I wouldn't include a free weapon in that case, but otherwise, sure...
I would class it as a Combat Trait in that case...
I deal with it by making Martial Weapon Proficiency feat grant all Martial weapons, like it does as a class feature.
Would anything break if I made MWP a trait?I deal with it by making Martial Weapon Proficiency feat grant all Martial weapons, like it does as a class feature.PrC would break.
Oh noes. Bad wizards going into Eldritch knight are now slightly less bad. How will the game survive.
Besides, VMC Battle Oracle does the same thing and is 100% rules legal.
Always sort of bugged me that if I was playing a character with nonstandard proficiencies that becoming proficient with a longsword or a bastard sword both had the same cost despite one being clearly better (just as a random example).
Another way to phrase this question I guess would be to ask if letting the first option of the Heirloom Weapon feature apply to any weapon of the same type rather than one specific weapon would break anything.
Not for one martial weapon, no.
The way I see it: MWP is worth less than a feat. Great Fortitude gives you +2 to Fort. Relentless gives you +1 to Fort. Ergo, MWP is somewhere around that power level.
I'd make it a Combat Trait too.
A trait would help Oracle's forex, but not breakingly so
Would anything break if I made MWP a trait?I deal with it by making Martial Weapon Proficiency feat grant all Martial weapons, like it does as a class feature.PrC would break.
So, just Eldritch Knight, since others tend to have pesky BAB requirements.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do you understand the concept of "Heirloom"? Besides, traits aren't supposed to be more powerful than the equivalent of half a feat. What you're asking for clearly oversteps the line.
Another way to phrase this question I guess would be to ask if letting the first option of the Heirloom Weapon feature apply to any weapon of the same type rather than one specific weapon would break anything.
Of course, completely outshadowing MWP isn't such a big deal since MWP is a really bad feat that nobody takes. EWP isn't even worth it most of the time unless you really need a specific weapon's special abilities for a build.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Instead of making it a trait, I made it cost a skill point.
Yes, Zhayne, I can see that or a trait.
Heck, if it was solely for RPing reason I'd just give it to them.
I make EWP a trait, so MWP could be a trait too.
And unless I've missed something crucial in my reading (never seen an EK in play) Eldritch Knight was thoroughly broken when the Magus was released.
Not really; they fill different niches. Magus is someone who blends swordplay with combat magic, eldritch knight is basically a somewhat beefy mage.
Basically, right now, the main cost to become an EK is a loss of two caster levels, and in return you get (over the course of ten levels) +10 hp, +2 Fort, -2 Will, and three bonus feats.
While it is a niche option and generally a powerdown, it's not a _huge_ powerdown, and while a high-level EK will be weaker than a high-level straight wizard, it will still be a powerhouse. Compared to a magus it will probably be on par, better at some stuff and worse than some.
For example, at 18th level, a Wiz7/Ftr1/EK10 will have 8th level spellcasting, and 14 BAB, while a Magus20 will have 6th level spellcasting, 14 BAB, and a whole slew of great special abilities. The Magus will be by far superior in melee combat, but will not have access to stuff like Create Demiplane and Mind Blank and Maximized Empowered Enervation. It's a tradeoff.
Granted, a straight Wiz18 would have 9th level spells while giving up mostly a bit of hit points and three combat feats (though they get 2 magic feats) and BAB, making touch attacks much less reliable (ME Enervation is fantastic against casters, who tends to have decent touch AC unless dragons, and there BAB14 plus weapon focus is definately better than BAB9), and will thus have access to some reeeaaally powerful spells that the EK doesn't have (yet, and never as easily) and the Magus can't even dream of.
Granted, this is at really high levels, and at say level 11 the Wiz5/Ftr1/EK4 is casting 5th level spells while the Magus casts 4th level and the Wizard casts 6th level, while the benefits of the EK compared to wizard is even smaller than at higher levels (1 combat feat vs 1 magic feat; BAB 7 vs BAB 5).
Swapping the cost to one caster level and a feat definately makes it stronger, to the point where I could see it being a little too good - not too good as in "as good for most wizards as straight wizard", but too good for a prestige class (as I'm of the school that prestige classes should be mostly powerful as niche options, though I think EK as a concept doesn't really fit as a prestige class at all, but that's another topic).
So yeah, when people say "the EK sucks", it's a gross oversimplification; it's generally a bit weaker than the most powerful class in the game, but it's still a powerhouse, and it's certainly not straight up weaker than the magus (which is IMO a quite well-balanced class).
In my most recent campaign I noticed that the Aldori Swordlord Fighter archetype doesn't give aldori dueling sword proficiency so I just gave it to the player. Then I was talking to another player and I suggested the sawtooth sabre for dual wielding. So I gave him proficiency too.
It was at that point that I realized MWP and EWP are terrible feats, and I just give out proficiency for story purposes.
Do you understand the concept of "Heirloom"? Besides, traits aren't supposed to be more powerful than the equivalent of half a feat. What you're asking for clearly oversteps the line.
Another way to phrase this question I guess would be to ask if letting the first option of the Heirloom Weapon feature apply to any weapon of the same type rather than one specific weapon would break anything.
Wow somebody is having a bad day. If you Care to explain the concept of "Heirloom" in a Way that make sense for the trait feel free to do so:)
And to the OP it sounds like a exelent trait.
Do you understand the concept of "Heirloom"? Besides, traits aren't supposed to be more powerful than the equivalent of half a feat. What you're asking for clearly oversteps the line.
Another way to phrase this question I guess would be to ask if letting the first option of the Heirloom Weapon feature apply to any weapon of the same type rather than one specific weapon would break anything.
Wow somebody is having a bad day. If you Care to explain the concept of "Heirloom" in a Way that make sense for the trait feel free to do so:)
And to the OP it sounds like a exelent trait.
The idea of someone being capable with a single weapon while being completely inept with an identical weapon that they haven't been around is really silly anyway. I could easily see the Heirloom trait granting proficiency in that specific weapon type based on the fact that the PC grew up practicing with the weapon (on top of giving the MW weapon to the PC).
When the Martial Weapon Proficiency was designed, there were no traits. If there had been traits, I'm sure Martial Weapon Proficiency would have been designated as a trait instead of a feat. It's just a legacy of both backward compatibility and innovation as game designers learn to hone their craft.
For example, I think the Spell Recall feature of the magus should also be a class feature of the wizard, but the class designers hadn't thought of it yet when they first published the wizard. Or if they had thought of it, decided not to use it for backward compatibility.
|
Yeah, try comparing EWP to something like Improved Initiative or Combat Reflexes (to say nothing of caster feats which make the aforementioned ones look silly) and you'll see that it's 99% of the time not worth the precious feat slot.By definition, nothing is worth "a precious feat slot" if it doesn't stack up to the most powerful feats in the game. No one said all feats were created equal.
Yeah, and that's awful game design. If a feat isn't worth the feat slot it takes up, then it shouldn't be a feat at all. There's no good reason the MWP feat should cost the exact same resource as the Power Attack feat, not even getting into the nonsense of Divine Protection or Sacred Geometry.
Ivory Tower design can screw right off, as far as I'm concerned.
Would anything break if I made MWP a trait?I deal with it by making Martial Weapon Proficiency feat grant all Martial weapons, like it does as a class feature.PrC wouldbreaksuck less.
FTFY