Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
To anyone that has had time to really look over the monk, martial arts, feats, equipment, and such:
Does it look like there are some options that can come together well to make a barehanded DEX > STR monk work pretty well?
Were any alternatives to the brass knuckles introduced that could apply to unarmed strike as a whole while retaining the flavor of a barehanded monk?
Do any of those martial arts involving energy attacks have anything fitting the general flavor of a Hadoken, without any alignment baggage? For example, Efreeti Style has cones mentioned upthread, but does it have anything more projectile-ish? And is it alignment flavored after Efreeti or is it completely clean?
It's hard to wait until next Thursday. :) Thanks for the Style synopsis Hida!
I don't really know what a Hadoken is (though I infer that it's some kind of martial arts + energy zap/ball/attack), but each of the genie styles has a flavor of that and none of them have anything to do with alignment (nor do any of the styles have anything to do with alignment).
If you took Agile Maneuvers and/or Weapon Finesse, the Flowing Monk archetype would be a splendid Dex-based monk IMO.
|
I don't really know what a Hadoken is (though I infer that it's some kind of martial arts + energy zap/ball/attack), but each of the genie styles has a flavor of that and none of them have anything to do with alignment (nor do any of the styles have anything to do with alignment).
YES!
If you took Agile Maneuvers and/or Weapon Finesse, the Flowing Monk archetype would be a splendid Dex-based monk IMO.
Agile Maneuvers, Weapon Finesse, and Pirahna Strike are a given for me, so now I'm ver curious about the Flowing Monk again. :)
Thanks!
When will they realize that a scroll of an useful spell is far more easy than invest 2-3 precious feats in something that will end not working?
What does a scroll have to do with it?
Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
From what I have read until now, I like the book. It gives Monks some much needed options (I tended to run out of interesting feats to spend my feats on....), allows in the standard setting for some gun use, without overdoing it. (Not too many goblins with guns..... :-))
Lots of options for almost everyone.... I like it.
I am a bit worried about one group of feats though, as it can further empower the Fighter (Archer) or any other archer with sufficient feats.....
Snap Shot: Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus, base attack bonus +6 Threaten squares within 5 feet of you when wielding a ranged weapon
Improved Snap Shot dex 15, Snap Shot, base attack bonus +9 You threaten an additional 10 feet with Snap Shot
Greater Snap Shot dex 17, Improved Snap Shot, base attack
bonus +12 Gain bonus on damage and critical confirmation when using ranged weapons (as part of opportunity attacks)
I know my Zen Archer Monk will be picking these up, even if it will be relatively late because of his BAB, however it does give even more attacks to a type of character that didn't really needed boosting.
I personally would have limited these to weapons that have to be "pre-loaded". E.g. firearms or crossbows (to shoot you only need to pull the trigger.... not to still pull out an arrow, load and shoot).
Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
Well it is Asian so...........
|
Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
Is there any reason to use a falchion now?
From what I have read until now, I like the book. It gives Monks some much needed options (I tended to run out of interesting feats to spend my feats on....), allows in the standard setting for some gun use, without overdoing it. (Not too many goblins with guns..... :-))
Lots of options for almost everyone.... I like it.
I am a bit worried about one group of feats though, as it can further empower the Fighter (Archer) or any other archer with sufficient feats.....
Snap Shot: Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus, base attack bonus +6 Threaten squares within 5 feet of you when wielding a ranged weapon
Improved Snap Shot dex 15, Snap Shot, base attack bonus +9 You threaten an additional 10 feet with Snap Shot
Greater Snap Shot dex 17, Improved Snap Shot, base attack
bonus +12 Gain bonus on damage and critical confirmation when using ranged weapons (as part of opportunity attacks)I know my Zen Archer Monk will be picking these up, even if it will be relatively late because of his BAB, however it does give even more attacks to a type of character that didn't really needed boosting.
I personally would have limited these to weapons that have to be "pre-loaded". E.g. firearms or crossbows (to shoot you only need to pull the trigger.... not to still pull out an arrow, load and shoot).
I'd say it's better for fighters for several reasons:
1. Zen Archers usually have more Wisdom than Dexterity and thus fewer attacks of opportunity.2. Rapid Shot is pretty useless for a Zen Archer since it doesn't work on flurries.
3. Snap Shot isn't better than Reflexive Shot
Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
My GM will be making that Exotic, I can tell you that much
Too many options and not enough feats again.
I don't think I'm going to be using Called Shots. 50 points of damage for that type of effect is too powerful and way too easy to obtain. Two of my players were averaging 50 points of damage a hit at lvl 14 or 15.
Too many options and not enough feats again.
I don't think I'm going to be using Called Shots. 50 points of damage for that type of effect is too powerful and way too easy to obtain. Two of my players were averaging 50 points of damage a hit at lvl 14 or 15.
We probably won't either. Mostly because we don't want to give our GM more ways to kill us.
Too many options and not enough feats again.
I don't think I'm going to be using Called Shots. 50 points of damage for that type of effect is too powerful and way too easy to obtain. Two of my players were averaging 50 points of damage a hit at lvl 14 or 15.
We probably won't either. Mostly because we don't want to give our GM more ways to kill us.
That is true too. Enemies get over 50 points of damage at hit easy as well.
I can see several things coming together to make Vital Strike very nice..."Finally" Make it nice you mean, right? Cause it's really not nice at all. Worse thing is, I always loved the idea, but it's such a bad feat chain that it hurts.
+1
[Threadjack]Too weak if you are a PC and too powerful if you are a monster. I hate that it's based on the weapon’s damage dice. Makes everyone use greatsword and/or enlarge person.
I agree with seekerofshadowlight, they should have made it one scaling feat and call it done. .....and not based it on weapon’s damage dice. Perhaps based it on size. If you are small: 1d6 at BAB +6 and + 1d6 every 5 BAB. If you are medium. 1d8, etc. Or even better. Just add a fix damage bonus that Scale. 2d6 at BAB +6 and scaling 2d6 every +5 BAB regardless of size or weapon. [/Threadjack]
Monk seems to be fixed, Nice job Jason Nelson! :-)
Bard, barbarian and Magus get cool stuff too. Ninja looks promising, I hope it hasn't been nerfed to much. Inquisitor gets new Teamwork feats for ranged attack. Great. Ranger get some new cool stuff, including rage. New spells.
Haven't seen that much fighter love yet. Any new (great) fighter feats?
Is ninja hit with the nerf bat?
The ninja is pretty much the same (see other thread) but the rogue can now do anything the ninja can, So it is whatever name you like better.
I'd say it's better for fighters for several reasons:
1. Zen Archers usually have more Wisdom than Dexterity and thus fewer attacks of opportunity.
2. Rapid Shot is pretty useless for a Zen Archer since it doesn't work on flurries.
3. Snap Shot isn't better than Reflexive Shot
I agree it is much better for fighters, but I am not playing one......
Still it is not like you don't have enough feats as a Monk, and having opportunity attacks against anything within 15 feet is powerfull........
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
Because balance-wise, it'd need to do 1d12 or 2d6 to be exotic with an 18-20 crit.
Because balance-wise, it'd need to do 1d12 or 2d6 to be exotic with an 18-20 crit.Nodachi: Two-handed martial heavy blade; 1d10 damage; 18-20/x2 crit; brace.
WHY IS THIS A MARTIAL WEAPON!? :P
EDIT: Especially when you consider the fact that the katana* (one-handed, 1d8/18-20/x2) and the wakizashi* (light, 1d6/18-20/x2) are exotic weapons.
* Get bonuses on coup de grace.
Well, compared to the other two-handed 18-20/x2 weapon, the falchion, the Nodachi is better in average damage and in the addition of the Brace quality. And compared to the 1d10, two-handed martial bastard sword the Nodachi comes out ahead in the critical threat range and the brace quality. Dunno if slightly more damage and brace is worth it being exotic, but out of the three Japanese based swords it does seem the odd one out.
Other than that the little previews of the monk have me really excited, now if only August 4th could arrive sooner!
Monk seems to be fixed, Nice job Jason Nelson! :-)
Can't say I agree. It has cool new stuff, but the fundamental flaws still remain: 1.) MAD, 2.) Contradicting combat focus between skirmishing and full attacking and 3.) Very expensive to do enhancements on unarmed strike attacks.
The ninja is pretty much the same (see other thread) but the rogue can now do anything the ninja can, So it is whatever name you like better.
Well, the Rogues Ki Pool would be much shallower, so there are still limitations.
|
Well, compared to the other two-handed 18-20/x2 weapon, the falchion, the Nodachi is better in average damage and in the addition of the Brace quality.
Technically it's better but the difference is trivial.
Average damage on a falchion is 5, average damage on a Nodachi is 5.5. Typical damage bonus from strength, power attacks, almost always dwarfs base damage. Similarly, the brace quality is probably the least used and least valued of the weapon qualities. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone brace a weapon.
Regardless, my guess is the majority of falchion users are half-orcs using it with weapon familiarity. I just don't see a lot of human or dwarf fighters picking it up. It's going to see plenty of use.
|
|
Well, compared to the other two-handed 18-20/x2 weapon, the falchion, the Nodachi is better in average damage and in the addition of the Brace quality.Technically it's better but the difference pretty much meaningless to anyone except bean counters.
Average damage on a falchion is 5, average damage on a Nodachi is 5.5. Typical damage bonus to strength, power attacks, and other abilities makes that trivial. Similarly, the brace quality is probably the least used and least valued of the weapon qualities. I'm not sure I've ever seen someone brace a weapon.
Regardless, my guess is the majority of falchion users are half-orcs using it with weapon familiarity. I just don't see a lot of human or dwarf fighters picking it up. It's going to see plenty of use.
Wasn't the falchion the most popular martial two-handed weapon for the CharOp crowd? In the long term, the increased threat range is more important than the reduced damage compared to the greatsword.
Holy Tactician is really cool, and makes me actually want to play a Paladin now. They get abilities of the cavalier, and their replacement for Smite Evil gives bonuses to hit/damage to themselves and their allies.
Seems interesting.. what do they lose for that ?
|
|
Wasn't the falchion the most popular martial two-handed weapon for the CharOp crowd? In the long term, the increased threat range is more important than the reduced damage compared to the greatsword.
I have no idea. If so, all the falchion builds DPR went up by ~1.5 points damage per round at 10th level. From what 100 to 101.5?.. I'm sure someone will be along with some real math. Regardless, I think the game will survive.
I have no idea. If so, all the falchion builds DPR went up by ~1.5 points damage per round at 10th level. From what 100 to 101.5?.. I'm sure someone will be along with some real math. Regardless, I think the game will survive.
Well that depends, either you're a half orc or paid for the proficiency, either way going human and taking this as a martial weapon nets you a feat. Might change the DPR a little.
Any rogue archetype the ninja can take? Any cavalier archetype the samurai can take?
Shouldn't they be able to take all of them? I mean, the Ninja and Samurai are alternate Rogues and Cavaliers.
|
|
Any rogue archetype the ninja can take? Any cavalier archetype the samurai can take?Shouldn't they be able to take all of them? I mean, the Ninja and Samurai are alternate Rogues and Cavaliers.
Alternate classes are archetypes. You can combine archetypes if they don't replace the same abilities. So, a ninja could be a burglar, but not an acrobat because he doesn't get trapsense which the acrobat replaces. At least that's how he worked in the beta.
So, to answer my own question, there seems to be rogue archetypes that the ninja can take. Still curious about the samurai, though.
|
Process my order or the... the... umm... *looks for something suitable* or the ogre gets it! *takes Ogre hostage*Hey there Everybody,
I was wondering why the new preview thread was not getting too many posts, now I see why. As with all of our major book releases, I ask that folks who have gotten their PDFs early refrain from posting who sections of text. You can answer questions and summarize bits, but lets not spoil the entire book before the release date.
Thank you. And I am glad it looks like most are really happy with what they are seeing in Ultimate Combat.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
So much this. My order is sitting there with 3 APs (backlog...) and Ultimate Combat. By friday customer service says...
Wait, what? Nodachi is strictly better than both the martial version of the bastard sword (martial; 2H; 1d10; 19-20/x2; no Special Qualities), AND the Elvish Curveblade (exotic; 2H; 1d10; 18-20/x2; no Special Qualities)? To be generously fair, Elvish curveblades have Elf in them, allowing them to be considered martial. But that's crazy.
And with the precedent set (katanas and wakizashis are both exotic), this just looks like a brain-fart.
Ehhh. Don't like it.
Also, Ninja/samurai auto-proficiency with katana bugs me a bit. If it's proficiency with katana as a martial weapon, I'm totally fine with that, from both a flavor standpoint (surely real ninja and samurai could wield a katana as a 2-hander), and a mechanical one (Surely the alt-rogue and alt-cavalier shouldn't get exotic weapon proficiency over and above their base forms without any real tradeoff). But otherwise, it bugs me. Not every samurai could wield a katana one-handed. In fact, the few who could were widely considered exceptional.
Bah. Rule zero to the rescue until errata arrives.
But otherwise, it bugs me. Not every samurai could wield a katana one-handed. In fact, the few who could were widely considered exceptional.
D&D =! realistic depiction of historical combat.
Never said that, and it's really great how you latched on to that one bit of the point I was trying to make, as opposed to the actual mechanical implications that were the crux of the argument.
|
|
Wait, what? Nodachi is strictly better than both the martial version of the bastard sword (martial; 2H; 1d10; 19-20/x2; no Special Qualities), AND the Elvish Curveblade (exotic; 2H; 1d10; 18-20/x2; no Special Qualities)? To be generously fair, Elvish curveblades have Elf in them, allowing them to be considered martial. But that's crazy.
The bastard sword can be one-handed with proficiency; the curve blade can be Finessed. Brace isn't that cool.
Its not like the katana is incredibly powerful either though.Wait, what? Nodachi is strictly better than both the martial version of the bastard sword (martial; 2H; 1d10; 19-20/x2; no Special Qualities), AND the Elvish Curveblade (exotic; 2H; 1d10; 18-20/x2; no Special Qualities)? To be generously fair, Elvish curveblades have Elf in them, allowing them to be considered martial. But that's crazy.
And with the precedent set (katanas and wakizashis are both exotic), this just looks like a brain-fart.
Ehhh. Don't like it.
Also, Ninja/samurai auto-proficiency with katana bugs me a bit. If it's proficiency with katana as a martial weapon, I'm totally fine with that, from both a flavor standpoint (surely real ninja and samurai could wield a katana as a 2-hander), and a mechanical one (Surely the alt-rogue and alt-cavalier shouldn't get exotic weapon proficiency over and above their base forms without any real tradeoff). But otherwise, it bugs me. Not every samurai could wield a katana one-handed. In fact, the few who could were widely considered exceptional.
Bah. Rule zero to the rescue until errata arrives.
The martial version is about half-a-point worse DPR than the falchion, which, mathematically, has the best DPR of any martial weapon. The exotic version is better than the bastard sword (crit-range is almost invariably more valuable than damage die). Being that 1-handed, 18-20/x2 martial weapons exist, it's not so good as to be worth the feat, but it IS good enough that, with the ability to take all the talents the other one can (ninja/rogue), ninja is better. I assume it loses rapier proficiency, but gains a step up of damage die. Slashing is usually better than piercing, too (except underwater or with duelist PrC)
So yes, if they gain exotic proficiency with it, it's good. It's not gamebreaking, and it's not like everything is so perfectly balanced that this would throw it all off, but it's still one more thing that the ninja and samurai get over what rogues and cavaliers do.
Ehh. But anyway. If my players ask, I'll probably just houserule something to make EWP less prohibitive, because I'm a fan of cool stuff. Maybe go through the list of classes and add one exotic weapon (that makes sense flavorfully) to all the martial and some 3/4 classes. B/c I'm not ranting that the katana is overpowered, or even that free proficiency is. I'm arguing that free exotic katanas don't make sense flavorfully, or mechanically, given the precedents set. But I also feel that EWP is typically underpowered, so, I'm gonna mess with that.
I heard about clerics being able to use their Wis bonus to attack with their deities favorite weapon. Is that a feat, alternative class ability, what? I ask this because would it apply to Inquisitors too?
I heard about clerics being able to use their Wis bonus to attack with their deities favorite weapon. Is that a feat, alternative class ability, what? I ask this because would it apply to Inquisitors too?Not without a fairly weird build, because it is a feat with Channel Smite as a prereq.
Thanks! (Now knows what not to plan for)
Since it hasn't been said the Nodachi doesn't have reach right?
Also it is better than the falchion because as other have said it is 0.5 more damage on average but what poeple haven't thought is the damage when you are enlarged (or lead blades), the falchion's damage becomes 2d6 (from 2d4) and the Nodachi's damage becomes 2d8 (from 1d10) which means that it has 2 more damage on average.
Sure characters who aren't martial proficient (rogues, bards etc.) can be half orc and not spend a feat but characters who are martial prof. can now pick that weapon.
The Nodachi was just a Japanese greatsword. I do not see the need for new stats. But then I really hate how pathfinder /3.x gives the same weapon different stats based off its name from place to place (looks hard at monk weapons)
What about the brass knuckles, in the first preview we saw that the weapon was in the UC, so was that a typo or are they changed from the APG?
The various kinds of swords and polearms etc. are differently statted because many of them are fundamentally different weapons. You don't use a katana with a shield, for example. The style of attack with a Nodachi was different than the style of attack with a greatsword, because the shape of the blade and angles of the metal were wildly different. A ranseur is not a halberd is not a longspear.
Now, to be fair, an Urumi doesn't deal 1d8 damage, and it probably doesn't threaten on 18-20 either, but y'know. Dire flails exist, so...
The longsword was just a European bastard sword. I do not see the need for new stats. But then I really hate how pathfinder /3.x /AD&D gives the same weapon different stats based off its name from place to place (looks hard at polearms)
well if ya want to nitpick, the pathfinder longsword is really called an Arming sword and the bastard sword is what would have been called a long sword.
The various kinds of swords and polearms etc. are differently statted because many of them are fundamentally different weapons. You don't use a katana with a shield, for example. The style of attack with a Nodachi was different than the style of attack with a greatsword, because the shape of the blade and angles of the metal were wildly different. A ranseur is not a halberd is not a longspear.
Now, to be fair, an Urumi doesn't deal 1d8 damage, and it probably doesn't threaten on 18-20 either, but y'know. Dire flails exist, so...
The issue is however 3.5/pathfinder simply is to abstract in weapon stats to make it useful and meaningful to try and make them all that different
2E for exsample had more reason to give diff stats as they had more options and "parts" to weapon stats, weapon speed , 2 ways to deal damage based on the size of the foe and all that, but pathfinder is much simpler and simply does not need to have a dozen weapon stats for what is the same weapon but a different name.
You have no different ways to roll a d20 based on how you hold the weapon, no difference in armor piercing and the like. A great sword is a great sword no matter where it was made, same with flails and maces and sickles.
The longsword was just a European bastard sword. I do not see the need for new stats. But then I really hate how pathfinder /3.x /AD&D gives the same weapon different stats based off its name from place to place (looks hard at polearms)well if ya want to nitpick, the pathfinder longsword is really called an Arming sword and the bastard sword is what would have been called a long sword.
The various kinds of swords and polearms etc. are differently statted because many of them are fundamentally different weapons. You don't use a katana with a shield, for example. The style of attack with a Nodachi was different than the style of attack with a greatsword, because the shape of the blade and angles of the metal were wildly different. A ranseur is not a halberd is not a longspear.
Now, to be fair, an Urumi doesn't deal 1d8 damage, and it probably doesn't threaten on 18-20 either, but y'know. Dire flails exist, so...
The issue is however 3.5/pathfinder simply is to abstract in weapon stats to make it useful and meaningful to try and make them all that different
2E for exsample had more reason to give diff stats as they had more options and "parts" to weapon stats, weapon speed , 2 ways to deal damage based on the size of the foe and all that, but pathfinder is much simpler and simply does not need to have a dozen weapon stats for what is the same weapon but a different name.
You have no different ways to roll a d20 based on how you hold the weapon, no difference in armor piercing and the like. A great sword is a great sword no matter where it was made, same with flails and maces and sickles.
True. While I agree that it would be cool if it was more accurate in simulation of combat(piercing does better against nat. armor, Greatsword has a reach advantage vs. a dagger, bludgeoning busts up heavy armor/shields, thrusting allowed for longswords and so on) there are way too many factors involved, and the way it is is probably more fun.
To be fair, there are *sort of* different ways to "roll" based on how you "hold" the weapon. Fighting defensively gives attack penalty, AC bonus, or, say, power attack is attack penalty for damage bonus, and so on. Obviously, most of the ways of doing anything along these lines are feat-intensive and not really realistic, but hey. I'm not playing GURPS for a reason.
Shudders as GURPS is invoked
Honestly I would be fine with going though the weapons and cutting a good deal and just adding a "This weapon is known as .." text. Some have niches but others are the same basic weapon with a different name under the system limits.
|
|
True. While I agree that it would be cool if it was more accurate in simulation of combat(piercing does better against nat. armor, Greatsword has a reach advantage vs. a dagger, bludgeoning busts up heavy armor/shields, thrusting allowed for longswords and so on) there are way too many factors involved, and the...The longsword was just a European bastard sword. I do not see the need for new stats. But then I really hate how pathfinder /3.x /AD&D gives the same weapon different stats based off its name from place to place (looks hard at polearms)well if ya want to nitpick, the pathfinder longsword is really called an Arming sword and the bastard sword is what would have been called a long sword.
The various kinds of swords and polearms etc. are differently statted because many of them are fundamentally different weapons. You don't use a katana with a shield, for example. The style of attack with a Nodachi was different than the style of attack with a greatsword, because the shape of the blade and angles of the metal were wildly different. A ranseur is not a halberd is not a longspear.
Now, to be fair, an Urumi doesn't deal 1d8 damage, and it probably doesn't threaten on 18-20 either, but y'know. Dire flails exist, so...
The issue is however 3.5/pathfinder simply is to abstract in weapon stats to make it useful and meaningful to try and make them all that different
2E for exsample had more reason to give diff stats as they had more options and "parts" to weapon stats, weapon speed , 2 ways to deal damage based on the size of the foe and all that, but pathfinder is much simpler and simply does not need to have a dozen weapon stats for what is the same weapon but a different name.
You have no different ways to roll a d20 based on how you hold the weapon, no difference in armor piercing and the like. A great sword is a great sword no matter where it was made, same with flails and maces and sickles.
I liked 3.0's combat at first when I played it as it was less number crunching.
But I kind of want to see a weapon speed system come back since most people are very used to d20 now, and having more differences between weapons is something players usually want. And it can definitely swing things from the big massive 2H to 2WF or more balanced approach.
...True. While I agree that it would be cool if it was more accurate in simulation of combat(piercing does better against nat. armor, Greatsword has a reach advantage vs. a dagger, bludgeoning busts up heavy armor/shields, thrusting allowed for longswords and so on) there are way too manyThe longsword was just a European bastard sword. I do not see the need for new stats. But then I really hate how pathfinder /3.x /AD&D gives the same weapon different stats based off its name from place to place (looks hard at polearms)well if ya want to nitpick, the pathfinder longsword is really called an Arming sword and the bastard sword is what would have been called a long sword.
The various kinds of swords and polearms etc. are differently statted because many of them are fundamentally different weapons. You don't use a katana with a shield, for example. The style of attack with a Nodachi was different than the style of attack with a greatsword, because the shape of the blade and angles of the metal were wildly different. A ranseur is not a halberd is not a longspear.
Now, to be fair, an Urumi doesn't deal 1d8 damage, and it probably doesn't threaten on 18-20 either, but y'know. Dire flails exist, so...
The issue is however 3.5/pathfinder simply is to abstract in weapon stats to make it useful and meaningful to try and make them all that different
2E for exsample had more reason to give diff stats as they had more options and "parts" to weapon stats, weapon speed , 2 ways to deal damage based on the size of the foe and all that, but pathfinder is much simpler and simply does not need to have a dozen weapon stats for what is the same weapon but a different name.
You have no different ways to roll a d20 based on how you hold the weapon, no difference in armor piercing and the like. A great sword is a great sword no matter where it was made, same with flails and maces and sickles.
Back in second edition speed was fun. Today it's hardly necessary and it would make things WAY slower than they already are.
I tried with some friends to do something like that a while ago, and it would change the whole combat system in a VERY hard way to predict. All weapons would have to be reviewed and the Big weapons specially would have to be improved A LOT.Bear in mind that second edition was co pletelly unbalanced regarding weapons, if it wasn't a sword, it was utterly crap, most people dared to use other weapons just for fluff reasons, there was really no reason to use axes... and don't even get me started on the hammer...
|
But I kind of want to see a weapon speed system come back since most people are very used to d20 now, and having more differences between weapons is something players usually want. And it can definitely swing things from the big massive 2H to 2WF or more balanced approach.
You'll need to drop the static initiative system for that to work. Something that actually measures times between actions.
|
|
You'll need to drop the static initiative system for that to work. Something that actually measures times between actions.But I kind of want to see a weapon speed system come back since most people are very used to d20 now, and having more differences between weapons is something players usually want. And it can definitely swing things from the big massive 2H to 2WF or more balanced approach.
I'd rather avoid that. Exalted's system has significant flaws and the way damage works in Pathfinder (low base damage, high bonuses through strength and other modifications), faster weapons would be much stronger than slow ones.