|
Not is not problem solved when you want to sell a book with new classes.
Hopefully te dev woudl not agree with you in this one.
"We are also looking into a new class feature that allows the warpriest to be an effective combatant with the favored weapon of its deity, regardless of what weapon is favored by their deity. Look for increased damage and additional effects depending on the type of weapon and its role in the game."
So if I were you, rather than fighting what has already been decided I would be making sure to ask for the feat since that doesn't even exist yet.
Which is the compromise position.
Meanwhile, any suggestions for abilities for the weapon groups to achieve more parity?
|
|
THe glaive have nothing to do with what shelyn represent. I mean, it is flavorful there is a story behind it but the weapon it is cool and all that but it is not matched with what the deity represent.And byt he way, the god favored weapon do not have anything to do with what the deity represent.True for many gods unfortunately. The favored weapon is a legacy gig. Sure you can tell me why Irori is unarmed strikes and Shelyn has a Glaive, but not sure if you can tell me why Lamashtu has the falchion, Rovagug the greataxe, or Pazuzu has a longsword.
"it is flavorful there is a story behind it"
How can you type these words after "THe glaive have nothing to do with what shelyn represent"
If you don't like the story, yell at SKR.
But the replacement is "I want my choice to be completely arbitrary and meaningless"
Because that is better...
It is a patch for a non-existent "problem"
If you want to be a druid, you don't wear metal armor.
If you want to be a wizard/sorcerer you get spell failure if you wear armor.
If you want to be a fighter with an exotic weapon, you take a feat.
And the Warpriest gets a bonus to the favored weapon of their god.
If you want that bonus to apply to something other than the favored weapon of their god, you take a feat.
What I would really like to see in this discussion is ideas for things to give each weapon group to bring the weapons closer to parity so it is a non-issue.
If this is meant as a response to me, then I think you might be misunderstanding my point. I don't care about parity between weapons, I care that my Warpriest of Abadar is restricted to a crossbow (a light crossbow, to be specific). If a feat existed that let me use a Warhammer, that would help, but then the guy who just wanted to play a Warpriest with a Warhammer and doesn't care about flavor will be a Warpriest of Gorum. I'm paying a feat because I actually care about my character concept.
I think fundamentally we actually agree here. We both want to see Warpriests using weapons because they are thematically appropriate, rather than because they are mechanically optimal. I don't necessarily want to open things up to using any weapon, but I do want a little more flexibility to make the character I want to make.
As for suggestions, I briefly made one in the main Warpriest thread, and I'll reiterate here. I think the favored weapons list should be rewritten and expanded, or the Warpriest should get to select extra weapon options based on Blessing/Domain choice. If the Law Blessing let me use a Warhammer, or the Death Blessing let me use a Morningstar, I would be totally happy. And if something like that doesn't make it into the final class, I will happily house rule it. Not everyone has that luxury, though.
But complaining is easier than contributing I suppose...
It would be a lot less aggravating to debate with you if you didn't include this sort of thing in your posts. I understand your frustration, but this makes me irritated, which makes it harder for me to contribute in a positive way.
And as a side note: why does Abadar favor the Light Crossbow, while Zohls just favors the Crossbow? This sort of arbitrary inconsistency is why I'm concerned about favored weapons in general.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If nothing else I'm grateful to Ciretose for arguing this out for so long with so very, very many different posters - he's kept the topic at the top of the Warpriest thread for so long that whatever Jason winds up doing with the favored weapon mechanics I'm sure he will think it through damn hard and hopefully also realizing that tying it down too hard will ultimately hurt the class.
THe glaive have nothing to do with what shelyn represent. I mean, it is flavorful there is a story behind it but the weapon it is cool and all that but it is not matched with what the deity represent.And byt he way, the god favored weapon do not have anything to do with what the deity represent.True for many gods unfortunately. The favored weapon is a legacy gig. Sure you can tell me why Irori is unarmed strikes and Shelyn has a Glaive, but not sure if you can tell me why Lamashtu has the falchion, Rovagug the greataxe, or Pazuzu has a longsword.
Yeah... To be honest a glaive makes more sense severing ties than holding them unfortunately. Could you imagine her with a spiked chain to represent loss and love while her brother carried the same weapon? That would be pretty romantic I think.
I think it can also represent their weapon of choice. Rather unfortunate their priest choose to use only their favored weapons though, rather than a large selection based on ideals or their own pick. Gorum for instance is okay with many weapons of war and definitely supports the whole spiked armor gig, though he uses a greataxe. We've seen a number of concepts in the post that would support other weapons, but the class just doesn't cut it which is unfortunate.
|
|
Also
"Later, presumably after the Age of Darkness, the siblings quarreled again, he responding to her tears and pleading with violence, until she wrested his weapon, a golden glaive, away from him, and a tenuous peace of silence and avoidance was struck."
"Weapon training, which only occurs for about an hour every other day or so, if at all, builds off motions learned from the acolyte’s art or music (paladins frequently practice calligraphy, as the movement of the pen mirrors that of the glaive)."
"So how does the goddess of beauty and love get a glaive as her favored weapon? Shelyn bears the glaive gifted to her half brother in exchange for him swearing the Unbreakable Oath. The weapon was crafted by the former god of smiths, who fell during the same murderous spree that claimed Shelyn’s mother. When he received it, the weapon corrupted Zon-Kuthon and convinced him to go to war against the other deities. It was during this war that Shelyn lost her mother and became goddess of love. When created, Whisperer of Souls was given the ability to absorb souls (hence its name) and once it absorbs 100 powerful souls (not just anybody’s soul will do) it will become a god in its own right and bring about an era of murder and death. When Zon-Kuthon received the weapon it held no souls. By the time Shelyn stole Whisperer of Souls it had almost all it needed. In the time since, Shelyn has been able to free most of those souls thanks to the help of Nethys and brave adventurers (a grand quest of goodness must be performed to release a soul). Much to the frustration of Whisperer of Souls, it can’t seem to corrupt Shelyn or influence her in any way (earning her the title "the Incorruptible"). Quite the opposite, in fact: when Shelyn first stole the weapon it was a nightmarish and hideous piece of craftsmanship, but in the millennia since, Shelyn has remade it into a beautiful piece of art. It still bears a few ugly bits here and there, but they become less pronounced with each soul she releases."
Nope, Shelyn has no connection to the glaive...
You only just read the story about Shelyn? Read back, Shelyn's glaive has been used repeatedly as one of very few examples of a genuinely logical favored weapon.
|
|
If nothing else I'm grateful to Ciretose for arguing this out for so long with so very, very many different posters - he's kept the topic at the top of the Warpriest thread for so long that whatever Jason winds up doing with the favored weapon mechanics I'm sure he will think it through damn hard and hopefully also realizing that tying it down too hard will ultimately hurt the class.
Your welcome.
The Wizard and Sorcerer never recovered from armor restrictions, so I'm sure they learned the lesson...
|
|
You only just read the story about Shelyn? Read back, Shelyn's glaive has been used repeatedly as one of very few examples of a genuinely logical favored weapon.
No, I am an AP subscriber. I read the long version before.
But it was actually cited as not being logical by several posters, as she is the god of love and beauty. I can cite them if you like.
All of this is lovely, but do any of the three of you have any suggestions or are you just here to air grievances?
I posted a suggestion about 45 minutes back in the main warpriest thread actually - I believe you ignored it and instead focused on arguing how inquisitors make excellent TWFers :)
Nope, Shelyn has no...SHelyn have a conection "Beauty, art, love, music" do not, neither "Artists, poets, lovers".
Player: I want to be a warpreist that fight in defence of "Beauty, art, love, music", I think x weapon fits the concept
DM: Sorry you have to use glaive.
Player: WTF?
I am entirely in favor of letting a Warpriest of Shelyn use other weapons, but I'm also in the camp of thinking this is one of the few favored weapons that has a very solid story behind it and makes a very appropriate Warpriest weapon. My playtest character is a Warpriest of Shelyn, and his Glaive is plated with silver and chased with gold. Engravings of rose vines cover the haft. I think it fits the concept pretty well.
|
|
It would be a lot less aggravating to debate with you if you didn't include this sort of thing in your posts. I understand your frustration, but this makes me irritated, which makes it harder for me to contribute in a positive way.And as a side note: why does Abadar favor the Light Crossbow, while Zohls just favors the Crossbow? This sort of arbitrary inconsistency is why I'm concerned about favored weapons in general.
I apologize to you, but you can see what I am dealing with from some other posters so I hope you understand.
Abadar's connection to crossbows comes from his urban status. It is kind of a city weapon in contrast to the Bow of Erastil (or at least that is how I took it)
Fortunately, one of the weapon groups is crossbow, so it could get specific buffs to a more utility purpose.
I hear you, but I don't think a single feat is to much to ask to be able to select any weapon in the game to put the core feature of the class onto.
|
|
Nope, Shelyn has no connection to the glaive...SHelyn have a conection, "Beauty, art, love, music" do not, neither "Artists, poets, lovers".
Player: I want to be a warpreist that fight in defence of "Beauty, art, love, music", I think x weapon fits the concept
DM: Sorry you have to use glaive.
Player: WTF?
Your god has selected this as the favored weapon.
Do you also think that having to use the divine focus of the God is a problem?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would be a lot less aggravating to debate with you if you didn't include this sort of thing in your posts. I understand your frustration, but this makes me irritated, which makes it harder for me to contribute in a positive way.And as a side note: why does Abadar favor the Light Crossbow, while Zohls just favors the Crossbow? This sort of arbitrary inconsistency is why I'm concerned about favored weapons in general.
I apologize to you, but you can see what I am dealing with from some other posters so I hope you understand.
Abadar's connection to crossbows comes from his urban status. It is kind of a city weapon in contrast to the Bow of Erastil (or at least that is how I took it)
Fortunately, one of the weapon groups is crossbow, so it could get specific buffs to a more utility purpose.
I hear you, but I don't think a single feat is to much to ask to be able to select any weapon in the game to put the core feature of the class onto.
I don't think it's too much either. I do think that it's much more likely to hurt people with interesting character concepts than people who are trying for mechanical optimization. Honestly, I would rather see a Warpriest of Desna with a greatsword and a cool background than a Warpriest of Gorum with a greatsword because greatsword.
What do you think about tying some weapons to Blessing choices? This opens up the flexibility somewhat, while still making sure not every Warpriest has the same weapon.
Oh, and I understand why Abadar favors the crossbow, but it doesn't feel as strong as Shelyn or Sarenrae's interest in their favored weapons.
And I really don't understand why it specifies light crossbow for Abadar, but doesn't pick and choose with Zohls. It definitely gives the impression that favored weapons weren't chosen as carefully as I would want them to be if they're going to be a central mechanic for a class.
I posted a suggestion about 45 minutes back in the main warpriest thread actually - I believe you ignored it and instead focused on arguing how inquisitors make excellent TWFers :)Actually I responded to it. Go check.
Sorry, can't find it. Oh well, no worries.
|
|
I don't think it's too much either. I do think that it's much more likely to hurt people with interesting character concepts than people who are trying for mechanical optimization. Honestly, I would rather see a Warpriest of Desna with a greatsword and a cool background than a Warpriest of Gorum with a greatsword because greatsword.What do you think about tying some weapons to Blessing choices? This opens up the flexibility somewhat, while still making sure not every Warpriest has the same weapon.
If blessings stay as is, you have restrictions now as to what blessing you can take, based on your deity.
You would have to create this web of this weapon with this blessing...I think it is simpler to tie it to a weapon group, as the strengths and weaknesses can be addressed largely that way.
I think that if you are a follower of a deity, part of the flavor of that choice is actually following the deity. I don't see that as a restriction as much as part of what allows the world to make logical sense and create a coherent world.
If the players are walking along and come upon someone with a butterfly standard wielding a starknife, that means something. They can understand that.
It isn't a bad thing. It isn't even a trope since I can't think of the last time I saw a player actually using a starknife.
This is an opportunity to have flavor be the benefit it should be. To reward players who actually embrace the setting.
That is not a bad thing. And frankly I think the setting is a hell of a lot more interesting than most of the bad backstories I read on here.
It makes sense to encourage players to actually play into the setting and not against it.
If you want the flavor of the greatsword of Desna, then you aren't going to care about the feat, because you got your greatsword and the flavor was more important to you than the mechanics.
And if it isn't more important, I'm not sympathetic to you and I certainly don't want to adjust the game to encourage you.
|
|
Nope, Shelyn has no connection to the glaive...SHelyn have a conection, "Beauty, art, love, music" do not, neither "Artists, poets, lovers".
Player: I want to be a warpreist that fight in defence of "Beauty, art, love, music", I think x weapon fits the concept
DM: Sorry you have to use glaive.
Player: WTF?Your god has selected this as the favored weapon.
Do you also think that having to use the divine focus of the God is a problem?
It is indeed a problem, that is what I am traying to say. Nobody should be forced to this kind of things.
Player: I want to be a warpreist of the god of war and that kinf of stuff. In faerun we have the red knight and tempus.
DM: yeah, golarion totally have one of those it is called gorum.
Player: Cool, I would use a greataxe.
DM. sorry you have to use a greatsword
Player: WTF dude?
DM: Well, you can take this feat tax
Player: Yeaaaah...Maybe I better play another class.
Or play on Faerun. (we still do). Or if I'm on Faerun and want Gorum...oh well, I'm not on Golarion. If it is important to me, I take a feat.
Or houserule.
So you aren't going to contribute to helping with a fix then?
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Curious how desna the godess of freedom force you to use HER favorite weapon.Your god has selected this as the favored weapon.
Do you also think that having to use the divine focus of the God is a problem?
She is making you use it?
See I thought she was just giving you bonuses if you did use it.
Curious how desna the godess of freedom force you to use HER favorite weapon.Your god has selected this as the favored weapon.
Do you also think that having to use the divine focus of the God is a problem?
She is making you use it?
See I thought she was just giving you bonuses if you did use it.
Bonuses you need to thrive. Take my hand or die gig. Sure you can choose not to take the hand, but there are some consequences in your future for doing so.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bonuses you need to thrive. Take my hand or die gig. Sure you can choose not to take the hand, but there are some consequences in your future for doing so.Curious how desna the godess of freedom force you to use HER favorite weapon.Your god has selected this as the favored weapon.
Do you also think that having to use the divine focus of the God is a problem?
She is making you use it?
See I thought she was just giving you bonuses if you did use it.
Because they don't have 6 levels of casting or any other weapon proficiency...
If I am forced to take a single feat, I am no longer viable!
|
|
So you aren't going to contribute to helping with a fix then?This is hardly a fix. WHat you have say here matched the " is totally cool if you have to spend feat taxes and still totally suc at sling cause flavor dude".
So no, I will not participate more in this thread, because this is the kind of thing taht should never get printed in a rulebook.
Hopefully people give great suggestion that get taken into account for an archeype and nothing more.
I woudl wish you luck, but in this case I hope you fail in this endevour.
Then contribute something.
You just keep complaining, everything sucks, woe is me...crossbows suck, slings suck, everything sucks if it isn't identical to the best possible option...
Add to the debate. You are bright Nico, we have been in a lot of threads, you know the rules.
Add something. Suggest something that would work and still keep favored weapons favored.
I don't think it's too much either. I do think that it's much more likely to hurt people with interesting character concepts than people who are trying for mechanical optimization. Honestly, I would rather see a Warpriest of Desna with a greatsword and a cool background than a Warpriest of Gorum with a greatsword because greatsword.What do you think about tying some weapons to Blessing choices? This opens up the flexibility somewhat, while still making sure not every Warpriest has the same weapon.
If blessings stay as is, you have restrictions now as to what blessing you can take, based on your deity.
You would have to create this web of this weapon with this blessing...I think it is simpler to tie it to a weapon group, as the strengths and weaknesses can be addressed largely that way.
I think that if you are a follower of a deity, part of the flavor of that choice is actually following the deity. I don't see that as a restriction as much as part of what allows the world to make logical sense and create a coherent world.
If the players are walking along and come upon someone with a butterfly standard wielding a starknife, that means something. They can understand that.
It isn't a bad thing. It isn't even a trope since I can't think of the last time I saw a player actually using a starknife.
This is an opportunity to have flavor be the benefit it should be. To reward players who actually embrace the setting.
That is not a bad thing. And frankly I think the setting is a hell of a lot more interesting than most of the bad backstories I read on here.
It makes sense to encourage players to actually play into the setting and not against it.
If you want the flavor of the greatsword of Desna, then you aren't going to care about the feat, because you got your greatsword and the flavor was more important to you than the mechanics.
And if it isn't more important, I'm not sympathetic to you and I certainly don't want to adjust the game to encourage you.
If it's not more important, then I'll just make a Warpriest of Gorum. Like I said, I can handle taking a feat. Flavor is more important to me, and if I have to eat a feat to make the character I want, I will. What I don't like is that such a feat would unduly put a greater burden on players who care about flavor. You keep saying you want to encourage people to make characters with good flavor, but this feat would do the opposite. The only people who would care enough to be interested in the feat are the people you claim to support.
People will make bad, flavorless backstories whether or not they are using their god's favored weapon. People will make good backstories either way as well. But putting in a barrier that only interferes with people who care about their character concept beyond the damage they deal doesn't seem like a good choice.
|
|
Fair enough. I think arguing that making it a magus would make it more diverse is a joke, but at least it is a position.IN my post the word diverse did not appear. The maugs thing is to solve the action economy issue and to give them something unique when compared against the other divine casters.
Because diversity was never something you were concerned with. You just don't want to have to participate in the setting flavor...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Warpriests should not have to be forced to use their deity's favored weapon. They are warriors of their faith, and thus should use a warrior's weapon, not a clergyman's weapon. When a Warpriest takes up arms to fight for Pharasma, they would not bring a dagger to war. They would use something a soldier would use. Something bigger.
|
|
Because diversity was never something you were concerned with. You just don't want to have to participate in the setting flavor...Fair enough. I think arguing that making it a magus would make it more diverse is a joke, but at least it is a position.IN my post the word diverse did not appear. The maugs thing is to solve the action economy issue and to give them something unique when compared against the other divine casters.My only concern with diversity is the silly restriction of sacred weapon. Once that is not in the equation there are other thing that can be talked about.
And no, In the post about magus/cleric hybrid the word diverse/diversity never appear, so you readed what you wanted to read.
It only appeared in criticism of my position. Because you don't actually care about diversity, or flavor.
Just power level.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Okay. Okay. Just... okay. I need to say this, and the only possible way is for me to do it in caps. I'm not yelling, and I'm not directing it at anyone in particular.
/deep breath
NO ONE IS FORCING YOU TO USE YOUR DEITY'S FAVORED WEAPON.
NO ONE.
NONE.
You wanna play a Warpriest of Nethys that uses an Earthbreaker? Sweet! Go for it! You're making a conscious decision to ignore some of your class features, or otherwise minimize them, but everyone does that. Paladin with a Heavy Shield? GOODBYE, LAY ON HANDS. Cleric with a Heavy Shield/Weapon? GOODBYE, SPELLCASTING. Fighter dual-wielding daggers? LOWER DAMAGE.
Nobody is up in arms about this because there are other options that are more effective, and the same goes for the Warpriest. Nobody is forcing you to do anything: You get BONUSES for fighting with your favored weapon, not penalties for everything else. That's why you're proficient with Martial Weapons. Maybe you're a Warpriest of Asmodeus who prefers to use a scythe, but when the chips are down and the good outsiders are coming for him, he's got his mace at the ready. Or maybe you're a devout follower of Ragathiel who prefers to stay at range with a longbow, but knows that when things get up close and personal he's got a bastard sword at the ready all blessed up and ready to go.
These are all valid, usable character ideas that are totally and completely fine. DEAL.
|
|
It only appeared in criticism of my position. Because you don't actually care about diversity, or flavor.
Just power level.
says who?
THe fact ist that your suggestion hurst diversity and flavor, wether your recognize it or not do not matters.
My suggestion do not.
Actually, that's not quite right. You can't "prove" that his "suggestion hurt[s] diversity and flavor" just like you can't prove that your suggestion doesn't. You can imply that, but you can't prove it.
What you CAN argue is the viability of various suggestions in play. If a Warpriest who decides to sparingly use his class feature is not viable (read: Cannot overcome challenges of a level roughly equivalent to his own with the help of other party members, or otherwise meaningfully contribute), then you might have a point. I have yet to see anyone make it, however.
As it stands, any class can use whatever they darn well please. Just not necessarily viably. If you're going to argue, argue for mechanics, not roleplaying, because anyone can roleplay anything.