|
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Is a bladebound magus automatically proficient with his or her black blade? It seems there are a number of exotic weapons that meet the black blade's requirement of being a one-handed slashing weapon, and it would be awkward not to be proficient with your bonded intelligent item.
There's nothing in the description of the archetype nor the blade that grants proficiency.
It wouldn't be an unreasonable house rule, especially if done in the style of post-errata Heirloom Weapon.
No part of the archetype grants extra proficiencies, however. Short a lenient GM, proficiency in your black blade katana must be acquired elsewhere.
So why does your character have the black blade to begin with if he/she don't even know how to wield it?
Just adding a bit of logic to that should make it clear the situation they're intended to be proficient automatically.
The flavor text and background are pretty clear that you aren't necessarily planning to use that particular weapon, you might just find it some day. So I would say it's up to you to obtain proficiency with it if you don't get that automatically from race or class. And as a character design thing, I think that suggests picking one you're proficient with. Unless you want the lack of proficiency to be a plot point.
+1
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
The black blade they were "destined" to wield just happened to be an exotic weapon that they have trained to wield (spent their starting feat on EWP for it). Or, alternatively, they're destined to wield an exotic weapon they've never handled before; they can still wield it, they just take a -4 non-proficiency penalty until they learn how to use it properly. Could make for some interesting RP.
Aside, you need a +1 BAB to get EWP.
Best option is play a half elf (if you have the ARG) and trade your skill focus for an EWP. :-)
So long as I am DM, a Bladebound Magus is automatically proficient with his/her black blade.
The flavor text and background are pretty clear that you aren't necessarily planning to use that particular weapon, you might just find it some day. So I would say it's up to you to obtain proficiency with it if you don't get that automatically from race or class. And as a character design thing, I think that suggests picking one you're proficient with. Unless you want the lack of proficiency to be a plot point.
The black blade they were "destined" to wield just happened to be an exotic weapon that they have trained to wield (spent their starting feat on EWP for it). Or, alternatively, they're destined to wield an exotic weapon they've never handled before; they can still wield it, they just take a -4 non-proficiency penalty until they learn how to use it properly. Could make for some interesting RP.
So why does your character have the black blade to begin with if he/she don't even know how to wield it?
Just adding a bit of logic to that should make it clear the situation they're intended to be proficient automatically.
Yeah, it doesn't work like that. You can "logically" argue to any position you want to, especially one that favors your character mechanically.
Pick a black blade you're proficient with, or burn the feat, trait, or fighter level dip to get it.
I'm a DM. The thing you quoted came from me as a DM, not as a player.
And even if I was the player at the seat, my stance would remain the same.
If that is the case, why does the OP only have two FAQ marks?
|
This is also the Rules forum, and not the Homebrew forum. There is no rules that give a Black Blade proficiency with said weapon if they choose an exotic weapon.
The Baron is correct. If a Bladebound Magus was supposed to gain a free proficiency with the weapon type the black blade was chosen to be, it would be stated in the archetype.
What it does say is A black blade is always a one-handed slashing weapon, a rapier, or a sword cane. The magus chooses the blade's type upon gaining the blade, and once chosen, it can't be changed. If the Magus' player is foolish enough to select a weapon-type other than a weapon the character is proficient it, then he must deal with the consequences.
Giving the Magus a free proficiency is 100% homebrew. If you want to do that as a GM, it is your perogative, but you are giving the player something for free.
|
|
I realize the rules as written don't grant any sort of automatic proficiency, but I could definitely see that being oversight. It certainly seems in keeping with the theme of the archetype that proficiency might be automatic, and Exotic Weapon Proficiency is such an awful feat I guess I'm secretly always hoping the design team will find ways to cut around it. There are actually several magus archetypes that grant some form of exotic weapon proficiency, and I believe they mostly stack with bladebound, but they also mostly come pre-loaded with significant enough changes to the class (on both a flavour and function basis) to not be worthwhile for many characters.
If that is the case, why does the OP only have two FAQ marks?Because the answer is pretty obvious?
If it was as obvious as you claimed, this thread wouldn't need to even exist.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Just because a class doesn't have something the way you want it doesn't mean it's a design oversight. The magus is not a full BAB character, so there's no reason to grant it a blanket exotic weapon proficiency feat at first level, when even Fighters don't get that.
This.
Plus, the Kensai archtype does specifically call out its weapon proficiency. So to argue it was an oversight, you're arguing it was put in one place, missed in the other.
|
|
Just because a class doesn't have something the way you want it doesn't mean it's a design oversight. The magus is not a full BAB character, so there's no reason to grant it a blanket exotic weapon proficiency feat at first level, when even Fighters don't get that.
IF EWP was such an "awful feat", you wouldn't be trying to get it for free. You want it because it does give you an advantage over a martial weapon. There isn't an elligible weapon that you can take with the EWP that's not an improvement over the martial one handed selections. You want EWP, you pay a price one way or another by spending a feat, or taking an archetype.
And just because something is the way I want it doesn't mean it isn't oversight. I'll never know for sure unless I ask, and I'm honestly not sure why you're getting so worked up that I did. At what point did I say I cared what the specific answer to the question was? I just want to know the answer.
If you're certain that an archetype all about having an awesome sword isn't supposed to be automatically proficient with that awesome sword, then I'd recommend not clicking the FAQ link. A lot of people seem to agree with you and consequently this thread hasn't gotten many flags. It's a perfect example of the system working as intended.
You're right of course that most exotic weapons are upgrades over martial weapons, but very, very few of them are enough of an upgrade to warrant expenditure of a precious feat.
|
|
Plus, the Kensai archtype does specifically call out its weapon proficiency. So to argue it was an oversight, you're arguing it was put in one place, missed in the other.
I'm not arguing that it's oversight. I'm asking whether or not it was. And something being included one place and not another is the very definition of oversight. It may very well have been a conscious decision on the part of the author or editors to require the feat for any bladebound who wanted a falcata or rhoka or khopesh. Or it may be that they just didn't think about it. That's why I'm asking.
Giving a free feat for an archetype without giving anything up seems to be a little unfair to the other players. Why should your already powerful weapon be even more powerful for free? Also considering the blade bound magus does not get his bound blade until 3rd level having him spend the feat he gains for 3rd level seems reasonable. To me this looks like an intentional design of the archetype. It allows you to have any qualifying weapon as a black blade and know how to use it when you get it. If you have a martial or simple black blade then you can use your 3rd level feat for something else, if you have an exotic weapon as your black blade then you spend your feat to become proficient with it.
As an alternative I could see a house rule allowing a blade bound magus to trade proficiency with all martial weapons for the appropriate exotic weapon. Too many players think just because you take a penalty you can't do something. I had a player who complained that his character could not use stealth because it was not a class skill. I pointed out that anyone can use stealth even if they are not trained, but that was not good enough. He had a concept of a fighter based archer and argued that a hunter should have stealth. When I suggested he just spend a feat for skill focus stealth he complained. (This was before the traits to give it as a class skill). If you background only affects the fluff you can do what you want. If it affects the mechanics of the game be prepared to spend some resources.
Chiming in to agree that the Bladebound archetype does not appear by RAW to grant any specific proficiency with the black blade. From a house rule perspective, I might grant proficiency with the black blade only (similar to how the Heirloom Weapon trait doesn't grant proficiency with all weapons, but with one specific weapon only), but not as a way to get a free universal proficiency with a type of weapon.
I don't believe an FAQ is needed in this case.
|
|
Jeez, guys. I didn't think the question was that unreasonable. I'm a rules guy and I like things to be clear. I can see newer players extrapolating subtext from this archetype, and the notion of automatic proficiency with the black blade doesn't seem out of phase with the feel of the archetype, so I asked about it. "Your question is bad and you should feel bad" has been received loud and clear if you all are content to just let the thread sink.
|
Jeez, guys. I didn't think the question was that unreasonable. I'm a rules guy and I like things to be clear.
It is clear.
The magus is proficient with all martial weapons and the archetype does not grant an exotic weapon proficiency. You can choose and use any eligible martial weapon freely but will need to purchase proficiency with an exotic weapon in the normal manner.
|
|
Just because a class doesn't have something the way you want it doesn't mean it's a design oversight. The magus is not a full BAB character, so there's no reason to grant it a blanket exotic weapon proficiency feat at first level, when even Fighters don't get that.
IF EWP was such an "awful feat", you wouldn't be trying to get it for free. You want it because it does give you an advantage over a martial weapon. There isn't an elligible weapon that you can take with the EWP that's not an improvement over the martial one handed selections. You want EWP, you pay a price one way or another by spending a feat, or taking an archetype.
And just because something is the way I want it doesn't mean it isn't oversight. I'll never know for sure unless I ask, and I'm honestly not sure why you're getting so worked up that I did. At what point did I say I cared what the specific answer to the question was? I just want to know the answer.
If you're certain that an archetype all about having an awesome sword isn't supposed to be automatically proficient with that awesome sword, then I'd recommend not clicking the FAQ link. A lot of people seem to agree with you and consequently this thread hasn't gotten many flags. It's a perfect example of the system working as intended.
You're right of course that most exotic weapons are upgrades over martial weapons, but very, very few of them are enough of an upgrade to warrant expenditure of a precious feat.
The FAQ button isn't there to ask for a change in the rules. There is no reason to think that the bladebound magus was meant to have automatic proficiency in his blackblade, so there is no reason to hit the FAQ button.
Jeez, guys. I didn't think the question was that unreasonable. I'm a rules guy and I like things to be clear. I can see newer players extrapolating subtext from this archetype, and the notion of automatic proficiency with the black blade doesn't seem out of phase with the feel of the archetype, so I asked about it. "Your question is bad and you should feel bad" has been received loud and clear if you all are content to just let the thread sink.
There is nothing at all in the text of bladebound that expresses or implies that the magus gets a free proficiency. Typically, rules do not bother to state that a character does not gain a proficiency when the default is that a character does not gain a proficiency. There is no way to make the rules more clear other than to state something along the lines of
If the bladebound magus is not proficient with their bound weapon, they do not automatically become proficient with their bound weapon.
That would be a terrible rule to write, as it opens the door for all kinds of "it doesn't say you *don't* gain fireball at will as a spell-like ability" requests for clarification.
If you feel like it's silly that a magus could choose a bound weapon that it isn't proficient with, play it otherwise if you're the GM or your GM agrees. I play it RAW, as (a) it's RAW, and (b) it makes perfect sense to me that a magus who encounters his destined weapon may not have, up until that point, trained in said weapon.
Your question is not bad, and you should not feel bad, but it is easy to answer--and has been.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Your question is not bad, and you should not feel bad, but it is easy to answer--and has been.
This ability doesn't grant proficiency and asking them to clarify this would be a waste of a FAQ like the often asked "Do I really have to take Power Attack before taking Cleave" question that apparently shows up in FAQ queues often.
If they were to clarify things like you want, the books would be double size. They still wouldn't cover all the types of clarifications you would like to be covered.
I think the problem is that people look at it wrong. First, magus can wield a lot of weapons suitable for the archetype.
Second the decision to pick a weapon the magus is not proficient with is the players problem to deal with. The archetype doesn't care or require him to be proficient.
Basically players choose exotic weapons because they want something extta they pay a feat for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Your question is not bad, and you should not feel bad, but it is easy to answer--and has been.This ability doesn't grant proficiency and asking them to clarify this would be a waste of a FAQ like the often asked "Do I really have to take Power Attack before taking Cleave" question that apparently shows up in FAQ queues often.
If they were to clarify things like you want, the books would be double size. They still wouldn't cover all the types of clarifications you would like to be covered.
*waits for James to reread his quote*
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
*waits for James to reread his quote*
Sigh, the bane of online posts. Often your posts are not clear enough.
I meant to make the point that his question wasn't bad and he wasn't bad. But that having FAQ for things that can be answered by looking at the rules will add needless complexity.
I dont see the point either way.
With the recent FAQ's on Spell Combat and such it has made using anything other than a Simitar pointless. Deverish dance is basicly the only optimized path for a Magus now. The STR build Magus is dead because you cant use two hands and still cast a spell. Pretty lame because I never liked the Deverish builds.
Ignore my post if you care nothing about optimization... but then you wouldn't care about using a feat to get an exotic weapon if you didnt care about optimization.
*waits for James to reread his quote*Sigh, the bane of online posts. Often your posts are not clear enough.
I meant to make the point that his question wasn't bad and he wasn't bad. But that having FAQ for things that can be answered by looking at the rules will add needless complexity.
Well, I do have a tendency to ramble. : D
I agree with your assessment 100%.
I dont see the point either way.
With the recent FAQ's on Spell Combat and such it has made using anything other than a Simitar pointless. Deverish dance is basicly the only optimized path for a Magus now. The STR build Magus is dead because you cant use two hands and still cast a spell. Pretty lame because I never liked the Deverish builds.
Ignore my post if you care nothing about optimization... but then you wouldn't care about using a feat to get an exotic weapon if you didnt care about optimization.
Incorrect. There are gradients between "want to be an uber-broken shockmagus" and "meh, just give my feats to the cleric".
Incorrect. There are gradients between "want to be an uber-broken shockmagus" and "meh, just give my feats to the cleric".I dont see the point either way.
With the recent FAQ's on Spell Combat and such it has made using anything other than a Simitar pointless. Deverish dance is basicly the only optimized path for a Magus now. The STR build Magus is dead because you cant use two hands and still cast a spell. Pretty lame because I never liked the Deverish builds.
Ignore my post if you care nothing about optimization... but then you wouldn't care about using a feat to get an exotic weapon if you didnt care about optimization.
More importantly, none of the recent FAQs have changed the 'brokenness' of the shockmagus's main source of damage - his Shocking Grasp.
Then again, I never assumed spell combat was meant to be used with two-handed weapons, so I haven't noticed that anything has really changed.
I dont see the point either way.
With the recent FAQ's on Spell Combat and such it has made using anything other than a Simitar pointless. Deverish dance is basicly the only optimized path for a Magus now. The STR build Magus is dead because you cant use two hands and still cast a spell. Pretty lame because I never liked the Deverish builds.
Ignore my post if you care nothing about optimization... but then you wouldn't care about using a feat to get an exotic weapon if you didnt care about optimization.
Not that this is salient to the discussion, but could someone please link me to the FAQ he is referencing?
Edit: Based on Xaratherus' comment I'm guessing it stated outright that you couldn't use Spell Strike to deliver your touch spells?