exotic weapon breakdown for the most part.
Exotic Weapon Prof does have a mechanical benefit...it gets rid of the -4 Non-prof penalty.
So, burn a feat to reduce a penalty towards wielding a weapon that is no better than a simple/martial weapon? Sorry, that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. If this weapon is no better than another, why the penalty in the first place? I could understand if it was weighted improperly and was cumbersome, but that isn't the case. You suffer a penalty because it is "exotic?" What exactly does that mean?
I am glad the exotic weapons are require a feat to take because really I don't want a game where everybody is running around with silly weapons no one really used as weapons because of the level of training required.
All weapons require training to use properly. "Exotic" weapons aren't considered "exotic" where ever it is that they are created. A longsword might be considered "exotic" to someone in the east, as opposed to the katana.
Really, what I see here is poor game design coupled with peoples' bias towards certain weapons, "I don't want this weapon used in my games!"
As a DM, I would never force someone to burn a feat for flavor. A feat is a limited resource and should impart some sort of mechanical advantage. Thus, if a player burns a feat on an exotic weapon proficiency, it had better provide them some sort of advantage - be it a bump in damage die, expanded crit, or something special that can't be done with other weapons. Take for example the Sawtooth Sabre:
A sawtooth sabre may be used as a Martial Weapon (in which case it functions as a longsword), but if you have the feat Exotic Weapon Proficiency (sawtooth sabre), you treat the weapon as if it were a light weapon for the purpose of two-weapon fighting—the sabre remains classified as a one-handed melee weapon for all other purposes.
Someone once asked me about whether an Heirloom Weapon could be made of mithral. While answering the questions, I eventually determined that a mithral butterfly knife was a masterwork weapon that cost only 250 gp. So there's that.
Wouldn't it be 500 gp for the mithral, plus the cost of the item? 500 gp/lb. A mithral dagger would cost 502 gp, where as the mithral butterfly dagger would cost 505 gp.
Exotic Weapon Prof does have a mechanical benefit...it gets rid of the -4 Non-prof penalty.
So... the only reason to take this weapon is for flavor. Since when does flavor need rules? In a RP heavy campaign, most GMs are going to be JUST FINE with a character who uses a dagger's stats for a butterfly knife concept.
Make this knife have a +2 to stealth checks to conceal it and a +2 to intimidate checks and I could see the benefit. Otherwise there is none.
It's not the feat that people are complaining about, it's the weapon. The weapon provides no mechanical benefit over a dagger, but costs a feat. So the feat used for a butterfly knife provides no mechanical benefit.
Seriously, who's going to use this? I challenge anyone to suggest a reason they would use this that negates the possibility of 'flavoring' the dagger.
So, burn a feat to reduce a penalty towards wielding a weapon that is no better than a simple/martial weapon? Sorry, that doesn't really make a whole lot of sense to me. If this weapon is no better than another, why the penalty in the first place? I could understand if it was weighted improperly and was cumbersome, but that isn't the case. You suffer a penalty because it is "exotic?" What exactly does that mean?
If you don't have the prf. you have to burn the feat. If a wizard wants to use a long sword he has to use a MWP feat...or if you don't have a certain Simple weapon you have to burn a feat.
Some class can use exotic weapons without using a feat...like Bards and whip.
All weapons require training to use properly. "Exotic" weapons aren't considered "exotic" where ever it is that they are created. A longsword might be considered "exotic" to someone in the east, as opposed to the katana.
It also represents a level of training. The harder a weapon is to use than the rarer the weapon will been seen in use...making it exotic.
Really, what I see here is poor game design coupled with peoples' bias towards certain weapons, "I don't want this weapon used in my games!"
I'll agree to disagree here.
I'll agree to disagree here.
Right back atcha ~.^
Um...no he is not.
This is the second time I saw this in reading only two posts. Even if your native language is not English, the difference between the verbs used here is NOTABLY different.
Exotic Weapon Prof does have a mechanical benefit...it gets rid of the -4 Non-prof penalty.
Except that is a non-sequitur. Non-proficient weapons give a -4 penalty to wielding them, for ANY weapon tier. Eliminating the penalty does NOT mean the feat is granting a mechanical benefit. Most of the "exotic" weapons are STILL inferior to lower tier weapons that you can get FOR FREE.
I am glad the exotic weapons are require a feat to take because really I don't want a game where everybody is running around with silly weapons no one really used as weapons because of the level of training required.
Like bolas, throwing sticks, butterfly knives, or slightly larger swords? FURTHER MORE, real-world inspired asian weapons are NOT "exotic" for Asia. Every single weapon in the exotic category not made right the hell up is NOT EXOTIC.
If a weapon requires, REQUIRES, a feat - a finite resource - to use properly, said weapon better bloody well be worth the investment. Martial weapons should themselves be mechanically superior to simple weapons and Exotic weapons should be EVEN MORE mechanically superior to either.
Exotic Weapon Prof does have a mechanical benefit...it gets rid of the -4 Non-prof penalty.So... the only reason to take this weapon is for flavor. Since when does flavor need rules? In a RP heavy campaign, most GMs are going to be JUST FINE with a character who uses a dagger's stats for a butterfly knife concept.
Make this knife have a +2 to stealth checks to conceal it and a +2 to intimidate checks and I could see the benefit. Otherwise there is none.
It's not the feat that people are complaining about, it's the weapon. The weapon provides no mechanical benefit over a dagger, but costs a feat. So the feat used for a butterfly knife provides no mechanical benefit.
Seriously, who's going to use this? I challenge anyone to suggest a reason they would use this that negates the possibility of 'flavoring' the dagger.
While besides my general dislike for butterfly knives...they are a showy weapon with very little utility besides being 'flashy'(IE I agree with the fact they are useless and not worth the training)....I can see some people doing it.
But than again maybe the difference here is just how build character...I always use two to three feats for pure flavor wise(recieving very little benefit from the mechanics) and usualy spend Skill points the same. I never got the idea every feat selection...and every skill point must be spent to make your character uber.
Not saying my way is better...just I don't see this as a problem.
But than again maybe the difference here is just how build character...I always use two to three feats for pure flavor wise(recieving very little benefit from the mechanics) and usualy spend Skill points the same. I never got the idea every feat selection...and every skill point must be spent to make your character uber.Not saying my way is better...just I don't see this as a problem.
Your personal interest in blowing finite resources to gain no actual benefit from them does not mean said resources should not provide real benefits to people trying to play a game of numbers - which d20 is.
If a weapon is rare, it need not be "exotic." You can just as easily limit the actual number of these weapons floating around in your world economy, making them harder to come by, without feat-taxing them. That way if someone wants one, they have to find one. I don't know about you, but for a flavor choice, I'd be much more appreciative of tracking down the weapon and engaging an entire quest of sorts to acquire it than simply burning a feat and walking down to the weapon shop and picking one up.
Except that is a non-sequitur. Non-proficient weapons give a -4 penalty to wielding them, for ANY weapon tier. Eliminating the penalty does NOT mean the feat is granting a mechanical benefit. Most of the "exotic" weapons are STILL inferior to lower tier weapons that you can get FOR FREE.
Except that is what all weapons prof feat do is get rid of that penalty. Should a wizard complain about having to take the MWP feat for a Long sword? Not everyone gets MW for free (or all of them...not everyone even get all Simple weapons profs for free.
If a weapon requires, REQUIRES, a feat - a finite resource - to use properly, said weapon better bloody well be worth the investment. Martial weapons should themselves be mechanically superior to simple weapons and Exotic weapons should be EVEN MORE mechanically superior to either.
Why? It cost the same Feat to be prof in a Martial weapon as it does a Exotic weapon. Why should they be superior? You are not making any sense at all here.
I'll can agree with Simple weapon because atleast there if you take the SWP you get all simple weapons...but the difference between the investment of Martial and Exotic are the same...the only difference is Class profs here.
Why? It cost the same Feat to be prof in a Martial weapon as it does a Exotic weapon. Why should they be superior? You are not making any sense at all here.
I'm not making sense?
To quote MYSELF from the post you are quotingMartial weapons should themselves be mechanically superior to simple weapons and Exotic weapons should be EVEN MORE mechanically superior to either.
Except that is a non-sequitur. Non-proficient weapons give a -4 penalty to wielding them, for ANY weapon tier. Eliminating the penalty does NOT mean the feat is granting a mechanical benefit. Most of the "exotic" weapons are STILL inferior to lower tier weapons that you can get FOR FREE.Except that is what all weapons prof feat do is get rid of that penalty. Should a wizard complain about having to take the MWP feat for a Long sword? Not everyone gets MW for free (or all of them...not everyone even get all Simple weapons profs for free.
If a weapon requires, REQUIRES, a feat - a finite resource - to use properly, said weapon better bloody well be worth the investment. Martial weapons should themselves be mechanically superior to simple weapons and Exotic weapons should be EVEN MORE mechanically superior to either.Why? It cost the same Feat to be prof in a Martial weapon as it does a Exotic weapon. Why should they be superior? You are not making any sense at all here.
I'll can agree with Simple weapon because atleast there if you take the SWP you get all simple weapons...but the difference between the investment of Martial and Exotic are the same...the only difference is Class profs here.
Exotic requires a +1 bab, martial does not.
Martial is easily handled with level of combat class, exotic isn't.You may think that martial weapons cost ths same as exotic.. But I just take one level of any combat class, I have prof with all martial weapons. I cast the spell, Transformation, I gain prof with all martial weapon. My eidolon for 4 evolution points, gains prof with all martial weapons.
There is tons of more ways to gain prof with all martial weapons. But classes that are prof with exotic weapons are not prof with all exotic weapons. Only specific ones.
A wizard who wants to wield a longsword, his long sword is mechanically better than the dagger. Or he might even be an elf.
This is why "exotic" weapons exist. Not because it is to represent training, but because of the tons of things out there that give you prof with ALL martial weapons. Never mind the fact that a fighter who goes into a fencing school to learn all about.. say the Aldori dueling Sword, comes out knowing how to use a chakrum.
|
I'll say it again because I don't think anyone noticed the first time.
{The reason I call it weaker is because it requires a feat to be proficient, and unless I'm mistaken, every class in the game has dagger proficiency, so having the exact same stats as a regular dagger, having no equipment tricks as of now to supplement it (and keep in mind you can also have equipment trips for a regular dagger too) and then saying, but this one takes a proficiency feat, makes it weaker IMO}
Butterfly knife says "otherwise, treat this weapon as a dagger," which means anyone can use it as if it were a dagger. So you don't have to spend a feat to use it as a dagger, which means it's just as good as a dagger. The door is open for more things with it (just as the door is open for more feats, spells, and magic items that rely on bardic performance, barbarian rage, and other rounds-per-day powers introduced in the PFRPG)
The bolded part was what I said in the discussion linked here
So the butterfly knife is the same as a normal knife, and if you just use it as a normal knife you don't need EWP and have no penalties, but if you have EWP or quick draw then it has the ability to be closed and opened in your hand as a free action. Once again, poorly worded, but there you go.
I'll say it again because I don't think anyone noticed the first time.
{The reason I call it weaker is because it requires a feat to be proficient, and unless I'm mistaken, every class in the game has dagger proficiency, so having the exact same stats as a regular dagger, having no equipment tricks as of now to supplement it (and keep in mind you can also have equipment trips for a regular dagger too) and then saying, but this one takes a proficiency feat, makes it weaker IMO}
Butterfly knife says "otherwise, treat this weapon as a dagger," which means anyone can use it as if it were a dagger. So you don't have to spend a feat to use it as a dagger, which means it's just as good as a dagger. The door is open for more things with it (just as the door is open for more feats, spells, and magic items that rely on bardic performance, barbarian rage, and other rounds-per-day powers introduced in the PFRPG)
The bolded part was what I said in the discussion linked here
So the butterfly knife is the same as a normal knife, but if you have EWP or quick draw then it has the ability to be closed and opened in your hand as a free action. Once again, poorly worded, but there you go.
The problem though is simply how it is put into the combat table. Because when its in the table it is considerably worse than a dagger. 1h, can't be thrown, no bonuses to SoH etc.
The second problem though is the double feat for effect when they do release equip tricks for it. Like the Dueling Sword, you need two feats before it is more effective over an easier to gain prof.
One of the reasons I don't like the current equip tricks. You have to take the feat to start up the tricks, then take the feats for each specific trick.
As I said, just putting some simple bonuses onto it, like a +2 for feint checks, (and making it so that its entry in the table is equal to dagger) and +4 to Sleight of hand to hide the weapon, since it has its own sheath, would make the weapon at least somewhat worthy of an exotic weapon prof.
The weapon doesn't have to be vastly Superior. Just a bit better or mechanically different in a useful way.
I always use two to three feats for pure flavor wise(recieving very little benefit from the mechanics) and usualy spend Skill points the same. I never got the idea every feat selection...and every skill point must be spent to make your character uber.
So, if given the chance to make a character with a butterfly knife, you wouldn't approach your GM to ask him if you could just 'flavor' the dagger to be a butterfly knife? Being able to open and close the knife provides no benefit outside of looking cool, so clearly it would not unbalance the weapon at all in any game unless you play for cool points.
Here's a little tidbit from another recent thread:
I disagree. There's not "good drawbacks" for regeneration, or damage reduction, or energy immunity. Saying SR needs a good drawback is, in my opinion, kinda going against the philosophy that defenses should be things people want.It's better for SR to be something that you get at higher level for the most part (special low-level monsters notwithstanding, since they're not intentionally designed as PC options), and NOT have elements that make characters not want it.
Put another way, if something is supposedly as powerful as SR has a fair amount of players turning it down because its disadvantage is too much... then it's not balanced and not well-designed with an eye toward use in play by players.
So player options should benefit the player by being useful to the player. Who knew!?
I had to stop for a second and ask myself why I care so much about a stupid little butterfly knife, and I realized it's not about the damn knife. This same argument comes up again and again about unpalatable options offered as a display of 'flavor'.
Anyway, my best guess here is that whoever designed the butterfly knife was just spacing out. And probably the editor(s) too.
You know, you are totally right Gruuuu.
Lets review a few mechanics out there that are flavor based.
The New witch hex "Smell Children"
This gives you sent, but only to smell out children. Flavorful indeed, can totally make a Grimm witch with this to seek out children. Best in an evil campaign, or for a villain. A smart player might even be able to use it to his advantage to track down families or settlements that have children. There is actual mechanics there supporting the whole of this hex.
If say the hex, didn't mention sent, and you had to see and be aware of the child in order to smell them. (again still not sent) Because now the mechanics are depleted into a nothingness, the actual flavor of the hex is also depleted.
In fact many of the Witches hexes are very flavorful, but they also have the mechanics for that flavor. Flavor and Mechanics are not fully separate entities. Even if you have EWP: Butterfly knife, if the stats are for, say a longbow, then you don't have the flavor of a butterfly knife. You have the flavor of a longbow with a stupid name.
Just simply adding a few bonuses here and there, like as said before +2 to hide checks OVER the base dagger and possibly a +2 to intimidate and/or the ability to use a free dazzling display, and +2 to feint checks, you start to have more of the flavor of such a weapon and reasons to actually use it. (if say you were a highly charismatic rogue for example and wanted to take advantage of feints and demoralization)
In our houserules, ALL weapons have simple, martial, and exotic stats. You use the stats depending on your level of proficiency with that weapon. Click on the link for "Weapons."
Meh, seems really nit picky to me. I put this in the "realism" camp.
I guess the only solution to me is to make simple do 1d6, martial 1d8 and exotic 1d10. Give 2 handed only a bump and special attacks a negative. Call your longsword a superstabber or a cutlass or whatever, it's still just a martial weapon. Would that make everyone happy?
+1 Gruuu. well said.
@Boomerang: the problem was not the coming back or not. It was an example of it having not only zero power, but zero nice utility power to justify the EWP. BTW, who care if IRL the boomerang does not come back? Make it coming back for rule of cool!
(BTW, i think that a feat could be justified by some mehcanics, skell or feat synergy benefit, as Aevux said - not necessarily a gianormous critical - but SOMETHING is needed. Put few mniro ones if you fear a major benefit, but make it special, not a waste of space in a rulebook. It decreases the value of the boook).
I agree that equipment trick are meh. It's another feat tax. Make it available with the weapon proficency, perhaps putting a limit based on BAB or rogue levels or monk or whatever fits.
All you need to know about exotic weapons is that the repeating crossbow - possibly the easiest weapon to use in the history of mankind - is more difficult to use then the composite longbow - which took years of specialized training to master.
You know, you are totally right Gruuuu.
Lets review a few mechanics out there that are flavor based.
The New witch hex "Smell Children"
This gives you sent, but only to smell out children. Flavorful indeed, can totally make a Grimm witch with this to seek out children. Best in an evil campaign, or for a villain. A smart player might even be able to use it to his advantage to track down families or settlements that have children. There is actual mechanics there supporting the whole of this hex.
If say the hex, didn't mention sent, and you had to see and be aware of the child in order to smell them. (again still not sent) Because now the mechanics are depleted into a nothingness, the actual flavor of the hex is also depleted.
In fact many of the Witches hexes are very flavorful, but they also have the mechanics for that flavor. Flavor and Mechanics are not fully separate entities. Even if you have EWP: Butterfly knife, if the stats are for, say a longbow, then you don't have the flavor of a butterfly knife. You have the flavor of a longbow with a stupid name.
Just simply adding a few bonuses here and there, like as said before +2 to hide checks OVER the base dagger and possibly a +2 to intimidate and/or the ability to use a free dazzling display, and +2 to feint checks, you start to have more of the flavor of such a weapon and reasons to actually use it. (if say you were a highly charismatic rogue for example and wanted to take advantage of feints and demoralization)
The witch's Scar hex, by comparison, has absolutely no mechanical benefit to the witch nor any mechanical drawback for the victim. It is literally an attack that curses the target with flavor. It doesn't even apply a Charisma penalty!
Your personal interest in blowing finite resources to gain no actual benefit from them does not mean said resources should not provide real benefits to people trying to play a game of numbers - which d20 is.
I have to disagree. Role playing games are first and foremost about the story. True, there is a numeric component, but the core concept of any RPG is imagining you're someone you're not (or somewhere you're not, or some other variant of reality). Dice and stats simply make it quantifiable.
Your personal interest in blowing finite resources to gain no actual benefit from them does not mean said resources should not provide real benefits to people trying to play a game of numbers - which d20 is.I have to disagree. Role playing games are first and foremost about the story. True, there is a numeric component, but the core concept of any RPG is imagining you're someone you're not (or somewhere you're not, or some other variant of reality). Dice and stats simply make it quantifiable.
If you are playing it as an RPG, I agree.
There is a large group of people on the forums who play it as a combat simulation game. For them, I have to disagree.
Dagger 1d4 damage, 19-20 crit 10 foot throw +2 SoH to hide Light weapon
War Razor 1d4 damage, 19-20 crit +2 SoH to hide Light weapon (Requires martial weapon)
Butterfly knife 1d4 damage, 19-20 crit 1hand weapon (Requires exotic weapon prof. Possibly also need Quick draw to properly use it, which still brings it up to the point of dagger.)Isn't this backwards?
Shouldn't a dagger that goes through martial and then into exotic get progressively better?
I don't know why War-razors by the latest supplement got an 19-20 crit. In the past they had 18-20 and as a result where slightly better at melee than daggers. But when reprinted in adventurers armory, they were reduce to the 19-20 crit instead.
And butterfly knives..
There is no point to this. Especially since you lose the ability to finesse the butterfly knife if you are prof with it and your ability to duel wield goes down. Not to mention you cannot throw it anymore.Butterfly Knife: A butterfly knife has a blade concealed
between two halves of the handle that can be brought to
bear quickly. If you are proficient with the butterfly knife
(or have the Quick Draw feat) and are holding it in your
hand, you may open it as a free action; a nonproficient user
must spend a move action to open it. Otherwise, treat this
weapon as a dagger.
Yeah. This is one of my two major issues with Pathfinder - the weapons are terribly bland... and the few that have any advantage whatsoever ( a very few, realistically) are taken by anyone with half a brain. I understand that it's a balance issue, but it just seems odd to me that I can't have something a bit better then a longsword without spending a feat (and most of the time, the exotics really aren't worth the feat anyway). It really takes a LOT of the flavor out of combat when the weapons are so... bland. I'm really hoping they double think this when ultimate combat comes out, because otherwise I'm going back to my house-rules for weapons.
rando1000, what you said is at the same time very, very true and very, very wrong.
It's true because iMHO you nailed it, you caught exactly what makes people (or at least me) fall in love for RPG.
It's false because for a lot of these things, I don't need rules at all. If there is instead conflict (how this situation ends?) I must use rules to be fair.
For this good rules are needed. if the archetype says "fighter dragon hunter" but the bonuses vs dragons are bad or inexistent, I can just take a standard fighter and call it Dragon Slayer. And I'm fine with that, mind it.
But then, I realize that I don't need the book with the crappy archetype - or, at least, I need it less. HOW MUCH is less, before I stop to be a customer?
Your personal interest in blowing finite resources to gain no actual benefit from them does not mean said resources should not provide real benefits to people trying to play a game of numbers - which d20 is.I have to disagree. Role playing games are first and foremost about the story. True, there is a numeric component, but the core concept of any RPG is imagining you're someone you're not
Which is why I like to play a competent character who doesn't waste finite resources on making myself ineffectual for "role-playing" reasons.
d20 is on of the games more heavily focused on the numbers than the role-playing. Sure, you can role-play. Role-playing is not going to prevent the Orc from busting in your teeth because it didn't use up all its finite resources on flavor.
the only reason to take this weapon is for flavor. Since when does flavor need rules?
+1 And add +4 to your Sanity too.
PF has enough rules and bloat in it already without adding in more stuff that has no mechanical meaning. You don't need rules to have a DM let his player "count" his dagger as a butterfly knife. RP'rs are already doing stuff like that so adding the "rule" doesn't benefit the RP'r nor the optimizer. As such, it's just bloat; which already exists in plenty.
SJ
I don't need rules to roleplay.
On the contrary, making exotic weapons and the such only inhibits roleplaying. It punishes players for wanting to play different characters. What's that, you want to make a rogue that uses an exotic weapon? Guess what, you have to spend resources to do it. No, you don't get anything out of it, but hey, now you can Officially(tm) use your butterfly knife rather then just roleplay it!
I recall in 3.5 when they made a feat called "Spell Thematics," a metamagic that let you refluff your spells. Suddenly, something that wizards had been doing all this time now cost them a feat and was a metamagic.
No amount of number crunching will ever kill roleplaying. Punishing people for roleplaying, that will.
The witch's Scar hex, by comparison, has absolutely no mechanical benefit to the witch nor any mechanical drawback for the victim. It is literally an attack that curses the target with flavor. It doesn't even apply a Charisma penalty!
Oh yeah.. I forgot about that one.
When I first saw it, I started to do research on it but forgot.
The only advantage I can think of with that is the equivalent of an arcane mark, but slightly harder to get rid of and only works on creatures.
Or as some people keep trying to say the mechanical advantage of high cha, you could put a giant penis shaped scar on the persons face. Even though it doesn't hinder anyone..
At least though it is so much more cooler than "I open my knife in a cool dramatic fashion."
Just checked though, Didn't see any hexes that use it. Dunno about spells though.
One of the things that Paizo should do in ultimate combat is create rules for replacing out the base weapon prof for the classes. If I made a fighter who spent all his life training with a whip, I want him to be trained with a whip, I'd be willing to drop most if not all, my martial weapon prof for the whip. Even some of the armor prof for additional ability with light armor.
Because my character trained his entire life to use a whip. Not a longbow.
|
the flipping exotic feat... maybe it should just be deleted and those "exotic" weapons be rolled into one of the other feats. Then limit or don't even offer the weapon at the market. If the PC wants the ogga-booga knife than make him go to ogga-booga land to get one. I've never got why Bastard sword was an exotic weapon, odd choice. It looks and feels like a sword to me. Not really a ogga-booga knife.
booger=boy
That's why bastard sword is a martial weapon.
Its exotic to 1 hand it. That's not something everyone does/can do (bastard sword requires a str 13 to take EWP with it)
I am glad the exotic weapons are require a feat to take because really I don't want a game where everybody is running around with silly weapons no one really used as weapons because of the level of training required.
Like a sling, or English longbow, or a rapier? Slingers in ancient times were prized because unless you grew up using one you just weren't going to be that good at it. Same with the larger longbows with a heavy draw. Unless you trained up the strength to use one over years of practice you were worthless at them. A rapier is stretching it, I admit, but is certainly no easier to learn to use than many of the monk weapons, or a hand crossbow. Edit: while I had a source on the use of prized units of dedicated slingers in ancient warfare now I can't find it, so it may be that I had misread the skill required to become a good slinger.
Anyways, I don't really care as much about exotic weapons since I don't mind my players re-skinning existing weapons, but do agree that creating feats and disadvantages in general for flavor is a shaky design path to go down. I do chuckle at some exotic weapons though, like the siangham and kama. A siangham is a one-handed stick with a pointy end, otherwise know as a short spear in D&D terms, while the kama is a Japanese sickle, otherwise known as a sickle in D&D terms, yet both are exotic.
I am glad the exotic weapons are require a feat to take because really I don't want a game where everybody is running around with silly weapons no one really used as weapons because of the level of training required.Like a sling, or English longbow, or a rapier? Slingers in ancient times were prized because unless you grew up using one you just weren't going to be that good at it. Same with the larger longbows with a heavy draw. Unless you trained up the strength to use one over years of practice you were worthless at them. A rapier is stretching it, I admit, but is certainly no easier to learn to use than many of the monk weapons, or a hand crossbow. Edit: while I had a source on the use of prized units of dedicated slingers in ancient warfare now I can't find it, so it may be that I had misread the skill required to become a good slinger.
Anyways, I don't really care as much about exotic weapons since I don't mind my players re-skinning existing weapons, but do agree that creating feats and disadvantages in general for flavor is a shaky design path to go down. I do chuckle at some exotic weapons though, like the siangham and kama. A siangham is a one-handed stick with a pointy end, otherwise know as a short spear in D&D terms, while the kama is a Japanese sickle, otherwise known as a sickle in D&D terms, yet both are exotic.
I thought a siangham was far shorter than a short spear..about a foot to a foot and a half, compared with 3-4 for a short spear. The reason they are exotic is their high damage for their size and weight, plus the flurry..
Long bow vs repeating xbow..Long bows are not "easy" to use..but a repeating crossbow would not be point and click..I always pictured the exotic component would be the mechanics of it..keeping it from jamming, loading it properly, etc. Thats why such things were never more then..well..exotic..in RL..they jammed constantly.I guess for me Martial comes down to someone being able to use the weapon even if they were untrained fairly easily..where Exotics..due to weight, shape, balance, whatever would be almost unsuable without training. Flavor, yes..but a flavor I am happy with. While I agree that some of the weapon need tweakage, if they were all extra special high powered goodness, then people would just complain about power creep and everyone using x weapon. I don't mind the feat being used to negate the -4 plus flavor..only players that REALLY want that weapon, for it special ability or flavor will take it, keeping it exotic and flavorful.
If that don't work for you...houserule it for your game, instead of getting your blood pressure up.
Let the sarcastic comments begin...
Well my sarcastic comment..
My blood pressue doesn't go up, it ends up going down when I see things that could have been cool and flavorful get turned into mush but people continue to try to defend the mush as flavorful... but only if you put in brown sugar ( Have the GM fix it) and those same people wonder why we go for the cocopuffs and try to "reflavor those" by making them into cocopuff treats (Think rice krispytreats only with cocopuffs)
The problem with the butterfly knife is that it loses flavor when you take its weapon prof. (Which apperently you don't actually have to take.. and if you don't it is better)
With its current mechanics, its wielded like a battle axe not a dagger if you are prof with it. (Since you lose Weapon finesse)
Its like making something like a chainsaw as an exotic weapon. But then making where you bash people over the head with it instead of chainsaw type attacks. Or making explody rocket weapon, but you have to run up and hit people over the head with it. (and it still doesn't explode)
Then turning around and defending the weapons for thier "flavor."
I thought a siangham was far shorter than a short spear..about a foot to a foot and a half, compared with 3-4 for a short spear. The reason they are exotic is their high damage for their size and weight, plus the flurry..
Long bow vs repeating xbow..Long bows are not "easy" to use..but a repeating crossbow would not be point and click..I always pictured the exotic component would be the mechanics of it..keeping it from jamming, loading it properly, etc. Thats why such things were never more then..well..exotic..in RL..they jammed constantly.
I guess for me Martial comes down to someone being able to use the weapon even if they were untrained fairly easily..where Exotics..due to weight, shape, balance, whatever would be almost unsuable without training. Flavor, yes..but a flavor I am happy with. While I agree that some of the weapon need tweakage, if they were all extra special high powered goodness, then people would just complain about power creep and everyone using x weapon. I don't mind the feat being used to negate the -4 plus flavor..only players that REALLY want that weapon, for it special ability or flavor will take it, keeping it exotic and flavorful.
If that don't work for you...houserule it for your game, instead of getting your blood pressure up.
Let the sarcastic comments begin...
This response right here illustrates perfectly for me what bothers me most about the EW classification. In your first paragraph, you justify making the siangham an exotic weapon for completely mechanical reasons -- it does more damage, flurries, etc. But then in the following paragraphs, you defend making them exotic purely for flavor.
So the list of Exotic Weapons is comprised of some weapons that are there for reasons of flavor, and their mechanical superiority or inferiority be damned, and some that are there for balance reasons due to their abilities, and the actual exoticness or commonality of their flavor be damned (I'm looking at you, Bastard Sword). And people change horses mid-stream, from flavor to balance, just to defend the status quo? Am I the only one struck by the lack of logic in that?
True, a Siangham is a light weapon compared to a 1-handed short spear, but a mace and sickle are also both light weapons with identical stats that are simple weapons, and the sickle and kama are literally the same thing. And a repeating crossbow may not be point and click, but a hand crossbow should be, right? It doesn't really matter to me though, exotic weapons not living up to their name was a problem long before Pathfinder was created, and while I would be happy if that design were changed it isn't something I'm going to worry heavily about.
Yeah, I don't get why a hand crossbow is exotic.
I myself have actually gone out and purchased a hand crossbow once. Never got to use it, but I did pull back the string and fire "blanks"
Not sure what happened to it during a move.
Never liked the EWP feat, as is. It would be better if it allowed you to use ANY exotic weapon/exotic weapon type (slashing/piercing etc) or if it is restricted to one weapon, you should get a + 1 to hit with that type of Exotic Weapon due to extensive training.
I guess the natural argument would be applying the same bonus to those that take the Martial Weapon proficiency (such a wizard taking long bow for example) I'd be OK with that if it was taken as a Feat and the bonus doesn't come as part of the class feature, since as a feat, the MWP is also limited to a single weapon.
I thought a siangham was far shorter than a short spear..about a foot to a foot and a half, compared with 3-4 for a short spear. The reason they are exotic is their high damage for their size and weight, plus the flurry..
Long bow vs repeating xbow..Long bows are not "easy" to use..but a repeating crossbow would not be point and click..I always pictured the exotic component would be the mechanics of it..keeping it from jamming, loading it properly, etc. Thats why such things were never more then..well..exotic..in RL..they jammed constantly.
I guess for me Martial comes down to someone being able to use the weapon even if they were untrained fairly easily..where Exotics..due to weight, shape, balance, whatever would be almost unsuable without training. Flavor, yes..but a flavor I am happy with. While I agree that some of the weapon need tweakage, if they were all extra special high powered goodness, then people would just complain about power creep and everyone using x weapon. I don't mind the feat being used to negate the -4 plus flavor..only players that REALLY want that weapon, for it special ability or flavor will take it, keeping it exotic and flavorful.
If that don't work for you...houserule it for your game, instead of getting your blood pressure up.
Let the sarcastic comments begin...This response right here illustrates perfectly for me what bothers me most about the EW classification. In your first paragraph, you justify making the siangham an exotic weapon for completely mechanical reasons -- it does more damage, flurries, etc. But then in the following paragraphs, you defend making them exotic purely for flavor.
So the list of Exotic Weapons is comprised of some weapons that are there for reasons of flavor, and their mechanical superiority or inferiority be damned, and some that are there for balance reasons due to their abilities, and the actual exoticness or commonality of their flavor be damned (I'm looking at you, Bastard Sword). And people change...
Then I guess you misses the 2nd part..where exotics are part flavor, part mechanics. The ability to get that damage from the siangham equals special training..someone without that training shouldn't be able to do it (and yes I know that the weapon still deals the same damage, just a -4 to hit). The flavor fact comes from the fact that your standard game is based loosely on europe..not to many sianghams running around dark ages europe.
|
|
the flipping exotic feat... maybe it should just be deleted and those "exotic" weapons be rolled into one of the other feats. Then limit or don't even offer the weapon at the market. If the PC wants the ogga-booga knife than make him go to ogga-booga land to get one. I've never got why Bastard sword was an exotic weapon, odd choice. It looks and feels like a sword to me. Not really a ogga-booga knife.
booger=boy
That's why bastard sword is a martial weapon.
Its exotic to 1 hand it. That's not something everyone does/can do (bastard sword requires a str 13 to take EWP with it)
that's so odd and confusing. Its a normal weapon if you use it with 2 hands but comes from a far off distant place if you use it with 1?!?
I'd still ditch the Exotic Weapons thinger and have a -2 penalty in place until you specialise further with it. A Master of The Bastard Sword can use it with one hand with no problem!
booger=boy
Not distant, requires training that not everybody can do.
Also a katana is a bastard sword in PF and 3.5, and that's exotic too :P
Atleast they can share the same feat (unless ultimate combat changes a katana's stats)
Your personal interest in blowing finite resources to gain no actual benefit from them does not mean said resources should not provide real benefits to people trying to play a game of numbers - which d20 is.I have to disagree. Role playing games are first and foremost about the story. True, there is a numeric component, but the core concept of any RPG is imagining you're someone you're not (or somewhere you're not, or some other variant of reality). Dice and stats simply make it quantifiable.If you are playing it as an RPG, I agree.
There is a large group of people on the forums who play it as a combat simulation game. For them, I have to disagree.
I play it as both. I'm in it for the story, certainly. But that story is one of heroes, in which combat is a very common element. If I'm spending a finite resource to more or less make my character less competent, than, in my view, both aspects are suffering.
Then I guess you misses the 2nd part..where exotics are part flavor, part mechanics. The ability to get that damage from the siangham equals special training..someone without that training shouldn't be able to do it (and yes I know that the weapon still deals the same damage, just a -4 to hit). The flavor fact comes from the fact that your standard game is based loosely on europe..not to many sianghams running around dark ages europe.No, I got that part. What you missed is that that is EXACTLY my objection. Not every weapon in the list is "Part flavor, part mechanics" like the siangham -- and even those that are, are a mixed bag. Some are all mechanics, some are all flavor with no real mechanical advantages. But taking the siangham as an examplle, let me ask you this: If I took away its mechanical advantages, but kept the Asian flavor, is it still exotic? What if I keep the special abilities, but put it in an Asian setting -- still exotic? There's no rhyme or reason, no real pattern, to the EW list. And as many have pointed out, for those weapons on the list that are all flavor and provide no real mechanical advantages, why does that make them as worthy of costing a feat JUST for flavor as other weapons on the list which offer greater mechanical advantages? Heck, even some of the more advantageous EW's don't make sense when you can take a different feat and be able to do the same thing with ANY weapon.
As for the argument that flavor=good roleplaying, that's just poo. If that's the case, just take existing weapons and, as has been suggested, re-skin them. If it doesn't add any mechanical differences from the original, why not just call the dagger a butterfly knife, or a Bowie Knife (Actuall, my GM is letting me do that one)? By actually including such weapons in the game, but making them cost a feat, you're actually DISCOURAGING flavor and role-playing. Let's be honest: Even the most ROLE-oriented of us want to play characters who are heroic, and do what they do well. Most, if not all, characters who are thinking about weapon choices are going to be martial characters. Giving up one of your feats just to wield a specific weapon, unless that weapon is chock full o' whoopass, puts you at a distinct disadvantage as compared to a character who is identical in every other way except for weapon choice. If you're SO dedicated to flavor that you're willing to nerf your character so, that's cool (hell, I've been known to do that myself), but the game shouldn't FORCE you to make that choice. Most players are going to say "Pass", and that belies the whole "It's just good flavor/roleplaying" argument.
Making someone burn a feat for flavor and roleplay is effectively a RP tax. Exotic Weapons shouldn't be just flavor, but should be at least potentially better. The Urumi is a perfect weapon for a Sword and Board two weapon fighter, for example. That's an example of a valid exotic weapon. The rules should strive to integrate roleplay and combat, not force a false choice.