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.
Okay I really like this idea, I had been playing this RAW for lack of a better idea. Thank you for the better idea. . .
Wow, I didn't realize that PF had dropped the range increment for the sai. As it was in 3.5, it was the only monk weapon that was close to being balanced as an exotic weapon (comparing it to the light hammer for example).
I do not think it is just exotics as well.
I wanted to make a rouge that used two sickles for two weapon fighting. Then of course in the treasure I get a masterwork short sword. I know sickles are not optimal but this seemed cool but of course I do not get the treasure to do it with the rarely used simple weapons.
I do not think it is just exotics as well.
** spoiler omitted **
A) One reason I don't use APs. (Just one of many)
B) On the rare occasions I do use APs, I adjust them to fit the characters.
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.
+1
|
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?
He would have reason to complain, if he spent a feat on longsword proficiency, then found out the weapon stats for it were identical to the dagger he could already use.
He would have even more reason to complain, if the longsword were inferior to his dagger.
I adjust them to fit the characters.
Agreed. I did this even in 1st ed. Most magical items were swords in published adventures and if you're prefered weapon was the Glaive-Guisarme you were pretty much out of luck. Fortunately, I thought this was an easy fix as I would just take the bonuses from 'magic item that no one can use' and put it on one that they could.
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.
+1
SJ
All weapons should be resorted into "eh" weapons, "good" weapons, and "omg these are awesome" weapons and feats to support hat.
Download this document. It's a database containing all of Saga's weapon stats for all their books. Some friends and I put it together along with a companion document to help players and GMs get all the game's crunch in one location, rather than having to go through 10+ books (Saga doesn't have a convenient SRD). Son't worry, it is perfectly legal. The project has been supported by Saga's designers for years.
I've removed the link from this post. Ravingdork, can you provide some sort of evidence that its distribution is authorized? (Please note that the game's designers are not relevant, unless they have been in turn authorized by the current copyright holder, which I believe is WotC.)
I've removed the link from this post. Ravingdork, can you provide some sort of evidence that its distribution is authorized? (Please note that the game's designers are not relevant, unless they have been in turn authorized by the current copyright holder, which I believe is WotC.)
Download this document. It's a database containing all of Saga's weapon stats for all their books. Some friends and I put it together along with a companion document to help players and GMs get all the game's crunch in one location, rather than having to go through 10+ books (Saga doesn't have a convenient SRD). Son't worry, it is perfectly legal. The project has been supported by Saga's designers for years.
No, I suppose I can't (at least not without a bunch of running back and forth, which I'm not going to do for THIS thread). In any case, it's been on the official Saga forums at WotC for years and neither the Saga developers nor the site admins shut it down (many even commented positively about it). From a strictly legal standpoint, though? I'm not really sure now that I think about it.
Anyways, I'm sure it's already served its purpose for this thread (that is, to show a comparison of Saga weapons and their balance to a handful of other posters who have likely already downloaded it).
No, I suppose I can't (at least not without a bunch of running back and forth, which I'm not going to do for THIS thread). In any case, it's been on the official Saga forums at WotC for years and neither the Saga developers nor the site admins shut it down (many even commented positively about it). From a strictly legal standpoint, though? I'm not really sure now that I think about it.Anyways, I'm sure it's already served its purpose for this thread (that is, to show a comparison of Saga weapons and their balance to a handful of other posters who have likely already downloaded it).
The easy way to deal with this RD, is to link to the WoTC forum instead. If WoTC doesn't like it, they can then remove it from their own forum. This protects Paizo as they are simply linking to a forum on WoTC, which WoTC supports, and not linking directly to material with an iffy pedigree.
The easy way to deal with this RD, is to link to the WoTC forum instead. If WoTC doesn't like it, they can then remove it from their own forum. This protects Paizo as they are simply linking to a forum on WoTC, which WoTC supports, and not linking directly to material with an iffy pedigree.
No, I suppose I can't (at least not without a bunch of running back and forth, which I'm not going to do for THIS thread). In any case, it's been on the official Saga forums at WotC for years and neither the Saga developers nor the site admins shut it down (many even commented positively about it). From a strictly legal standpoint, though? I'm not really sure now that I think about it.Anyways, I'm sure it's already served its purpose for this thread (that is, to show a comparison of Saga weapons and their balance to a handful of other posters who have likely already downloaded it).
Gee, that's a good idea.
As I re-work my game, I'm going with the EWP granting some mechanical bonus, from being better at tripping to bonuses to defense, both due to the general unfamiliarity of opponents with the weapon. I'm thinking that an opponent that also has that EWP should be able to negate the weapon's special trick. I recall a pair of Kusarigami (sp?) contestants in the 70s drawing due to each knowing the flaws of the weapons. Each had blown past multiple foes at the match with straight wins, only to get stymied in that round.
Exotic weapons..
Primarily they should be better than martial, or used for special purposes.
In other words the monk based weapons such as kama, exotic simply because it is a monk weapon. This is what is called a special purpose weapon.
other versions of special purpose weapons are whips. Very good for combat maneuvers, suck at other stuff due to low/no damage.
There should ideally be rules for replacement of weapons. Thus kama is replaced with sickle for things like an asian campaign. Or the ability to allow a fighter who has trained his entire life with a whip, to be prof with that whip without spending his feats and instead give up the 30 or so feats he gains from being prof with all martial weapons. (Maybe not that much, but I counted once, and the fighter gets a ridiculous amount of "feats" from being prof with all simple/martial weapons, armor and shields.)
One of the annoying things is when the developers think they come up with a good idea, such as I think it was Sean back when adventurer armory came out. Basically said something like "The advantage of using a war razor is that it has a +2 Sleight of hand check to hide it."
Unfortunately, the base weapon, in this case a dagger, already had this bonus.
In addition to this is when they release new weapons such as the sword cane, and do not give it to any class that would have actually been really good with. In this case, the Bard or Rogue would drool over such a weapon, and both are fairly competent with a similar weapon.