Revised Warpriest Discussion


Class Discussion

501 to 550 of 847 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Lead Designer

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Contributor

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

1) B is not easy to use. It requires you to keep a second set of dice in case you critically hit. It messes with some basic assumptions about how the game works, which isn't a good thing.

2) Depends upon your definition of balanced. If C is implemented, I could see many people favoring High-Crit builds for the War Priest, because nothing in the game currently could Crit as hard or as often as, say, a 20th level warpriest of a dagger / katana / rapier god. Generally speaking, a higher chance to crit is better than criting harder because you see it more often. But personally, I don't think any of these options are OP, especially if you're looking long-term.

3) C without question. Rolling tons of big dice is always fun.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

A is most balanced, C is probably most fun, and A and C are, arguably, tied for easiest to use.

A is easy because every Sacred Weapon would crit the same, so no one has to do any calculating. C is easy, because it functions as crits already do, while B requires a little bookkeeping.

B is just tedious and will cause confusion, I'd abandon it entirely.

Shadow Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Personally, if you want to maintain the extra damage, I would say it automatically defaults to a 20/x2 crit. Allowing 19/x2, or 20/x3 just messes with the point of having all kinds of different weapons end encourages people to pick the best weapon, regardless of flavor or fluff. This also seems like something that the Fighter class alone should even be able to use, as they are the master of arms and armor.

I also do think that Deity's Favored Weapons should have some kind of perk.

A,) So in this, would weapons that are already worse than this then get even their Crit Threat an Multipliers boosted too? Do we get to pick and choose? For instance does a Light Hammer (1d4, 20/x2) now become a 1d6, 19/x3 weapon? Does an Earth Breaker (2d6, 20/x3) become a 2d6 19/x3 or a 1d6, 19/x3 weapon?

B.) Seems like it would just cause issues and slow down the game a bit.

C.) I think will be fun for those that want to abuse the system, and will probably not be so fun for those that want to RP more along the flavor of their deity. It actually kind of takes out a lot of the reason to even pick a deity, and kind of makes Warpriests all look the same rather than all Warpriests of ______ looking similar.

I think both the easiest and most fun option would be to allow for Warpriests to take a Weapon Focus Feat to allow them to use any single weapon with their class features, but they receive Weapon Focus only for their Deity's Favored Weapon for free, and need to pay for others out of their normal Feats, with no increased damage or Crit stats for any of them. This allows any Warpriest to choose their main weapon if they want, with a minor charge (they have to pay a feat), rewards those that stick to their Deity's Favored Weapon, (they get it for free just like everyone else), and there is no potential to break the system just by picking the best weapon, but you can choose a better one if you want. It's a good compromise for everyone involved. You default to Deity's Favored Weapon, but have the option, (at 1st level or any time thereafter) to broaden your choice of chosen weapon as you would like.

While we have you , would it be possible to get an official answer on if the Warpriest does or does not qualify for Fighter only Feats? That's something that will really affect my playtest build coming up, and it would be nice to know, (even if it's just for now), if they can or can not.


1. A, then C, then B. I list B last because with a Warpriest's sacred weapon I probably won't even bother listing the normal weapon stats on my sheet. I put A first because if I plan on having the weapon as a sacred weapon, it frees me to not even bother looking up the weapon's regular stats.

2. A. I'm including in 'balance' the thematic idea that sacred weapon allows a Warpriest to choose a deity without major worry of mechanics.

3. I started to put C, but that was my mind assuming that 'optimal damage output = most fun'. I'm not really sure how to answer this one.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

A or C would be easy to use

A is the most balanced

C would be fun for the most part.

To be honest, Either A or C would work for me, I can GM around it if need be. But B would just be a pain in the backside.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

A is definitely easiest (I would suggest 19-20/x2 for slashing and piercing, with 20/x3 for bludgeoning, or maybe allow you to choose when you take weapon focus). A is also probably the most balanced; in general, if everyone is the same, it's more balanced than any alternative.

C is the most fun, and I don't think it's at all game-breaking. It's not completely balanced, but weapon selection never has been. This just changes how it's unbalanced.

EDIT: The more I think about it (and as I explain in my next post), the more I think A is the most fun. It would be even more fun if I could choose my crit range/multiplier, and get a damage progression to match, but that might be too good/complicated.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Xaratherus wrote:
3. I started to put C, but that was my mind assuming that 'optimal damage output = most fun'. I'm not really sure how to answer this one.

This is a good point. C is the most fun if you're using a weapon that takes advantage of it. Otherwise, A is probably the most fun, because it frees you up to choose a weapon because it's cool or thematic, without caring what the stats on it are. A friend of mine plays a D20 variant (I don't remember the name) where this is just a fact of weapons. They all do the same damage, so weapon choice is purely an aesthetic decision. He speaks very highly of this feature, and to a degree I can see why.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

I'm not sure it is all that big a deal as it is made out to be.

Of course, I haven't played much at igher levels where crit-fishing comes into its own, and the damage increase from SW begind to matter.

Of course, I'm quite invested in the visuals of my character, and I'm not likely to ever go with something as silly-looking as a scimitar or a falchion unless I have a warrior I can envision using them.

As for the questions:
1: A or C, don't care which, but B is a mess.
2: A, obviously.
3: I've only played with option C. All I can say is that rolling 1d8 for my armor spikes was sort of cool, but It didn't really make for much of a difference.

That said, now that we get the freedom to choose, I think it might be reasonable to scratch the damage increase. Since we get to pick what we want, nobody is in a tight spot they can't get out of, unless they put themselves in that spot. The problem with the original class was that it pretty arbitrarily stuck some warpriests in a tight spot, while others got on fine.

This problem only really needed one of two fixes, and I think giving them both is a mistake, as it leads to new problems.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

1.

C is probably easiest to use, to be honest, but not much easier than A. B is a little hard to wrap your head around, it seems to me.

2.
I am going to call B the most balanced, maybe. The original damage and weapon rules ostensibly took into account damage balanced against other effects. A is then close behind it in balance; it only fails at being the best because people will then start building to acquire specific weapon qualities that are probably partially balanced with damage. Then I think C is the most unbalanced, but still not horrible.

3.
I am gonna call it
B
A
C
For my purposes.

I'd have trouble choosing between A and B.

I would still maybe just recommend flat damage bonuses for favored weapons, though. Then maybe some good class-specific bonus feats for gods that favor (generally weaker) simple weapons and monk weapons.


monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arae Garven wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

That said, now that we get the freedom to choose, I think it might be reasonable to scratch the damage increase. Since we get to pick what we want, nobody is in a tight spot they can't get out of, unless they put themselves in that spot. The problem with the original class was that it pretty arbitrarily stuck some warpriests in a tight spot, while others got on fine.

This problem only really needed one of two fixes, and I think giving them both is a mistake, as it leads to new problems.

Except that then Warpriest who actually want to use their favored weapon (when it's an "underpowered" choice) are back where they started. I suggested this earlier in the thread, but I think it might make sense to put the damage increase only on your actual favored weapon, and let other sacred weapons fall where they may. Then you're encouraged to use your favored weapon, but other weapons are still a good choice (greatsword still smashes faces).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.


AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.

I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.

Yes, but if the Brawler (and his weaker Dad, the Monk) are supposed to be the best face puncher classes, and sort of deigned around that premise, it'd be a shame if the Warpriest just came along and did everything they do, better.

It's enough the Warpriest gets scaling weapon damage. Up until the revision it was a Monk only, then Monk/Brawler thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tels wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.
I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.

We just need some kind of archetype that loses armor proficiency and gains wisdom to AC, and we could make some pretty awesome Warpriests of Irori.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.

Yes, but if the Brawler (and his weaker Dad, the Monk) are supposed to be the best face puncher classes, and sort of deigned around that premise, it'd be a shame if the Warpriest just came along and did everything they do, better.

It's enough the Warpriest gets scaling weapon damage. Up until the revision it was a Monk only, then Monk/Brawler thing.

That sounds like an argument to make monk unarmed strikes better, not make warpriest's attacks weaker.


Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.
I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.
We just need some kind of archetype that loses armor proficiency and gains wisdom to AC, and we could make some pretty awesome Warpriests of Irori.

-_-

You must be one of Cosmo's minions.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.

Yes, but if the Brawler (and his weaker Dad, the Monk) are supposed to be the best face puncher classes, and sort of deigned around that premise, it'd be a shame if the Warpriest just came along and did everything they do, better.

It's enough the Warpriest gets scaling weapon damage. Up until the revision it was a Monk only, then Monk/Brawler thing.

That sounds like an argument to make monk unarmed strikes better, not make warpriest's attacks weaker.

Not exactly. I'd just prefer the 'unarmed specialist' classes not get outshined by someone who isn't designed to be an unarmed specialist. If this means buffing Monk/Brawler unarmed strikes, I'm fine with that. As the thousands of Monk threads can attest, unarmed strikes are generally awful weapons, partly in due to the increased enhancement cost, and partly due to the horrendous crits.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tels wrote:
Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.
I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.
We just need some kind of archetype that loses armor proficiency and gains wisdom to AC, and we could make some pretty awesome Warpriests of Irori.

-_-

You must be one of Cosmo's minions.

What's Cosmo's favored weapon?


Just wanted to pop in real quick.

When I saw the initial class design for Warpriest, I immediately dismissed it. Not my preferred playstyle, and not my preferred flavor. There wasn't anything about the Warpriest that really made it stand out or be worthy of notice. It looked appreciably underpowered. To be honest, I thought the class was a mess.

The revised Warpriest has me sitting up and paying attention. The class has really come into its own. I genuinely want to play it now, and look forward to having a Warpriest in the party. I'll be interested to see what this class looks like as a finished product.

Good job! Keep up the good work!


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

A is the least math and best for balance. I vote A.


Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.

Yes, but if the Brawler (and his weaker Dad, the Monk) are supposed to be the best face puncher classes, and sort of deigned around that premise, it'd be a shame if the Warpriest just came along and did everything they do, better.

It's enough the Warpriest gets scaling weapon damage. Up until the revision it was a Monk only, then Monk/Brawler thing.

That sounds like an argument to make monk unarmed strikes better, not make warpriest's attacks weaker.
Not exactly. I'd just prefer the 'unarmed specialist' classes not get outshined by someone who isn't designed to be an unarmed specialist. If this means buffing Monk/Brawler unarmed strikes, I'm fine with that. As the thousands of Monk threads can attest, unarmed strikes are generally awful weapons, partly in due to the increased enhancement cost, and partly due to the horrendous crits.

I am just saying that this warpriest with a knife or gauntlet spikes will be STRICTLY better than the warpriest with her fist. In that case, we still have the warpriest strictly outperforming the monk. She just isn't doing it with bare hands at that particular second. What does the actual bare fist matter?


Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.
I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.
We just need some kind of archetype that loses armor proficiency and gains wisdom to AC, and we could make some pretty awesome Warpriests of Irori.

-_-

You must be one of Cosmo's minions.

What's Cosmo's favored weapon?

Calamity.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

C.

From a DPR perspective, you have weapons that do 5% (20/x2), 10% (19-20/x2,20/x3), 15% (18-20/x2,20/x4), and 20% (19-20/x3) more damage with crits. I think we should ignore the 5% group since this includes mainly simple weapons, and the 20% group since this is a group of one (Falcata) that takes feats to get. So the majority of people will be choosing either 10% or 15% more crit damage. People make a far bigger deal of crits than they should. Huge scythe crits are fun, but static damage is far more important.

Adding the scaling damage, and the ability to make any weapon Sacred, removed damage dice envy and made deity choice flavorful, as it should be.


RtrnofdMax wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

C.

From a DPR perspective, you have weapons that do 5% (20/x2), 10% (19-20/x2,20/x3), 15% (18-20/x2,20/x4), and 20% (19-20/x3) more damage with crits. I think we should ignore the 5% group since this includes mainly simple weapons, and the 20% group since this is a group of one (Falcata) that takes feats to get. So the majority of people will be choosing either 10% or 15% more crit damage. People make a far bigger deal of crits than they should. Huge scythe crits are fun, but static damage is far more important.

Adding the scaling damage, and the ability to make any weapon Sacred, removed damage dice envy and made deity choice flavorful, as it should be.

I think if you do the math, two-handing falcatas maximizes expected damage already. Giving them great sword damage exasperates the problem.


Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:
Excaliburproxy wrote:
Tels wrote:

Obligatory Monk Post!

If 'A' is chosen (all Sacred weapons have same crit range) what would you choose Jason?

I ask, because, if the default becomes 19-20/x2 how does this interact with Improved Critical? If it doubles to 17-20/x2, it would make the Warpriest the best unarmed class in the game.

Brawlers and Monks would cry for a 17-20 crit range on their unarmed strikes.

This is acceptable if they worship the god of punching monsters right square in their dumb monster jowls.

Yes, but if the Brawler (and his weaker Dad, the Monk) are supposed to be the best face puncher classes, and sort of deigned around that premise, it'd be a shame if the Warpriest just came along and did everything they do, better.

It's enough the Warpriest gets scaling weapon damage. Up until the revision it was a Monk only, then Monk/Brawler thing.

That sounds like an argument to make monk unarmed strikes better, not make warpriest's attacks weaker.
Not exactly. I'd just prefer the 'unarmed specialist' classes not get outshined by someone who isn't designed to be an unarmed specialist. If this means buffing Monk/Brawler unarmed strikes, I'm fine with that. As the thousands of Monk threads can attest, unarmed strikes are generally awful weapons, partly in due to the increased enhancement cost, and partly due to the horrendous crits.
I am just saying that this warpriest with a knife or gauntlet spikes will be STRICTLY better than the warpriest with her fist. In that case, we still have the warpriest strictly outperforming the monk. She just isn't doing it with bare hands at that particular second. What does the actual bare fist matter?

My point was, if Sacred Weapon damage is standardized, then all Sacred weapons, be they crossbows, greatswords, battle ladders or unarmed strikes, will have the same damage, and the same crit range.

If, for example, the crit range is standardized to 19-20/x2, then a Warpriest could possibly take Improved Critical, to get 17-20/x2 on with their weapon of choice. A Brawler/Monk who uses his fists, can only ever have a 19-20/x2 crit range, at best, but deals 2d10 (average 11) points of damage. A Warpriest could have 17-20/x2 cirts, but deals 2d8 (average 9) damage on a hit. The Warpriest may deal 2 points less damage on a hit, but it also has a 10% higher chance of threatening a critical.

With Sacred Weapon properties an flat enhancement bonus, the Warpriest can afford permanent bonuses on his AoMF, and then further enhance his weapon for free. A Warpirest could have a +5 flaming frost shock holy unarmed strike (+3 holy AoMF, +2 fire, frost, shock from Sacred Weapon), while a Brawler/Monk could only have up to a +5 equivalent unarmed strike.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

1. Easiest to use would be C by far.

2. The most balanced is A but it also the most boring.
3. C would be most fun and easiest to use.

Option B is bound to cause confusion on the table, frankly anything which slows down gameplay is not fun in my opinion.


Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

1. I'm going back and forth on this, but for now I'm going to say C. The very slight problem with A is that you've now added a second variable to the mix. Say I have a kukri as my sacred weapon - low damage, great crit. The way the ability currently works I can choose to keep my original weapon damage. In this revised version would that apply for my critical range/multiplier as well? Or is it an all or nothing proposition?

2. I think A is the most balanced. How could it not be? Everything is exactly the same! In my opinion, that also makes it the most boring.

3. C.

Arae Garven wrote:

That said, now that we get the freedom to choose, I think it might be reasonable to scratch the damage increase. Since we get to pick what we want, nobody is in a tight spot they can't get out of, unless they put themselves in that spot. The problem with the original class was that it pretty arbitrarily stuck some warpriests in a tight spot, while others got on fine.

This problem only really needed one of two fixes, and I think giving them both is a mistake, as it leads to new problems.

I think the damage increase should be retained, but only if weapon focus is taken for the deity's favored weapon, and then only for that weapon. That way both sides of the previous debate get a bone thrown their way. Those who want choice now have it, while those who want the flavor of using their deity's favored weapon get a substantial, but not overpowering, boon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was so uninterested in this class after the initial playtest that I kinda totally ignored it.

I just have one question. Do I get a cookie?


Okay. There is already a built in mechanic for favoring the Deity's Weapon.

You automatically get to apply Sacred Weapon to it without Weapon Focus.

I like that despite whatever other training the Warpriest does, he can always rely on his Deity's Favored Weapon as a result of Sacred Weapon damage increase and the BAB that comes with it.

Shadow Lodge

Scavion wrote:

Okay. There is already a built in mechanic for favoring the Deity's Weapon.

You automatically get to apply Sacred Weapon to it without Weapon Focus.

I like that despite whatever other training the Warpriest does, he can always rely on his Deity's Favored Weapon as a result of Sacred Weapon damage increase and the BAB that comes with it.

That's not really favoring it though, because you also get Weapon focus for free, (and I could be wrong, but I don't think they confirmed that that was how they meant it to work, and just didn't catch it for the Deity's Favored Weapon).

Shadow Lodge

LoneKnave wrote:

I was so uninterested in this class after the initial playtest that I kinda totally ignored it.

I just have one question. Do I get a cookie?

While you are not the first I think, sure, here's a digital cookie. :)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

1) A or C
2) A
3) A

That said for A. I would prefer if weapons with high threat ranges (18-20, 19-20) normalized to 19-20/x2 and everything else normalized to 20/x3, rather than just have everything normalize to one or the other (and yes, this means falcatas would normalize to 19-20/x2). That way there would still be some differentiation between weapons other than their special features.


Okay, or drop the part about requiring the weapon focus, but still have the damage increase only apply to the favored weapon. Full BAB would still apply to any weapon affected by sacred weapon.

It just seems like there is some concern that giving the damage increase to any sacred weapon will lead to an imbalance. I personally don't agree with that line of thinking, but it seems to exist. Since I think the intent of the damage increase was to make sub-par favored weapons more desirable, it seems reasonable to restrict it to only those weapons if we're needing a compromise. Which maybe we don't.


OMNOMNOMNOMNOM

Also, just by virtue of essentially ALWAYS having full BAB, warpriests of irori already beat monks in, like, all the stuff you can do after moving. If they picked up Stunning fist, they'd actually have a higher chance landing it just by virtue of having more BAB after moving.

Sovereign Court

Excaliburproxy wrote:

I think if you do the math, two-handing falcatas maximizes expected damage already. Giving them great sword damage exasperates the problem.

Sure, but everyone has that choice. This class is not the place balance Falcatas.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

A is the best idea overall, as it makes sacred weapons more of a style decision, rather than a rush towards 18-20/x2 and 20/x4 (and falcatas, ugh), which is one of the coolest things about a Warpriest. When you see a battle cleric of certain deities, you laugh a little bit if they have a terrible weapon, but with a Warpriest of, say, Desna or Nethys, they might kick your butt with that Starknife or Quarterstaff! A makes them not both just reach for the dual-wielding kukris or what-have-you.

I recommend 19-20/x2 over 20/x3 because I've found it usually plays better with on-crit effects and less swinginess, though allowing the Warpriest to choose 20/x3 would be fine too. Also, if the warpriest chooses to take the original weapon damage instead of the special damage, they should get back the original multiplier (in case they are praying to Lord Zyphus for an accidental death with a x4 crit because anything less means they die).


LoneKnave wrote:

OMNOMNOMNOMNOM

Also, just by virtue of essentially ALWAYS having full BAB, warpriests of irori already beat monks in, like, all the stuff you can do after moving. If they picked up Stunning fist, they'd actually have a higher chance landing it just by virtue of having more BAB after moving.

I know :(

Hence me bringing up the standardized crit range. Even if weapons keep their own crit range, the Warpriest is a better face puncher than the Brawler/Monk as is, by virtue of self-buffing alone.

Silver Crusade

Balgin wrote:
teribithia9 wrote:
Captain K. wrote:

It's too powerful.

It's better than the Paladin. This ain't right.

It has 6th level spells so it will always be better than the Paladin in most ways, but don't make it better at fighting than us good guys.

A Warpriest of Iomedae is probably a better warrior than a Paladin of Iomadae. This isn't right.

It doesn't get smite.

You just can't beat smite.
I don't know. Personally I prefer Bastion of Good from the Sacred Shield archetype myself (especially with the class features that come after it and the right skills & feat selection :)). Playing an old school paladin instead of one of the angry aggressive impatient ones who just want to hit everything all the time.

Even if you want to play a defensive shield-wielding paladin, you're better off with the base weapon bond. Shield Mastery is a thing, and it's cheaper to just buy armor enhancement for your shield than to enhance it as a weapon, so you use the divine bond for the second one and end up just as effective for half the price. :)

Silver Crusade

Rogue Eidolon wrote:

[A] is the best idea overall, as it makes sacred weapons more of a style decision, rather than a rush towards 18-20/x2 and 20/x4 (and falcatas, ugh), which is one of the coolest things about a Warpriest. When you see a battle cleric of certain deities, you laugh a little bit if they have a terrible weapon, but with a Warpriest of, say, Desna or Nethys, they might kick your butt with that Starknife or Quarterstaff! [A] makes them not both just reach for the dual-wielding kukris or what-have-you.

I recommend 19-20/x2 over 20/x3 because I've found it usually plays better with on-crit effects and less swinginess, though allowing the Warpriest to choose 20/x3 would be fine too. Also, if the warpriest chooses to take the original weapon damage instead of the special damage, they should get back the original multiplier (in case they are praying to Lord Zyphus for an accidental death with a x4 crit because anything less means they die).

This. All of this. I don't want to feel that I'm making the "wrong" mechanical choice for my Warpriest of Desna by not dual-wielding Kukris.

Sovereign Court

Joe M. wrote:


This. All of this. I don't want to feel that I'm making the "wrong" mechanical choice for my Warpriest of Desna by not dual-wielding Kukris.

Are you making the wrong choice if you don't take Improved Critical at 11th?


RtrnofdMax wrote:
Joe M. wrote:


This. All of this. I don't want to feel that I'm making the "wrong" mechanical choice for my Warpriest of Desna by not dual-wielding Kukris.
Are you making the wrong choice if you don't take Improved Critical at 11th?

Yes... you should have got Keen at 7th.

Contributor

Tels wrote:
Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
Shadar Aman wrote:
Tels wrote:
AndIMustMask wrote:
monks would cry for a great many things that let them actually pull off the unarmed combat bit (or really any combat bit, zen archer and tetori notwithstanding), tels. decent crit range is just one of them.
I'm well aware, but I felt someone had to point it out. I don't know if it will factor into the Warpriest design, but it should at least be mentioned.
We just need some kind of archetype that loses armor proficiency and gains wisdom to AC, and we could make some pretty awesome Warpriests of Irori.

-_-

You must be one of Cosmo's minions.

What's Cosmo's favored weapon?
Calamity.

Oddjob's Top Hat.


DM Beckett wrote:
Scavion wrote:

Okay. There is already a built in mechanic for favoring the Deity's Weapon.

You automatically get to apply Sacred Weapon to it without Weapon Focus.

I like that despite whatever other training the Warpriest does, he can always rely on his Deity's Favored Weapon as a result of Sacred Weapon damage increase and the BAB that comes with it.

That's not really favoring it though, because you also get Weapon focus for free, (and I could be wrong, but I don't think they confirmed that that was how they meant it to work, and just didn't catch it for the Deity's Favored Weapon).

Uhm what? Its right there in the wording. What do you mean that wasn't how they meant it to work. I don't see how you're not supposed to read it like "I get my Deity's Favored Weapon automatically with it, AND I get a free weapon focus to get another Sacred Weapon or make my default one better."

"In addition to the
favored weapon of his deity, the warpriest can designate
a weapon as a sacred weapon by selecting that weapon
with the Weapon Focus feat (if he has multiple Weapon
Focus feats, this ability applies to all of them)."


I am playtesting a Warpriest of Asmodeus in the Way of the Wicked campaign. I love the new direction of this class.

My sacred weapons are Mace (deities weapon) and Great Sword.

My only big question ... why is there so much effort and discussion going into the sacred weapon scaling damage? Is this even needed to enhance the class? My opinion is that if you just removed the entire issue of sacred weapon damage scaling, this class would still stand solid on it's own with just the full BAB with sacred weapon and the new fervor mechanic. scaling damage just overcomplicates, and opens the door for errata's and band-aid fixes. It really just seems not worth the effort in this one area. Just my opinion of course, but I see far too much brain power going into an ability that really doesn't even seem like it's a defining feature of the class.

I would love to see efforts focus on improving or removing blessings, reducing MAD from 4 down to 3 (preferably all going to wisdom) and adding a few feats that build on the amazing mechanic called "fervor"

Slight tweaks and improvements on those three areas and I honestly think this class is wrapped up in a pretty bow and called a "win" for Pathfinder.

Shadow Lodge

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

So, question for the crowd concerning Sacred Weapon and crits...

A. All sacred weapons have a standard crit range and multiplier (19-20/x2 or maybe 20/x3)?

B. Whenever a sacred weapon scores a crit, all of the additional damage is based off the original weapon damage?

C. It works as is (weapon damage scales, crit stats are drawn from the weapon, which means some will crit more often, but only for x2, others rarely but for x3)

So....

1. Which is easiest to use?
2. Which is the most balanced?
3. Which is the most fun?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

I vote for idea C. Not because it rewards powergaming and optimization, and makes all high critical threat range/multipliers clearly superior for the class (at higher levels), but because it is the simplest solution IMO, without having all warpriests do the same damage at a certain level (1d10/19-20/x2 or x3). Or the hidden idea D that critical stats could scale with level like damage die does.

Silver Crusade

Malthule wrote:

I am playtesting a Warpriest of Asmodeus in the Way of the Wicked campaign. I love the new direction of this class.

My sacred weapons are Mace (deities weapon) and Great Sword.

My only big question ... why is there so much effort and discussion going into the sacred weapon scaling damage? Is this even needed to enhance the class? My opinion is that if you just removed the entire issue of sacred weapon damage scaling, this class would still stand solid on it's own with just the full BAB with sacred weapon and the new fervor mechanic. scaling damage just overcomplicates, and opens the door for errata's and band-aid fixes. It really just seems not worth the effort in this one area. Just my opinion of course, but I see far too much brain power going into an ability that really doesn't even seem like it's a defining feature of the class. I'd probably be happy with 1d6/19-20, bump to 1d8 at lvl 4 when you get the weapon boost ability.

I would love to see efforts focus on improving or removing blessings, reducing MAD from 4 down to 3 (preferably all going to wisdom) and adding a few feats that build on the amazing mechanic called "fervor"

Slight tweaks and improvements on those three areas and I honestly think this class is wrapped up in a pretty bow and called a "win" for Pathfinder.

Well, *some* damage boost is needed, for the dagger favored weapons. But good point that it probably doesn't need to *scale*, really.

[EDIT: I mean, I would be happy with 1d8/19-20, or 1d6/19-20 bumping to 1d8 at a certain point, maybe lvl 4 with the weapon boost. If we could get other abilities instead of the damage scaling, or more fervor ... That might be a nice swap!]

Other folks: is that right?


what about no scaling with a crit threshold improvement. It will have a larger impact overall and won't power up high crit weapons?

501 to 550 of 847 << first < prev | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Class Guide Playtest / Class Discussion / Revised Warpriest Discussion All Messageboards