|
Falcata is the only exotic weapon that I'd ever consider spending a feat on. That being said, most exotic weapons are still marginally better than martial weapons--it's just that the emphasis is on "marginally". There's been more than one point-based system breaking down all the bonuses, and exotic weapons almost always come out a point or two ahead. So they tend to be the best choice if you're getting a proficiency for free, like with weapon familiarity or heirloom weapon.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
They don't seem to be to me - which begs the question (unless for RP reasons) why spend a feat to learn one. But, I'd like to hear other opinions.
They're usually either a little better or have some niche role that "normal" weapons don't quite fill.
For instance, a bastard sword has all the same stats as a longsword except that it has a bigger damage die (d10 instead of d8). Thus, you get a little better damage output for your sword-and-board or two-weapon fighter by using the exotic bastard sword compared to the longsword.
Also, the whip is the only "melee" weapon (at least in core) that can attack something 15 feet away and perform trip and disarm combat maneuvers at that range as well. It fills a very specific function that no martial weapon can do.
Exotic weapons are primarily good for fighters, that have the spare feats to splash around. There are a few exceptionally good exotic weapons - like the falcatta (that I hope will have a re-balancing errata at some point).
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
The Elven Curve Blade is a very good as a melee weapon for "Switch Hitter" rangers who emphasize Dexterity over Strength in order to improve their archery skills, though it requires an additional feat (Weapon Finesse) to use effectively in this manner. Fortunately, elven rangers treat this weapon as martial anyway (and are thusly proficient). I think the likelihood of other races' rangers choosing to pay two feats for use of what is essentially a "backup" weapon is unlikely, but it is pretty nice for elves. The damage is also (slightly) superior to the falchion for a two-handed melee user who wants to maximize his crit potential. I could see an elven fighter who focuses on the critical feats getting a lot of mileage out of this weapon.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, the reason I was asking is I was thinking of giving exotic weapon proficiency to everyone - assuming that the character in question comes from a particular geographic region.
So, everyone who comes from the Pirate Isles gets proficiency in the hand x-bow for free, for example.
I'm creating several human races based on cultural differences and free exotic weaponry proficiency (and, perhaps, free exotic armor proficiency) is one of the distinguishing features between cultures (a free skill focus is another). I wanted to make sure it wouldn't unbalance anything.
Except the damned Falcata which I recommend anyone sane to ban, I don't know of any overpowered exotic weapon. Feel free to give proficiency, or to use the "Heirloom weapon" trait for a masterwork weapon at level 1 the character is proficient and gains an additional +1 to attack with - even an exotic weapon.
Except the damned Falcata which I recommend anyone sane to ban, I don't know of any overpowered exotic weapon.
There are things a lot stronger than the falcata in this game, not sure why this would take your specific ire.
The keen enchantment, for example.
What we do in my games, and what I advocate for when we play, is use weapon groups rather than weapon proficiencies.
So, Weapon Proficiency (Light Blades), Weapon Proficiency (Heavy Blades), etc. Then, if you pick up Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Light Blades), you can use all exotic light blades, or EWP (Heavy Blades) fro all exotic heavy blades. It makes the feat worth it, and it's not overpowered since most characters tend to stick to one or two weapons. What it does do is give them some versatility, in case they are built up as a bastard sword user, and find a nifty falcata with magic abilities, etc.
We do the same thing with other weapon feats, Weapon Focus (Group), Weapon Specialization (Group), etc.
Like a lot of things game-related, there is no gospel truth here. Whether or not a given Exotic Weapon is "worth" it is highly dependent on the player and their character.
I am sure that there are many people who will disagree with me when I say that the versatility of the Bastard Sword is awesome. It's a d10 weapon that, with the EWP, you can wield either one or two handed. I like that a lot, especially if I'm going for a guy who carries a shield.
The above is just my opinion, born out through game-play experience. Others will have different opinions based on their own experiences. What it comes down to is, do you think X weapons special benefit is worth a Feat or not. I bet you could make a case, both for and against, any of the exotic weapons.
Eh.
You have boomerang to one end of the spectrum, and falcata to another.
@Kilbourne: don't get it. please explain. Keen can be applied to Falcata.
Personnaly, I use the crit decks, so basically, a x3 weapon only has more critical options than a x2 one, thus making the falcata a good weapon, but not a game-breaking one.
In theory, yes, exotic weapons are better at something than martial weapons are, have special options and such, but most consider that feats are better spent elsewhere; which, from a technical standpoint I would agree.
From a flavor standpoint however, it's not the same.
Eh.
You have boomerang to one end of the spectrum, and falcata to another.
@Kilbourne: don't get it. please explain. Keen can be applied to Falcata.
Oof, sorry, I can see how that was hard to parse. I'm going to be unfunny and just explain what I mean (not trying to be rude now, just dry).
Premise: Max says he has banned falcata because to him, they are overpowered.
My Assumption: Max has banned the falcata because of their powerful critical capacity.
My Point: A +2 falcata can be generally equated a +1 Keen scythe, over a standard series of adventures and combats, in terms of HP damage and critical power.
Conclusion: There's no point in banning a falcata if you are not also going to ban many other things.
Exotic Weapons are usually a little bit better than their nearest martial equivalent (as they should be). Bastard sword vs. long sword is the clearest example - if everyone could use a bastard sword, the only reason to use a long sword would be for RP reasons, or convenience (as in the case where you found a great magical long sword).
Most discerning characters would use the bastard sword as it would be more likely to keep them alive. Characters know the world they're inside of intimately, its rules are their physics. Characters should tend to pick the most mechanically efficient way of keeping themselves alive - if you give someone flint & steel and gasoline & matches and ask them to start a fire... you shouldn't be surprised when they use the gasoline.
My point is: if you make one option clearly superior to others, you're going to see a lot more of it. Do you want everyone running around using exotic weapons? If so, then I think your change is a good idea.
On the other topic within this thread... the falcata does seem to be pretty good, what with there being so few things that are immune to critical hits in Pathfinder and all... and there are certainly some instances wherein it would be worth a feat; but I think that most builds would benefit more from feats that increase their tactical depth like the Improved CMs.
I'm unconvinced that the falcata is overpowered.17-20x3 weapon, two-handed. Have fun.
Beyond the silly build of this weapon, the scythe is at best a 19-20 weapon, thus less abusable with critical feats.Kilbourne = What kind of things should also be banned, in this case ?
For a weapon that I have to spend a feat to use? Sounds about right to me. Exotic Weapons should be objectively better than martial, and have qualities that martial weapons do not replicate. I would probably rule that the falcata cannot be wielded two-handed, to tone it down slightly, and because by all accounts, it is designed to be wielded with a buckler. Other than that, I really have no issue.
It may be too much if you get the feat for free for coming from Taldor or equivalent, though.
Conclusion: There's no point in banning a falcata if you are not also going to ban many other things.
I tried to do the math based on Kilbourne's thinking. Someone let me know if I made a mistake please.
Avg. Dam / Crit % / Crit Multi. / Confirm % / dam*crit %*crit mult*confirm %
Falcata / 4.5 / 0.1 / 3 / 0.5 / 0.675 / 5.175
Falcata +2 / 6.5 / 0.1 / 3 / 0.6 / 1.17 / 7.67
Falcata +1 Keen / 5.5 / 0.2 / 3 / 0.55 / 1.815 / 7.315
Scythe / 5 / 0.05 / 4 / 0.5 / 0.5 / 5.5
Scythe +2 / 7 / 0.05 / 4 / 0.6 / 0.84 / 7.84
Scythe +1 Keen / 6 / 0.1 / 4 / 0.55 / 1.32 / 7.32
Warhammer / 4.5 / 0.05 / 3 / 0.5 / 0.3375 / 4.8375
Warhammer +2 / 6.5 / 0.05 / 3 / 0.6 / 0.585 / 7.085
Warhammer +1 Keen / 5.5 / 0.1 / 3 / 0.55 / 0.9075 / 6.4075
These are based on the assumption your target has an AC 10 higher than your BAB - so an unenhanted weapon confirms %50 of the time - that is, you need to roll an 11 or better to hit your target. As the chance to hit a target decreases, the value of critical-hit-increasing mechanics also decreases. Increasing hit-roll is factored in to threat-confirm rolls.
Long story short - the scythe +2 is the best of the 9 weapons above with an average damage per strike of 7.84. It is two-handed though.
If my math is correct, increasing your chance to confirm is usually worth more than increasing your chance to threaten a critical.
What you missed is that only characters from a specific geographic region would get the Bastard sword for free. Not everyone is going to get it. They might prefer the package they get from a different geographic region.
No, in fact I understood that. I apologize that it wasn't clearer that I was only using the bastard sword as an example - some weapons are going to be better than others, and there is a mechanical incentive to use them. By changing the system you're going to be creating what economists call a perverse incentive for people to select their region based on what exotic weapon feat they receive.
Exotic weapons are exotic. They are not as a whole Superior. If they were they would require a feat called Superior Weapon Proficiency and not Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
If they were they would require a feat called Superior Weapon Proficiency and not Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
What something is called doesn't determine what it is/does. "A rose by any other name..."
Exotic weapons are exotic. They are not as a whole Superior. If they were they would require a feat called Superior Weapon Proficiency and not Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
You are correct, that they are not, on the whole, superior. But they should be. Just as martial weapons should be, on the whole, superior to simple weapons. Anyone can use a simple weapon, only the specially trained can use martial weapons (certain martially oriented classes and those who spend a feat), and only the very specially trained (feat only; no class provides access) can use an exotic weapon. Given that, it's pretty basic game balance that, as a general rule, Exotic > Marital > Simple.
Kilbourne = What kind of things should also be banned, in this case ?
Nothing -- I was trying to point out that banning a single weapon is just the first step to a laundry list of things that can be banned under the same assumptions. Secondly, I disagree with you, but that doesn't make you or the correct party in this discourse. We have a difference of opinion, and that's alright.
You ban falcatas.
I think banning falcatas is silly.
Neither of us is right or wrong.
Exotic weapons are exotic. They are not as a whole Superior. If they were they would require a feat called Superior Weapon Proficiency and not Exotic Weapon Proficiency.You are correct, that they are not, on the whole, superior. But they should be. Just as martial weapons should be, on the whole, superior to simple weapons. Anyone can use a simple weapon, only the specially trained can use martial weapons (certain martially oriented classes and those who spend a feat), and only the very specially trained (feat only; no class provides access) can use an exotic weapon. Given that, it's pretty basic game balance that, as a general rule, Exotic > Marital > Simple."Exotic", to me, means "foreign". The problem with calling this weapon set "exotic" is that there's no sense of them being foreign*. They shouldn't necessarily be superior, they should have regional identification.
*racial weapons being an exception
And, ultimately, that's the problem with the design of Exotic Weapons; many are perfectly 'normal' weapons, both in capability and the training theoretically required. These are lumped in together with the ones that are classed 'Exotic' because they're objectively better. The latter deserve the feat requirement; the former don't.
|
|
You ban falcatas.
I think banning falcatas is silly.Neither of us is right or wrong.
'Guess we'll agree to disagree then.
At my table, the falcata is in the same bin than Dervish Dance and Natural Spell. I'm sure there are thousands of people who will find this stupid, and they are probably right, but hey, rule 0.|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
They don't seem to be to me - which begs the question (unless for RP reasons) why spend a feat to learn one. But, I'd like to hear other opinions.
I'm pretty sure they are all superior.
In 3.5 days there was a weapon system calculator, that showed all (or most) exotic were in fact better than 100% (which was the baseline for martial.)
Okay, the reason I was asking is I was thinking of giving exotic weapon proficiency to everyone - assuming that the character in question comes from a particular geographic region.
So, everyone who comes from the Pirate Isles gets proficiency in the hand x-bow for free, for example.
I'm creating several human races based on cultural differences and free exotic weaponry proficiency (and, perhaps, free exotic armor proficiency) is one of the distinguishing features between cultures (a free skill focus is another). I wanted to make sure it wouldn't unbalance anything.
Honestly... I doubt it would unbalance anything. In fact the game ALREADY does that in some cases... Elves get the Curved Blade as a martial weapon... Orcs get... Something similiar...
nobody is rushing out to get that specific race just to get those exotic weapons...
I would probably follow suit though. 'People from talden can have Bastard sword as a martial weapon' as opposed to all people from Talden get Bastard swords...
@Kilbourne & AVE IMPERATOR:
the falcata is not broken at level 1. Add to the calculations all the flat bonuses to damage of high level, and you see that barring critical builds or TH fighter + devastating blow, there is no reason to use another weapon.
IMHO the weapon could have been great if one-hand only. Two handed already has big advantage.
Said this, i agree with people saying that expend a feat should mean something other than flavour. Better this than bastard sword. Sadly, swords and axes just suck IMHO.
If you want a decent application of the 'exotic weapon' feat, I recommend the Kirthfinder take on exotic weapons...it's just another level of skill in a weapon. Thus, exotic longsword = falcata, or has various other benefits (d12 vs size L).
It's a really good take on the rules, and puts some 'normal' weapons back in the spotlight if you spend the feat on them. A 2h sword rocking base 3-18 against size L can tell a Falchion wielder to kiss it.
==Aelryinth
Exotic weapons are exotic. They are not as a whole Superior. If they were they would require a feat called Superior Weapon Proficiency and not Exotic Weapon Proficiency.
I would argue that the Starknife would require an insane amount of exotic proficiency to use correctly, but it's Martial for some reason. Contrarily, the repeating crossbow is incredibly uncomplicated, but is Exotic.
Pathfinder should have replaced EWP with Superior Weapon Proficiency. If you are expending a character resource for something, you should actually get a mechanical benefit. You should not have less chances of finding one in random treasure and be mechanically inferior to boot (I'm looking at you, "revised" spiked chain, which is inferior to a heavy flail and costs an additional feat to use).
Paizo, however, seems to have a frustrating attitude that sometimes you should be punished for wanting to have something look cool by expending non-replaceable character resources on a widget that does nothing to benefit you. It's a terribly design approach. Kirth's version of the weapon profs may very well be adopted by me in my next campaign. Either that, or I'll be rebalancing all Exotic weapons to be worth the feat expenditure.
If you are expending a character resource for something, you should actually get a mechanical benefit. You should not have less chances of finding one in random treasure and be mechanically inferior to boot (I'm looking at you, "revised" spiked chain, which is inferior to a heavy flail and costs an additional feat to use).
Paizo, however, seems to have a frustrating attitude that sometimes you should be punished for wanting to have something look cool by expending non-replaceable character resources on a widget that does nothing to benefit you. It's a terribly design approach. Kirth's version of the weapon profs may very well be adopted by me in my next campaign. Either that, or I'll be rebalancing all Exotic weapons to be worth the feat expenditure.
/sigh... Just had a good message/rant going there, and lost it all... So I'll sum up.
1) I agree. While not an 'exotic' weapon, I was VERY frustrated with the 'Sword Cane'. It's a fluff weapon that is inferior to Rapiers... Yet Bard's and rogues who would USE it, need to spend a Feat to do so... Barbarians and gladiator's and warriors got it for free...
I got lucky and my DM agreed with me, and we houseruled 'This weapon shares a proficency with Rapier' at the end of it, and now my Elven Detective doesn't have to waste his only feat on a fluff weapon that's inferior to one he already can use...
2)I DO like the 'weapon groups' concept... I'm coming from 2E where every weapon needed it's own proficiency. Soooo Having a character automatically start with 'all simple and martial' is pretty awesome!!
Though in 2E's defense, You basically took whatever weapon you wanted for the character because you were spending a slot on it either way. Getting a higher number of weapons here... only makes it more glaring what you DON'T get...
The "half" feat exotic could be "fixed" with race proficencies.
See as an example the dwarven waraxe. i totally can see the bastard being an human weapon (martial for humans).
Wanna one and you are not human? Trait.
Other clearly superior weapons like falcata would be exotic.
Wanna use one? feat.
Ex weapon pro. and full balde totaly useful and beats the pants off a greatsword for two handers anyday.
No, you're definitely wrong for thinking he is silly. The Falcata has a lot of problems as implemented. I'm not saying YOU should ban it, but if you think that banning a far out of budget weapon that breaks realism harder than anything since the 3.0-3.5 spiked chain is silly, ya, you're wrong.I think banning falcatas is silly.
Neither of us is right or wrong.
I don't think it's silly, we are after all talking about (essentially) a game of make believe determined with dice. There's really nothing realistic about the uses of any of the pathfinder weapons, so that line of reasoning feels a bit out of place to me.
My book to hand, Swords and Bladed Weapons, mentions the Falcata but once and that in passing, as a variant of another type of Bronze Age short sword. Should justify a D6 damage for it.
The Elven Curve Blade is a very good as a melee weapon for "Switch Hitter" rangers who emphasize Dexterity over Strength in order to improve their archery skills, though it requires an additional feat (Weapon Finesse) to use effectively in this manner. Fortunately, elven rangers treat this weapon as martial anyway (and are thusly proficient). I think the likelihood of other races' rangers choosing to pay two feats for use of what is essentially a "backup" weapon is unlikely, but it is pretty nice for elves. The damage is also (slightly) superior to the falchion for a two-handed melee user who wants to maximize his crit potential. I could see an elven fighter who focuses on the critical feats getting a lot of mileage out of this weapon.
Yes, the elven curve blade is a nice weapon that allows finesse types to do something they could never really do before (2handed weapons). I hope they continue making more truly different weapons like it to allow various "traditional builds" to differentiate themselves in new ways
|
I've got two takes on exotic weapons.
There are the weapons that are Just Better, and cost a feat to take. The falcata, the 3e spiked chain, the fauchard, stuff like that. That's fine.
Then there are the weapons that I call the "gatekeeper" weapons. They are either a little bit better than martial weapons, but are given for free to someone with the right prerequisites (dwarven waraxe, elven curve blade, etc.) or are weapons that have special powers that come free to someone with the right prerequisites (monk weapons). They're not meant to be taken by everyone, but everyone gets the chance to take them, if they really want them.
The problem comes with weapons that don't fit those categories, like the boomerang. Then it just sits there uselessly. It's simple enough to ignore them, but I've occasionally had success turning them into new gatekeeper weapons with extra abilities (alternate racial trait for halflings: Bonus for thrown weapons, boomerang proficiency, and boomerang gets Returning property when it misses the target).