| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Working on house rules for classes thought I'd post what I have so far in case anyone is interested.
Barbarian
Rage Points: Instead of x times/rage certain rage powers instead consume extra rounds of rage.
Barbarians also get 3 extra rounds of rage per level not just 2
Core Rulebook
Guarded Stance(1 round of rage per round instead of one use for Con rounds, cannot use with rolling dodge)
Clear Mind (2 rounds of rage, can only be used once per save)
Mighty Swing(6 rounds of rage)
Moment of Clarity(no cost can simply be used as many times as you want)
No Escape(1 round of rage)
Powerful Blow(1 round of rage)
Rolling Dodge(1 round or rage per round instead of one use for Con rounds, cannot use with guarded stance)
Strength Surge(2 rounds for a strength check, 4 rounds for a combat maneuver)
Surprise Accuracy(1 rounds of rage per 4 levels)
Unexpected Strike(4 rounds of rage)
APG
Elemental Rage, Lesser(2 rounds of rage)
Energy Eruption (8 rounds of rage)
Energy Resistance Greater (4 rounds of rage)
Flesh Wound(5 rounds of rage)
Ground Breaker(3 rounds of rage)
Knockdown(1 round of rage, only once per round)
Smasher(1 round of rage)
UC
Auspicious Mark(3 rounds of rage)
Eater of Magic(5 rounds of rage)
Hive Totem Toxicity(4 rounds or fage for the poison bite)
Spell Sunder(3 rounds of rage)
Sprint(2 rounds of rage)
Fighter
4+int skill points, Acrobatics, Diplomacy, Heal, are class skills (as the tactician archetype APG)
All feats which apply bonuses when using a single weapon apply to the entire weapon group for fighters
Favored Class option: Gain Exotic Weapon Proficiency as a free feat
Bravery is replaced by Unflinching, the bonus applies to all Will saves (as unbreakable archetype UC).
Most Fighter Archetype Powers can be Taken as Fighter Only Feat Trees.
Monk
Light armor does not interfere with monk abilities
Flurry of Blows: This no longer functions as two weapon fighting, instead whenever the monk makes a full attack he may choose to take a -2 penalty to all attacks made and gain an extra attack at his highest base attack bonus (BAB), this attack must be made with a monk weapon or an unarmed strike (note the normal attacks can be made with any weapon). At 8th level he can make an additional unarmed attack at his full BAB -5, and at 15th yet another at his full BAB -10. If used with the two weapon fighting feat all the flurry bonus attacks must be unarmed attacks and the penalties stack. A monk still treats his monk BAB as equal to his monk level when flurrying.
Example a 20th level monk who we shall call Raphael has the normal, improved, and greater two weapon fighting feats. Wielding a sai in each hand he decides to flurry and use two weapon fighting. He gets –2 to all attacks for two weapon fighting and -2 to all attacks for flurrying taking only has BAB and those penalties into account he gets +16/+11/+6/+1 with his main hand sai, +16/+11/+6 with his off-hand sai, and +16/+11/+6 unarmed attacks. Yes that’s ten attacks but he is a level 20 so why the balls not. He is also a turtle.
Magus
Spellstrike now uses the weapons critical multiplier in addition to the weapon's threat range
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like those Fighter changes, although making Bravery apply to all Will saves just means the Fighter has a good Will progression... it also kind of makes all archetypes worse, as replacing bravery =! replacing Unflinching.
Perhaps give the good Will saves baseline and replace Bravery with Master At Arms: At the intervals where Bravery grows, you get Exotic Weapon Proficiency as a bonus feat. This would replace the grossly overpowered FCB of one feat per level and it would give some power back to archetypes.
Not well versed enough with Barbs to talk about that.
The Monk changes need some math done before I know how much better the Monk gets.
The Magus change seems nice, making more weapons viable, a 4x is still worse than a regular 18-20/2x, statistically.
Waiting for the Rogue changes now!
|
I like the idea for the barbarian; it seems a graceful solution to ragecycling. Not sure about the exact numbers, but the principle looks elegant.
Fighter: I like the FCB idea. Generally on board about skills, although personally I allow more flexible choice of additional class skills. Especiall knowledges; fighters can/should know what they're fighting and how to do that.
Monk: looks a bit too fiddly for my tastes. I think flurry works okay right now.
Magus: hmm, I never before realized the spell's critical modifier was capped. I suppose this'll open the door to Falcata Kensai though. Not sure if it's an improvement balance-wise, but it'd break the monotony of dervish dancers I guess.
Seems great, though some of the Barbarian Rage Power seem highly overpriced.
Especially Hive Totem Toxicity and Energy Eruption. Both aren't really powerful kinda situational and I would prefer other powers. In most cases Full Attacking will be much superior to releasing Energy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not so sure about giving the monk 10 attacks. Not just for power, but because it'll take forever to make 10 attack rolls, each one having a different attack bonus. It already does when the monk only has about 3 or 4.
Even though the magus is my favorite class in the game, letting spells use the modifier of his weapon feels really unnecessary. The magus is already really good at novaing.
Can you explain your reasoning behind the changes? Houserules are only as good as the reason for having them in the first place.
I love the Barbarian changes and have done something similar, though only with the "pounce" from the Beast Totem line. I think with a little experimentation/testing, we'll be using your idea of all of them keying off the pool of rage rounds with a slight increase to rage gains as you suggest.
I love the Barbarian changes and have done something similar, though only with the "pounce" from the Beast Totem line. I think with a little experimentation/testing, we'll be using your idea of all of them keying off the pool of rage rounds with a slight increase to rage gains as you suggest.
I believe when Pathfinder was first being developed they had rage points which essentially worked like this but it got scrapped last minute leaving us with the current system which leads to rage cycling.
As for the values for most of them i made the rounds of rage consumed equal to the level requirement for the rage power /2. Not sure if it will work out but when I get a chance I'll playtest it.
Just to make a note: The Unflinching class feature from the Unbreakable archetype applies only to mind affecting effects, not to all will saves (it's still better than the regular bravery feature).
Ah I missed that, well I'll say it's inspired by the unflinching class feature then.
I'm not so sure about giving the monk 10 attacks. Not just for power, but because it'll take forever to make 10 attack rolls, each one having a different attack bonus. It already does when the monk only has about 3 or 4.
Even though the magus is my favorite class in the game, letting spells use the modifier of his weapon feels really unnecessary. The magus is already really good at novaing.
Can you explain your reasoning behind the changes? Houserules are only as good as the reason for having them in the first place.
Fighter
I like the weaponmaster flavor of the class but it is slightly underpowered compared to it's cousin the barbarian. The main power "bonus feats" is underwhelming especially since there are not a huge number of fighter only feats.Giving them some more skills gives them a little bit more out of combat utility, giving them some will save bonuses makes them comparable to the barbarian with superstitious.
The most substantial change is the last sentence about the fighter. The archetype powers are cool I just make most of them available as fighter only feats this gives the fighter a few more upper level fighting style options without locking them into one or the other, aka they can get the benefits of most fighter archetypes by spending feats and don't need to limit themselves to one archetype... or at least that is the goal.
Monk
I don't really like monks. That said I do like the idea of the martial artist warrior I just think they should be encouraged to use real weapons like swords. "monk" weapons were historically developed because the powers that be took away all the swords not because a nunchaku is actually a comparable weapon. I may be putting too much of my own bias into the game but rather than simply banning monks I am trying to find a class that I feel happy with in my world.
This version of flurry of blows allows them to make additional unarmed or monk weapon attacks as part of a full attack, I think of it as comparable to the bite attack a barbarian can get while raging. The idea is essentially that a monk knows how to incorporate martial arts into their traditional fighting. So they use a katana or a spear as their main weapon but throw in punches or kicks as well. I might have a caveat that only experience players or those with color coded die may play a monk but it's really only two more attacks than say a duel wielding barbarian with the bite rage power would have and by the time we would get up to such high levels even an inexperienced player would have become experienced.
With the slayer and brawler coming out imminently I might need to rethink this house rule or just ban monks again.
Magus
I think the critical system is one of the best designed little parts of the game. The weapons feel different but statistically they have equivalent damage output.
15% chance of double damage = 5% chance of quadruple damage
10% chance of double damage = 5% chance of triple damage
Obviously the weapons with worse critical stats have better base damage to compensate.
Having the Magus power take the weapons crit range but not the multiplier breaks this beautiful system and for no apparent reason encourages all magus players to choose high crit probability weapons over high crit multiplier weapons. This change does not change average damage output at all it just concentrates it the same way switching from a longsword to a battleaxe does.
Also Dwarf Magus crafters. Dwarf Magus crafters everywhere!
Seems great, though some of the Barbarian Rage Power seem highly overpriced.
Especially Hive Totem Toxicity and Energy Eruption. Both aren't really powerful kinda situational and I would prefer other powers. In most cases Full Attacking will be much superior to releasing Energy.
Yes I just used level requirement /2 to determine the cost but that does seem a little high, I will probably need to rethink the pricing method.
Fighter
I agree that the fighter should get options that give them more things to do rather than merely improve what they can already do at first level. However, I'm not crazy about giving them Diplomacy as this is explicitly a class all about being a hardened warrior, not a diplomatic champion,which is more of a cavalier/paladin thing. Acrobatics and Heal make sense -- a warrior should be familiar with different types of injuries and how to treat them. Exotic Weapon Proficiency doesn't really work for a favored class bonus, which should be a per-level bonus. Getting 1/6 of a bonus feat makes more sense. Alternatively, it could be a fighter-only trait.
Monk
I feel your bias and lack of vision for the monk really shows in this houserule. It doesn't really solve any of the issues that make the monk less fun to play. However, I do agree flurry of blows needs a rewrite for clarity.
One of the things I like about the monk is that it's best they use weapons at early levels, but their bodies gradually become more powerful than manufactured weapons. That being said, I wish monk weapons had more variety and that ki focus wasn't so expensive.
Having the Magus power take the weapons crit range but not the multiplier breaks this beautiful system and for no apparent reason encourages all magus players to choose high crit probability weapons over high crit multiplier weapons. This change does not change average damage output at all it just concentrates it the same way switching from a longsword to a battleaxe does.
"No apparent reason?" They prevented x3 and x4 times multipliers because of game balance. Spellstrike is already insanely strong as is. Getting a 30d6 or 40d6 out of a 2nd level spell (assuming intensified shocking grasp) is pretty ridiculous, even for a lesser critical range. Also remember that a magus has the option to augment the spell with metamagic such as empowered and maximize spell. The nova is way out of hand for a class I already consider pretty darn good.
I do agree with you about the critical system, and also would like to see some changes that encourage more variety than scimitars and katanas. However, I feel there are better solutions than directly adding a lot more power to an already powerful class.
FighterI agree that the fighter should get options that give them more things to do rather than merely improve what they can already do at first level. However, I'm not crazy about giving them Diplomacy as this is explicitly a class all about being a hardened warrior, not a diplomatic champion,which is more of a cavalier/paladin thing. Acrobatics and Heal make sense -- a warrior should be familiar with different types of injuries and how to treat them. Exotic Weapon Proficiency doesn't really work for a favored class bonus, which should be a per-level bonus. Getting 1/6 of a bonus feat makes more sense. Alternatively, it could be a fighter-only trait.
MonkI feel your bias and lack of vision for the monk really shows in this houserule. It doesn't really solve any of the issues that make the monk less fun to play. However, I do agree flurry of blows needs a rewrite for clarity.
One of the things I like about the monk is that it's best they use weapons at early levels, but their bodies gradually become more powerful than manufactured weapons. That being said, I wish monk weapons had more variety and that ki focus wasn't so expensive.
Having the Magus power take the weapons crit range but not the multiplier breaks this beautiful system and for no apparent reason encourages all magus players to choose high crit probability weapons over high crit multiplier weapons. This change does not change average damage output at all it just concentrates it the same way switching from a longsword to a battleaxe does."No apparent reason?" They prevented x3 and x4 times multipliers because of game balance. Spellstrike is already insanely strong as is. Getting a 30d6 or 40d6 out of a 2nd level spell (assuming intensified shocking grasp) is pretty ridiculous, even for a lesser critical range. Also remember that a magus has the option to augment the spell with metamagic such as empowered and maximize spell. The nova is way out of...
Fighter
I intended the favored class option to be taken every level if you want. So a fighter could gain proficiency with a new exotic weapon every level, yest this is more than a normal favored class option but I decided it was worth it for the fighter. As they can only wield one or two at a time this does not really increase power but provides a way for them to have more options and really feel the master of all weapons role.Monk
Probably true I just don't get the class or maybe I am unable to GM a game with one. Three times I have had players start of as a monk and then a few levels later decide to change classes as their PC on paper didn't match what they wanted their PC to be. This was made as an option for those players in particular.
Magus
5% chance of 40d6 is statistically the same as 15% chance of 20d6, so this change does not represent an increase in power.
Assume they have improved critical and hit ten times:
Scimitar: 7 normal hits 10d6, three crits 20d6, total 130d6
Pick: 9 normal hits 10d6, one crit 40d6, total 130d6
If you want to argue that spellstrike is overpowered that is a separate matter. If you want to nerf it then make it only a natural twenty and only double the damage. However using the weapons crit range and not the modifier breaks the symmetry that makes the current crit system good.
A free feat every level is too much for a favored class bonus, even if it's EWP.
The idea behind the monk is a character that tries to discipline themselves, merge flesh, mind, and soul to become a perfect being. Like the typical 3.5e doctrine, the class stays in the realm of an extraordinary real-life person could do in levels 1-5. After that, the monk becomes more superhuman. It loosely ties some concepts of Buddhism into D&D lore. It's a fairly difficult class to build an effective character because they require four ability scores and their 3/4 BAB means they can't get the feats that make them really shine until 3rd level.
An increased critical modifier to spells is an increase of power, because it increases the potential damage ceiling of spells. Even though there's a trade off (less likely to happen), one should not ignore this because a player can augment spells in other ways, such as metamagic. Spells have different standards than basic attacks. You're grossly underestimating the power of increasing a spell's critical modifier.
I never said spellstrike is overpowered. I said it was strong -- it should be, since it's a core class-defining ability. However, I see no sense in making an already fairly powerful ability related to the most powerful class feature in the game (spells) and making it better for a minor point. It's like killing a mosquito with a cannon. You're trying to solve a low stakes problem in a very risky way. For this reason, I disagree with your houserule.
Fighter
...
All feats which apply bonuses when using a single weapon apply to the entire weapon group for fighters
This I like a lot. Might well use this. Thanks!
A free feat every level is too much for a favored class bonus, even if it's EWP.
The idea behind the monk is a character that tries to discipline themselves, merge flesh, mind, and soul to become a perfect being. Like the typical 3.5e doctrine, the class stays in the realm of an extraordinary real-life person could do in levels 1-5. After that, the monk becomes more superhuman. It loosely ties some concepts of Buddhism into D&D lore. It's a fairly difficult class to build an effective character because they require four ability scores and their 3/4 BAB means they can't get the feats that make them really shine until 3rd level.
An increased critical modifier to spells is an increase of power, because it increases the potential damage ceiling of spells. Even though there's a trade off (less likely to happen), one should not ignore this because a player can augment spells in other ways, such as metamagic. Spells have different standards than basic attacks. You're grossly underestimating the power of increasing a spell's critical modifier.
I never said spellstrike is overpowered. I said it was strong -- it should be, since it's a core class-defining ability. However, I see no sense in making an already fairly powerful ability related to the most powerful class feature in the game (spells) and making it better for a minor point. It's like killing a mosquito with a cannon. You're trying to solve a low stakes problem in a very risky way. For this reason, I disagree with your houserule.
First off since we have been going back and forth a bit I want to say thank you for participating in a discussion on my homebrew. If there is a glaring error I would like to know about it and understand it before I use these rules. Hence this post.
Unfortunately I don't see where I am grossly underestimating the power of spell criticals multiplier?
Lets take it to the extreme that I think you are indicating. A Lv. 20 Magus uses his disintegrate spell, with close range, maximize spell, and empower spell magus arcanas for 360 damage. Lets assume he has improved critical or a keen weapon by this point.
So we are comparing 30% chance of dealing 720 damage to a 10% chance of 1440 damage.
Why is 10% chance of 1440 better than 30% chance of 720?
The total damage is higher so he could potentially one hit a big bad but this is always true in the critical system with x4 and x3 weapons and it is generally considered a balanced trade between higher maximum and lower probability. Or if there is a general belief that axes and scythes are overpowered I have never heard it.
So If the magus wants to use up a high spell slot and two of his 1/day abilities to gamble on a critical hit I see no problem with that big potential payoff being there.
A huge factor here would be death by massive damage rules which I and all of the groups I have played with don't use. Of course if they are more common than I thought than that would be a legitimate reason to leave the rule the way it is.
Have I missed something or do we simply disagree on the importance of a damage cap?
A free feat every level is too much for a favored class bonus, even if it's EWP.
I agree that it is a dangerous precedent but I don't see this actually giving a significant power increase in this case. My original idea was to simply give fighters proficiency with all exotic weapons but that would make them too good of a dip class so I tied it with the favored class bonus.
EWP is one of the weakest of all feats that you can take. Statistically, it amounts to +1 damage in most cases.
I simply added +1/2 Training or Combat feats as an FC option. Giving them EWP's was ultimately meaningless, as he's only going to want 1 or 2.
I believe that giving Spec bonuses to an entire weapon group completely defeats the purpose of specialization. A favored weapon is a favored weapon, not a favored weapon GROUP. That said, a TWF should definitely be able to employ it on his pair of weapons, so that sword-dagger, sword-axe, spear-knife, sword-shield and other combos become viable.
I changed Weapon Groups around. You start at level 1 with a Primary Weapon Group...exactly 2 weapons, your primary weapon and one other. You get a +1 damage with those weapons.
Every time your Bravery hits, you add another weapon you are proficient in to your Primary weapon group.
At level 4, you advance to the standard +1/+1, and a weapon group that includes your primary weapon is added to your Primary Weapon Group.
Your Primary Weapon Group thus becomes: Your primary weapon (say, longsword), a secondary weapon (which could be dagger, shield, or longbow, UA, pike...whatever!).
At level 2, you pick any other weapon.
at level 4, you can pick the swords group, and you're good with all swords.
At level 6, you add any other weapon, repeated at 10, 14 and 18.
Thus, your primary weapon group is mainly composed of the weapons you USE, not just a 'group'.
At 8,12, and 16 you pick a Secondary Weapons Group, and your bonus with them is equal to your Primary Weapon group -1. So, you're good with a variety of weapons, but not as good as your primary weapon group.
Weapon Focus/Spec taken the first time is always on your Primary weapon, and doubles your Weapon Training bonus with it. Thus, at first level it grants the +1 of Weapon Focus, and doubles the +1 of Weapon Training, meaning you are +1/+2 with your favorite weapon at level 1! (hehe, shades of 1e!) Yay, Fighter finally gets a damage bonus at level!
If your second weapon is usable at the same time as your primary, it gains the same bonus. At level 4, you become +2/+2, at 8th you are +4/+4, etc.
If you take Weapon Spec a second time, you add +1/+1 to all weapons in your Primary Weapon Group.
If you take it a 3rd time, all weapons in all your Weapon Groups get +1/+1.
So your best weapon is always your best weapon, your primary weapons are always better then your Secondary, and your secondary better then your proficient weapons.
And one of your favored class options is to add a weapon you are proficient in to your Primary Weapons group.
Exotic Weapons Proficiency now lets you be proficient in a number of weapons equal to your Expertise bonus. When your Secondary Weapons Group comes online at 8, all those weapons are in your Secondary Weapons Group.
I love feat synergies playing into one another!
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BTW...if you really want to make weapon groups important, you should seriously think about restricting weapon proficiencies.
I recommend the following:
Proficiency feats allow you to spend skill points to get proficient in a weapon. Thus, taking Martial Weapons Proficency doesn't make you proficient in all martial weapons, it means you can spend a skill point to be proficient in as many weapons as you care to spend for.
1/2 BAB classes start with proficiency in 2 simple weapons, period. They can spend skill points if they want to be proficient in more.
3/4 BAB classes start with all simple weapons, and 2 weapons from their class list of allowed weapons (martial, monk, rogue, whatever). They can spend skill points to acquire more weapon profs from that list.
Full BAB classes are proficient in a number of martial weapons equal to their starting skill points (and all simple weapons), with the exception of the fighter and the paladin, both of whom start with proficiency in ALL martial weapons (the fighter because he has trained with them all, and the paladin as a gift from his empowering patrons, like his armor profs).
This makes that first level of being a Fighter truly valuable. He can pick up any non-exotic weapon and use it, something most of the other martial classes can't do. It also means that other martial classes are going to have favorite weapons from the get go.
Proficiencies actually have some value under this system.
==Aelryinth
EWP is one of the weakest of all feats that you can take. Statistically, it amounts to +1 damage in most cases.
I simply added +1/2 Training or Combat feats as an FC option. Giving them EWP's was ultimately meaningless, as he's only going to want 1 or 2.
I assumed that a fighter would only want a few but didn't want to impose that feat tax on them, everyone else but not the fighter because the fighter is special. If they want to become proficient with all the exotic weapons I decided they should be able to do that easily.
I believe that giving Spec bonuses to an entire weapon group completely defeats the purpose of specialization. A favored weapon is a favored weapon, not a favored weapon GROUP. That said, a TWF should definitely be able to employ it on his pair of weapons, so that sword-dagger, sword-axe, spear-knife, sword-shield and other combos become viable.
Again this is a case of me wanting the fighter to be special. For others they only get focus in one weapon fighters can apply that focus to an entire weapon group.
I changed Weapon Groups around. You start at level 1 with a Primary Weapon Group...exactly 2 weapons, your primary weapon and one other. You get a +1 damage with those weapons.
Every time your Bravery hits, you add another weapon you are proficient in to your Primary weapon group.
At level 4, you advance to the standard +1/+1, and a weapon group that includes your primary weapon is added to your Primary Weapon Group.Your Primary Weapon Group thus becomes: Your primary weapon (say, longsword), a secondary weapon (which could be dagger, shield, or longbow, UA, pike...whatever!).
At level 2, you pick any other weapon.
at level 4, you can pick the swords group, and you're good with all swords.
At level 6, you add any other weapon, repeated at 10, 14 and 18.Thus, your primary weapon group is mainly composed of the weapons you USE, not just a 'group'.
At 8,12, and 16 you pick a Secondary Weapons Group, and your bonus with them is equal to your Primary Weapon group -1. So, you're good with a variety of weapons, but not as good as your primary weapon group.
Weapon Focus/Spec taken the first time is always on your Primary weapon, and doubles your Weapon Training bonus with it. Thus, at first level it grants the +1 of Weapon Focus, and doubles the +1 of Weapon Training, meaning you are +1/+2 with your favorite weapon at level 1! (hehe, shades of 1e!) Yay, Fighter finally gets a damage bonus at
...
This is interesting I'll need to think on this more. I like weapon specialization scaling the fighters weapon training bonus.
BTW...if you really want to make weapon groups important, you should seriously think about restricting weapon proficiencies.
I recommend the following:
Proficiency feats allow you to spend skill points to get proficient in a weapon. Thus, taking Martial Weapons Proficency doesn't make you proficient in all martial weapons, it means you can spend a skill point to be proficient in as many weapons as you care to spend for.1/2 BAB classes start with proficiency in 2 simple weapons, period. They can spend skill points if they want to be proficient in more.
3/4 BAB classes start with all simple weapons, and 2 weapons from their class list of allowed weapons (martial, monk, rogue, whatever). They can spend skill points to acquire more weapon profs from that list.
Full BAB classes are proficient in a number of martial weapons equal to their starting skill points (and all simple weapons), with the exception of the fighter and the paladin, both of whom start with proficiency in ALL martial weapons (the fighter because he has trained with them all, and the paladin as a gift from his empowering patrons, like his armor profs).
This makes that first level of being a Fighter truly valuable. He can pick up any non-exotic weapon and use it, something most of the other martial classes can't do. It also means that other martial classes are going to have favorite weapons from the get go.
Proficiencies actually have some value under this system.
==Aelryinth
I have used the weapon groups alternate rule in the past as in Unearthed Arcana: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/UA:Weapon_Group_Feat
I liked it but never got around to making it mesh with fighter weapon groups in pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have used the weapon groups alternate rule in the past as in Unearthed Arcana: http://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/UA:Weapon_Group_Feat
I liked it but never got around to making it mesh with fighter weapon groups in pathfinder.
I did. My solution was to reorganize the weapon groups (the CRB fighter weapon groups differ from those given by the unearthed arcana rule, so the reorganization is strictly necessary) and declare that the weapon groups used for proficiency are the same as the weapon groups for the fighter's weapon training. Conveniently, a fighter ends up with weapon training 4 (that is, four groups), which is precisely the number of group proficiencies he gets according to that rule.
I've reproduced my weapon groups below. Because both of the original lists differ in some areas, my new list includes a few personal judgement calls. Your mileage may vary.
Fighter Weapon Training
The weapon groups listed here also replace the groups a fighter may choose for his weapon training class feature. In the event that a given weapon appears in more than one weapon group, the bonuses do not stack. The fighter uses the highest bonus from all his weapon groups that include a given weapon.
Weapon Groups for Pathfinder
Axes and Picks: battleaxe, dwarven waraxe (two handed use) greataxe, handaxe, heavy pick, light pick, throwing axe, scythe
Basic Weapons: club, dagger (not thrown), quarterstaff
Blades, Heavy: bastard sword (two handed use), falchion, greatsword, longsword, scimitar, scythe
Blades, Light: dagger, kukri, punching dagger (not thrown), rapier, sickle, short sword, starknife
Bows: composite longbow, composite shortbow, longbow, shortbow
Close*: bayonet, gauntlet, heavy shield bash, light shield bash, punching dagger, sap, spiked armor, spiked gauntlet, spiked shield bash, unarmed strike
Crossbows**: heavy crossbow, light crossbow
Druid: club, dagger, dart, dagger, scimitar, scythe, sickle, shortspear, sling, spear, quarterstaff
Firearms: Blunderbuss, musket, pepperbox, pistol, and all variants
Flails and Chains: flail, heavy flail
Hammers and Maces: club, greatclub, heavy mace, light hammer, light mace, sap, warhammer
Monk*: kama, nunchaku, sai, shuriken, siangham, unarmed strike, quarterstaff
Natural: natural weapons
Pole Arms: glaive, guisarme, halberd, ranseur
Spears: bayonet, javelin, lance, longspear, shortspear, spear, trident
Thrown: blowgun, club, dagger (thrown application), dart, javelin, light hammer, shortspear, sling, spear, starknife, throwing axe, trident
*Note: Both the Close and Monk weapon groups grant proficiency with an unarmed strike. This functions just like the improved unarmed strike feat, and proficiency with either of these groups counts as that feat for the purpose of prerequisites.
**Note on crossbows: If crossbows are to be presented as a viable option (compared to bows), they require a power boost. With that in mind, make the following changes to the rules for crossbows:
Critical: Change the critical for all crossbows to 19-20/x3.
Reinforced Crossbows: Any type of crossbow except a repeating crossbow can be reinforced. All reinforced crossbows are made with a particular strength rating (that is, each requires a minimum Strength modifier to use with proficiency). If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the reinforced crossbow, you can’t effectively use it, so you take a -2 penalty on attacks with it. The default reinforced crossbow requires a Strength modifier of +0 or higher to use with proficiency. Its range is 10 feet greater than a normal crossbow of its type and it costs an additional 50 gp. A reinforced crossbow can be made with a high strength rating to take advantage of an above-average Strength score; this feature allows you to add your Strength bonus to damage, up to the maximum bonus indicated for the crossbow. Each point of Strength bonus granted by the crossbow adds 100 gp to its cost. If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls with a reinforced crossbow.
As normal for the unearthed arcana rule, the exotic weapons proficiency feat gives you proficiency with all exotic weapons that are associated with the weapon groups with which you are proficient. Here is the list of exotic weapons from the CRB by weapon group. It is a fairly easy exercise to add exotic weapons from other sources.
Axes and Picks: dwarven waraxe (one handed use), dwarven urgosh (must also have Weapon Group: Spears), gnome hooked hammer (must also have Weapon Group: Hammers and Maces), orc double axe
Basic Weapons: none
Blades, Heavy: bastard sword (one handed use), two-bladed sword
Blades, Light: elven curve blade, kama, kukri
Bows: none
Close*: none
Crossbows**: hand crossbow, repeating heavy crossbow, repeating light crossbow
Druid: none
Firearms: none
Flails and Chains: bolas, dire flail, spiked chain, whip
Hammers and Maces: gnome hooked hammer (must also have Weapon Group: Axes and Picks)
Monk*: none
Natural: none
Pole Arms: none
Spears: dwarven urgosh (must also have Weapon Group: Axes and Picks)
Thrown: bolas, halfling sling staff, net, shuriken
Otherwise the rule functions pretty much the same. I spelled out some other specifics in my house rule document, but I'll just state them generally here for brevity's sake.
*As a general rule, races with racial weapon familiarity get a single free weapon group that is in addition to those gained by their classes. This may be a choice between two, if their racial familiarity contains weapons from two different groups. If their familiarity contains an exotic weapon, they generally get proficiency with that weapon as long as they have its corresponding weapon group; they do not require EWP for that weapon only.
*As a general rule, classes that gain a specific exotic weapon proficiency (such as the rogue's hand crossbow proficiency) gain proficiency with that weapon if they have the associated weapon group; they do not require EWP for that weapon only.
*As a general rule, characters that gain access to a natural attack (barbarians with a bite attack, druids with wild shape, mages that polymorph), gain Weapon Group: Natural for free at that time. This is not intended to be a feat tax, but is merely listed as a weapon group for the purpose of Weapon Focus and similar feats.
WithoutHisFoot this is great thanks!
I'm still more a fan of the fighter being great with a specific set of weapons he decides to use, rather then a bunch of weapons that are similar to one another.
After all, if the other martial classes get all their bonuses with any weapons they use, shouldn't the fighter get his bonuses with any of the weapons he decides to use frequently, at the very least? As opposed to 'all heavy swords?'
But, YMMV.
==Aelryinth
I'm still more a fan of the fighter being great with a specific set of weapons he decides to use, rather then a bunch of weapons that are similar to one another.
After all, if the other martial classes get all their bonuses with any weapons they use, shouldn't the fighter get his bonuses with any of the weapons he decides to use frequently, at the very least? As opposed to 'all heavy swords?'
But, YMMV.
==Aelryinth
I understand your point but I prefer it flavor wise the other way. Mostly because it synergizes well with my idea of letting feats for fighter effect a whole weapon group instead of a single weapon.
I always felt that the weapon group system was the opposite of what I wanted in a fighter. The fighter class has no versatility out of combat, and I think that it makes sense that the class can basically pick up a sharp stick off the ground and ruin your day. If I were to change the fighter class, it would be to remove weapon training and add class features that modify feats in a way that no other class could emulate.
I always felt that the weapon group system was the opposite of what I wanted in a fighter. The fighter class has no versatility out of combat, and I think that it makes sense that the class can basically pick up a sharp stick off the ground and ruin your day. If I were to change the fighter class, it would be to remove weapon training and add class features that modify feats in a way that no other class could emulate.
True the proficient with all simple and martial weapons makes sense for a fighter, unfortunately it doesn't make sense for anyone else. I tried to add out of combat utility with more skills, this will also go along with a reworked skill system which I posted earlier which makes class skills more powerful and eventually lets them have semi-magical effects, basically filling the role of some limited utility spells. Im still working on that though.
As far as feats that was my intention for allowing fighters to have feats apply to entire weapon groups, I guess it's not a new way so much as more of the same way. Retraining feats would be interesting but I'm not sure that I like it as it seems to depend upon a large degree of system mastery.
More like the fighter gets power attack and is better at it than anyone else, as opposed to free retraining of the feat itself.
More like the fighter gets power attack and is better at it than anyone else, as opposed to free retraining of the feat itself.
Interesting idea. I think I'd rather have for example an improved power attack available only to fighters as a fighter only feat but only because I think it would be easier to implement however since I am doing a whole lot of home brewing right now as I am in between campaigns I will play around with that idea.
I did jump the gun assuming you ment retraining, since the brawler everyone means retraining these days. I apologize.
I am also a fan of flexibility. I cannot recommend enough Rogue Genius Games Talented line. Owen KC Stephens (now on the Paizo team)is the crunchmaster. Talented Fighter, Talented Monk and Talented Barbarian. Coming soon (I hope) Talented Ranger
I'm still more a fan of the fighter being great with a specific set of weapons he decides to use, rather then a bunch of weapons that are similar to one another.
After all, if the other martial classes get all their bonuses with any weapons they use, shouldn't the fighter get his bonuses with any of the weapons he decides to use frequently, at the very least? As opposed to 'all heavy swords?'
You've given me an idea! It relates to the rainex's Bravery thread. I've been paying closer attention to your posts as of late. I don't agree with everything you say, but I find your though process inspiring.
Uhm, not to go all crazy on this one, but I considered making the fighter weapon groups Ranged, One-Handed, Close, Two-handed and Reach.
Also I'm considering making all the Weapon Spec/focus feats apply to all the weapons in the group.
Crazy, I know.
I agree with the second part.
As for the first I prefer it by weapon because you can have multiple fighting styles represented by one weapon group. Two-handed, blade and board, TWF some weapon groups even have ranged options (axes). So they can switch fighting styles without loosing their weapon training bonus. Of course I can clearly see the argument for making it by fighting style instead, could not have it be weapons at all but simply two-handed fighting, shield fighting, two weapon fighting, dueling, and ranged.
The reason I go with weapons instead of weapon groups is because there is inequality between weapons and weapon groups.
The axe group is the most versatile, incorporating thrown, off-hand, blunt, slashing and pierce damage, albeit with the cost of being all 20 x3 weapons.
The sword group basically is slashing damage, with your choice of lower die 18-20/x2 or higher die 19-20/x2. But no thrown option, or off-hand.
Close includes all damage types, is usable for TWF, includes shields for defense, and has thrown weapons. You just have to deal with the smaller die size.
I much prefer the realism of a guy who focuses on Sword and Board for his initial training, picks up longbow for some ranged punch, then longspear/lance for use in a spear line or mounted, then the dagger for emergencies and short range throwing. (shrugs). Those are his PRIMARY weapons...the one he uses all the time and practices the most. Weapon groups by 'type' is for emergencies and versatility, not preference.
I also don't believe in applying weapon spec to lots of weapons. Weapon Spec is the feat that says "I am a master of the longsword." Swordmasters are not equal with the scimitar, rapier, greatsword and longsword...those are all three very different weapons. While a weapon group sums up mastery of those well, weapon spec is about the focus and the favorite.
I handled it by having Weapon Spec double your Weapon Training TH/DMg bonus with your primary weapon (and IMproved Critical at Weapon Training 2). If you take it a second time, it adds +1 to th/dmg for all other weapons in your weapon groups, and also added Improved Critical to all those weapons. I felt that was worthy of a feat spent, considering that you're probably only ever going to get much use out of the Primary Weapons group.
==Aelryinth
Tad irritated with the changes to barbarian elemental powers. Those are supposed to be unlimited use while raging, this actually makes them cost you rage. They were already pretty bad but fun powers. This just makes them worthless.
Elemental Rage and Greater Elemental Rage are still unlimited.
Lesser Elemental Rage changes from once per rage to requiring 2 rounds of rage.
I much prefer the realism of a guy who focuses on Sword and Board for his initial training, picks up longbow for some ranged punch, then longspear/lance for use in a spear line or mounted, then the dagger for emergencies and short range throwing. (shrugs). Those are his PRIMARY weapons...the one he uses all the time and practices the most. Weapon groups by 'type' is for emergencies and versatility, not preference.
I feel that this is adequately modeled by the current gaining weapon training in multiple weapon groups. Sword, bow, spear, close. But really it comes down to personal preference, I like giving fighters the ability to apply combat feats to entire weapon groups and therefore it makes sense to have weapon training line up directly with that. It's a good point about weapon groups not being equal I'll probably need to change them around so that each does represent multiple fighting styles.
I also don't believe in applying weapon spec to lots of weapons. Weapon Spec is the feat that says "I am a master of the longsword." Swordmasters are not equal with the scimitar, rapier, greatsword and longsword...those are all three very different weapons. While a weapon group sums up mastery of those well, weapon spec is about the focus and the favorite.I handled it by having Weapon Spec double your Weapon Training TH/DMg bonus with your primary weapon (and IMproved Critical at Weapon Training 2). If you take it a second time, it adds +1 to th/dmg for all other weapons in your weapon groups, and also added Improved Critical to all those weapons. I felt that was worthy of a feat spent, considering that you're probably only ever going to get much use out of the Primary Weapons group.
I don't have a problem with letting fighters be masters of the sword such that they are equally good with all swords. It's unrealistic but pathfinder is an unrealistic game.
I much prefer the realism of a guy who focuses on Sword and Board for his initial training, picks up longbow for some ranged punch, then longspear/lance for use in a spear line or mounted, then the dagger for emergencies and short range throwing. (shrugs). Those are his PRIMARY weapons...the one he uses all the time and practices the most. Weapon groups by 'type' is for emergencies and versatility, not preference.
I feel that this is adequately modeled by the current gaining weapon training in multiple weapon groups. Sword, bow, spear, close. But really it comes down to personal preference, I like giving fighters the ability to apply combat feats to entire weapon groups and therefore it makes sense to have weapon training line up directly with that. It's a good point about weapon groups not being equal I'll probably need to change them around so that each does represent multiple fighting styles.
I don't have a problem with letting fighters be masters of the sword such that they are equally good with all swords. It's unrealistic but pathfinder is an unrealistic game.
I also don't believe in applying weapon spec to lots of weapons. Weapon Spec is the feat that says "I am a master of the longsword." Swordmasters are not equal with the scimitar, rapier, greatsword and longsword...those are all three very different weapons. While a weapon group sums up mastery of those well, weapon spec is about the focus and the favorite.I handled it by having Weapon Spec double your Weapon Training TH/DMg bonus with your primary weapon (and IMproved Critical at Weapon Training 2). If you take it a second time, it adds +1 to th/dmg for all other weapons in your weapon groups, and also added Improved Critical to all those weapons. I felt that was worthy of a feat spent, considering that you're probably only ever going to get much use out of the Primary Weapons group.
So I have been ruminating on this for the last four hours and I have decided that you are right Aelryinth. Having the fighter pick his weapons does make more sense. I still want to make fighters have feats apply to their entire weapon group though, maybe I'll do something like this.
Weapon Training.
At 5th level the fighter designates two weapons with which he is proficient as favored weapons. When wielding these weapons the fighter gets a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls. At 9th, 13th, and 17th levels the fighter can add one more weapon to his favored weapons list list and additionally the bonus increases by one to a maximum of +4 at 17th level.
I might add..
Additionally any feat which normally applies to a single weapon can instead by applied to the entire favored weapon list.
With Gloves of the Duelist letting Weapon Training get to +6 for the Primary Weapon Group, and +5 for the Secondary Group, I feel that compares favorably to a Barbarian in terms of to-hit and damage.
Weapon Spec means the fighter is going to get +10/+10 with his Primary Weapon, +7 With his Primary Weapon Group, and +6 With his Secondary weapons.
That is more then functional in terms of offensive ability. Especially since it costs only two feats and one magic item.
When you also start adding in things like Improved Power Attack, the Fighter isn't going to have any problems whatsoever with DPR. Indeed, the primary focus of the Techniques I've been designing is not DPR, since the Fighter is okay with those. It's things like his defenses, movement, skills, leadership and some out of combat stuff that makes him actually cool to use outside of combat.
==Aelryinth
Tad irritated with the changes to barbarian elemental powers. Those are supposed to be unlimited use while raging, this actually makes them cost you rage. They were already pretty bad but fun powers. This just makes them worthless.Elemental Rage and Greater Elemental Rage are still unlimited.
Lesser Elemental Rage changes from once per rage to requiring 2 rounds of rage.
Rage is currently valued at an extra round actually providing rage to an animal companion, and 2 extra rage giving them rage and all your rage powers that are non use activated.
What person in their right mind would ever use 1, let alone 2, rounds of rage for an extra 1d6 to all their attacks?
What class/archetype are you referring to? I know the barbarian ability needs adjusted and would be interested in anything that works similarity.
What class/archetype are you referring to? I know the barbarian ability needs adjusted and would be interested in anything that works similarity.Tad irritated with the changes to barbarian elemental powers. Those are supposed to be unlimited use while raging, this actually makes them cost you rage. They were already pretty bad but fun powers. This just makes them worthless.Elemental Rage and Greater Elemental Rage are still unlimited.
Lesser Elemental Rage changes from once per rage to requiring 2 rounds of rage.
Rage is currently valued at an extra round actually providing rage to an animal companion, and 2 extra rage giving them rage and all your rage powers that are non use activated.
What person in their right mind would ever use 1, let alone 2, rounds of rage for an extra 1d6 to all their attacks?
I was slightly off. 1 if they're next to you, and 2 if they're not, giving them your rage powers cost nothing extra at all. Its a rage power available to all barbarians, non totem so it stacks with any and all totem stuff (including beast totem with pounce and such) and the mount will gain all bonuses such as witch hunter, superstition, ghost rager, etc...
There is another set specifically for mounted barbarians as well.
Thanks. For my first attempt at making things cost rounds of rage I just need the cost equal to the barb level tried to take the power /2 I see now that was too simple.
The reason I go with weapons instead of weapon groups is because there is inequality between weapons and weapon groups.
...
I also don't believe in applying weapon spec to lots of weapons. Weapon Spec is the feat that says "I am a master of the longsword." Swordmasters are not equal with the scimitar, rapier, greatsword and longsword...those are all three very different weapons. While a weapon group sums up mastery of those well, weapon spec is about the focus and the favorite.
I use the weapon group proficiency rule because I feel that it adds variety and flavor to my game world that the standard rule cannot. In addition, the rule gives me, as DM, the freedom to drop a greater variety of weapons into the story as loot specifically because it allows players to apply their specializations to more weapons.
I do agree that the greatest of warriors should be specialists, not generalists, and that is a failing of this rule. In my game, however, I can usually accomplish this feel with "flavor text" rather than enforcement by game mechanics. That is, by describing Sir So-and-So as a master of the longspear, and having him fight with a longspear every time the party sees him, they will come to see him as a longspear specialist even though his feats could actually apply equally well to any spear.
The inequality between weapon groups is, as you've pointed out, also a failing of this rule. The differences have not been felt greatly in my own games, but for some groups this is something you may have to worry about. I was trying to keep the number of groups low for simplicity, but a potential solution is to split the offending groups into a greater number of groups (perhaps making a third blades group for Two-Handed Blades, and then similarly splitting Axes and Picks into Light, Heavy, and Two Handed groups, for example). Either way, I will remove the throwing axe from Axes and Picks for my game. That was an oversight on my part.
There is no throwing axe. It's just the hand axe. You can throw hand axes. Just like you can throw daggers. Not having the hand axe in an axe group would be odd. Like not having the club in a mace group...you can throw clubs, too.
I made up a feat just to address this kind of weapon disparity, esp with unique weapons.
Extraordinary Weapon Proficiency
YOu are good with weapons.
20/x2 weapons become 19-20/x2 weapons. (i.e. Simples become martials)
18-20/x2 weapons increase in die one size (d8 to d10, for example)
20/x3 and 19-20/x2 weapons become 19-20/x3 weapons (most martial weapons become falcatas)
20/x4 weapons are unaffected by this feat.
---Which means you now spend one feat to make your weapons statistically pretty identical, and the equal of a Falcata, instead of this crazy range of crits and crit multipliers.
Oh, and you can actually crit with a staff now. Yeah, I know, it's a page from 4e, but the craziness of crit multipliers by weapons just irked me.
==Aelryinth