Looking a little bit deeper in the cyclops stats (Bestiary p52) I have a couple of questions.
1. Weapon proficiency
Humanoid: "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class"
When a monster is proficient with the weapons it is carrying in its entry, it is mentioned in the corresponding type description as for fey for example ("Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry").
Giant subtype: "A giant is a humanoid creature of great strength, usually of at least Large size. Giants have a number of racial Hit Dice and never substitute such Hit Dice for class levels like some humanoids. Giants have low-light vision, and treat Intimidate and Perception as class skills"
So there isn't anything giving Cyclops the ability to use a greataxe (martial) properly, am I right? Giants often use martial weapons so I guess something should be added to the corresponding subtype, but maybe there is something I don't see. Is it?
2. Skills
One more thing regarding cyclops - I count 17 skill points used when it should have 20.
- Intimidate : 7 (rk) + 3 (giants class skill) - 1 (Cha) = 9
- Perception : 0 (rk) + 8 (racial) + 2 (alertness) + 1 (Wis) = 11
- Profession (soothsayer) : 6 (rk) + 3 (humanoids class skill) + 1 (Wis) = 10
- Sense Motive : 2 (rk) + 2 (alertness) + 1 (Wis) = 5
- Survival : 2 (rk) + 3 (humanoids class skill) + 1 (Wis) = 6
Is it that Profession is no more a class skill for giants or is there something else I don't see?
Thanks
The entry here is a little different, and includes a great axe.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/humanoids/giants/cyclops
I guess my poor english was unclear. What I meant in (1) is that I don't see any rule giving the cyclops proficiency with greataxe.
|
I hate the default "Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry".
It results in creatures being proficient in one single martial weapon, when by rights, there's no reason for them not to be proficient in them all.
"Sorry, GM, but the gnoll in that picture is clearly using a battleaxe, and you're trying to have one attack me with a hand axe, so I'm going to have to ask you to apply a non-proficiency penalty...".
The thing is that, as a humanoid, it only has "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class"...
The thing is that, as a humanoid, it only has "Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class"...
Heh. You are right. I mean, I would house rule in proficiency, but, by RAW, you appear to be absolutely correct.
Edit: What's funny is that other creatures get proficiency in whatever weapons they are described as using if they are humanoid in basic form...
i was under the impression that monsters could use whatever default weapons they are given. on a strictly practical level as a dfefault rule it cuts down on word count explaining they are proficient.
i was under the impression that monsters could use whatever default weapons they are given. on a strictly practical level as a dfefault rule it cuts down on word count explaining they are proficient.
Many other creature types make the fact that they are proficient in weapons they are described as using explicit.
We agree then. I would houserule that the giant subtype gives proficiency with the weapons in the entry and that Profession isn't a class skill for these specific humanoids.
I've also seen that the cyclops heavy crossbow has a critical hit multiplier of x3... normal?