So would it now be better to only play a martial to say mid-level and then switch to cleric/magus for when melee happens? Since martials are pretty much there just to keep things off the casters until the win button is pressed.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So would it now be better to only play a martial to say mid-level and then switch to cleric/magus for when melee happens? Since martials are pretty much there just to keep things off the casters until the win button is pressed.
You have it all wrong, you play a martial caster with full BAB like a bloodrager. That way you don't have to switch.
they, to be blunt, should know better by now.I guess they do. They are making their product better overall by fixing the issues. They can't please everyone.
Overall better? That's questionable. Even people that wanted those items looked at have expressed disappointment of how they where 'fixed'. Making underpriced options suck instead of pricing them correctly isn't really making anything better: I don't find options that are a waste of space/ink 'better' in any way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the change is bracer's of falcon's aim was perfectly reasonable. Giving a bow/crossbow a stacking +1 to hit and keen and a +3 on perception checks for 4k was stupidly cheap.
The bracers definitely needed a change. Personally my issue isn't that the item was nerfed, but the specific nerf they chose.
The new bracers are pretty cost inefficient. For the same price you can get five wands and ten scrolls of CL1 aspect of the falcon, which means you need 260 solid adventuring days just to break even with the bracers. Obviously this is anecdotal, but I personally can't remember many campaigns I've been a part of that had 260 separate adventuring days.
So even agreeing with the premise that the items are overpowered, I'm personally disappointed with these changes because I had hoped that adjustments to their power would make them more usable and less likely to be banned from campaigns. Instead the item might as well not exist, which is a shame.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The change in weapon cord seems a bit weird. Needing a full move action to recover a weapon attached to a weapon cord seems a bit excessive. I am guessing there must have been problems with people using it to cast by "dropping" the weapon and then equipping it as a swift action.
That was changed awhile ago, in response to PFS erm... general complaints revolving around using weapon cord to two weapon fight with double barreled pistols. Rather than fix double barreled pistols, they cut the weapon cord.
Then later decided to fix double barreled pistols anyway.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I don't find options that are a waste of space/ink 'better' in any way.
100% of my characters had the Jingasa.
100% of my melee characters had the feather step boots.One of my characters had the cap of the freethinker.
Some of my character has some of the other items.
I loved many of those items.
I also understood they were broken.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I loved many of those items.
I also understood they were broken.
You keep going back to this, but I don't think anyone here is disputing that the items were problematic. The argument is over the quality and severity of the nerfs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thought the change is bracer's of falcon's aim was perfectly reasonable. Giving a bow/crossbow a stacking +1 to hit and keen and a +3 on perception checks for 4k was stupidly cheap.The bracers definitely needed a change. Personally my issue isn't that the item was nerfed, but the specific nerf they chose.
The new bracers are pretty cost inefficient. For the same price you can get five wands and ten scrolls of CL1 aspect of the falcon, which means you need 260 solid adventuring days just to break even with the bracers. Obviously this is anecdotal, but I personally can't remember many campaigns I've been a part of that had 260 separate adventuring days.
Do the new bracers require a high-DC UMD check to use? Because a number of archers aren't rangers, druids, or hunters. Slayer, Paladin, Fighter, Inquisitor, Bard, and Skald can all be decent archers fairly easily, and it takes a while to be able to UMD wands and scrolls. Also, the odds of 5 wands and 10 scrolls of one spell being available aren't great. You could craft them, but you need to take 2 more feats and deal with a feat intensive playstyle.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do the new bracers require a high-DC UMD check to use? Because a number of archers aren't rangers, druids, or hunters. Slayer, Paladin, Fighter, Inquisitor, Bard, and Skald can all be decent archers fairly easily, and it takes a while to be able to UMD wands and scrolls. Also, the odds of 5 wands and 10 scrolls of one spell being available aren't great. You could craft them, but you need to take 2 more feats and deal with a feat intensive playstyle.I thought the change is bracer's of falcon's aim was perfectly reasonable. Giving a bow/crossbow a stacking +1 to hit and keen and a +3 on perception checks for 4k was stupidly cheap.The bracers definitely needed a change. Personally my issue isn't that the item was nerfed, but the specific nerf they chose.
The new bracers are pretty cost inefficient. For the same price you can get five wands and ten scrolls of CL1 aspect of the falcon, which means you need 260 solid adventuring days just to break even with the bracers. Obviously this is anecdotal, but I personally can't remember many campaigns I've been a part of that had 260 separate adventuring days.
But the Bracers work once a day!
The Wand works more than that. Cheaper too. You can afford a little UMD for that benefit.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do the new bracers require a high-DC UMD check to use? Because a number of archers aren't rangers, druids, or hunters. Slayer, Paladin, Fighter, Inquisitor, Bard, and Skald can all be decent archers fairly easily, and it takes a while to be able to UMD wands and scrolls. Also, the odds of 5 wands and 10 scrolls of one spell being available aren't great. You could craft them, but you need to take 2 more feats and deal with a feat intensive playstyle.I thought the change is bracer's of falcon's aim was perfectly reasonable. Giving a bow/crossbow a stacking +1 to hit and keen and a +3 on perception checks for 4k was stupidly cheap.The bracers definitely needed a change. Personally my issue isn't that the item was nerfed, but the specific nerf they chose.
The new bracers are pretty cost inefficient. For the same price you can get five wands and ten scrolls of CL1 aspect of the falcon, which means you need 260 solid adventuring days just to break even with the bracers. Obviously this is anecdotal, but I personally can't remember many campaigns I've been a part of that had 260 separate adventuring days.
A DC 20 is considered high now?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do the new bracers require a high-DC UMD check to use? Because a number of archers aren't rangers, druids, or hunters. Slayer, Paladin, Fighter, Inquisitor, Bard, and Skald can all be decent archers fairly easily, and it takes a while to be able to UMD wands and scrolls.
True, if you need to UMD them it makes the bracers look a bit better. Though by level 5 (the earliest level you should be getting the bracers) it's not tremendously difficult to succeed on a DC20 UMD check even with only minimal investment.
Even ignoring the wand comparison though, I'm not sure that the new bracers compare all that favorably to other items either. A pale green prism ioun stone gives the same bonus on attack rolls all day long for the same price, but is also slotless and it saves you the standard action. You lose the perception and crit modifier enhancements, but the former is incredibly difficult to utilize well and while the latter is nice, it's unreliable (especially given the new duration) and doesn't stack with any of its alternatives.
I will concede that the bracers get increasingly better the more combats you manage to cram into one minute though.
Also, the odds of 5 wands and 10 scrolls of one spell being available aren't great. You could craft them, but you need to take 2 more feats and deal with a feat intensive playstyle.
That's fair, though if you're holding to the bracer's restrictions on only using one charge a day you don't actually need five wands and ten scrolls, that was just highlighting how cost inefficient they are. You're likely to hit 12 before finishing your second wand and you could hit 20 without even getting to your third.
I loved many of those items.
I also understood they were broken.
I tentatively agree. If these changes had come out 90 days after ultimate equipment was release I'd probably be fine saying the nerfs were gross overkill but yes the items were too good as written. But I have a really hard time swallowing the fact that it took them nearly 4 years to realize these items were broken enough to warrant a change.
I despise Paizo policy of ignoring balancing until the arbitrary point in time that they decide reprinting is necessary. If the item needs a change, change it. Don't let everyone assume its fine for YEARS then spring the change on them unless you can point to something recent that changed that made them go from being acceptable to unacceptable.
This
I loved many of those items.
I also understood they were broken.
I tentatively agree. If these changes had come out 90 days after ultimate equipment was release I'd probably be fine saying the nerfs were gross overkill but yes the items were too good as written. But I have a really hard time swallowing the fact that it took them nearly 4 years to realize these items were broken enough to warrant a change.
The devs intentionally release errata this way so it coincides with a second printing, which I assume is because of workflow reasons and such. I suspect a lot of these corrections are things that they realized within a year of printing, not something they decided on a lark last month.
Alex, the Jingasa is an unaffiliated slot for AC bonuses. The price would be doubled.
The Jingasa at 5k giving both the +1 Luck Bonus AND the crit negation is underpriced by the very rules. Given the example of the Buffering Cap being 2000 gp and not even NEGATING the crit, the Jingasa should have been an absolute minimum of 9-10k gp.
The artificial inflation of the Luck Bonus with cheap traits is what prodded the change to the deflection bonus. They could probably have made it a competence or insight bonus, but eh.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why was wrong to just raise The price of The jingasa to 10-11k and call it a day?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Considering "on command" is a standard action and a CL1 potion of Aspect of the Falcon also lasts for one minute and it's a standard action to drink a potion... why the hell would anyone waste 4000gp and their wrists slot to replicate a 50gp potion!?!?!? You can take more than one potion per day but not with Bracers of Falcon's Aim...
You can't make a personal spell into a potion, for starters.
But as others have pointed out, you would have to use the new bracers for 260 days before they break even with the Wands/Scrolls you could buy with the gold instead.
So yeah, the only benefit is that you don't need an UMD check, but you are paying quite the sum for that advantage.
Actually, were they really too good?
Bracers of Falcon's Aim were also appropriately priced for a wondrous item replicating a spell with 1 minute per caster level that was only a Spell-level-1-caster-level-1 spell. Considering they are now command word once per day they should only cost 360gp. This stinks of spitefulness. Someone just didn't like how powerful BoFA were and have completely over-reacted in this errata.
This single item (previous version) is the cause of many people's misconception of how you price wondrous items. According to that table, a +4 armor bonus from Mage Armor should have a price of 2000 gp, but you know that Bracers of Armor +4 has a price of 16,000 gp,
You should never follow the table blindly. You should compare the spell's effect to existing item's.
*****
Yes. The current version is overpriced. But maybe the Bracers of Falcon's Aim never should have existed at all.
Maybe there shouldn't be any wondrous items which replicate spell effects. That's what wands and scrolls are for.
Edit: I meant stat-boosting spells like Shield of Faith, Mage Armor, Magic Weapon etc.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Alex, the Jingasa is an unaffiliated slot for AC bonuses. The price would be doubled.
The Jingasa at 5k giving both the +1 Luck Bonus AND the crit negation is underpriced by the very rules. Given the example of the Buffering Cap being 2000 gp and not even NEGATING the crit, the Jingasa should have been an absolute minimum of 9-10k gp.
The artificial inflation of the Luck Bonus with cheap traits is what prodded the change to the deflection bonus. They could probably have made it a competence or insight bonus, but eh.
==Aelryinth
If by "unaffiliated" you mean "slotless," then that's clearly incorrect.
If by "unaffiliated" you mean "shouldn't grant AC," then a citation from the book would be needed. Even without the book citation, I will go ahead and say that there are precedents, both historical and literary, that would disagree with your claim of a helm being "unaffiliated" with protecting you, especially if we want to consider what a helmet designed for war is supposed to do (though as of recent history, isn't particularly helpful).
And guess what, the artificial inflation applies to more than just the Jingasa, why not change them to a different bonus type too?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Aspect of the falcon is personal, you can't get a potion of it.
Still, yes, highly overpriced
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, were they really too
Yes. The current version is overpriced. But maybe the Bracers of Falcon's Aim never should have existed at all.
Maybe there shouldn't be any wondrous items which replicate spell effects. That's what wands and scrolls are for.Are you friggin kidding me? You want to bar ALL access to magic by non casters!? That's just hilariously bad.
Alex, the Jingasa is an unaffiliated slot for AC bonuses. The price would be doubled.
The Jingasa at 5k giving both the +1 Luck Bonus AND the crit negation is underpriced by the very rules. Given the example of the Buffering Cap being 2000 gp and not even NEGATING the crit, the Jingasa should have been an absolute minimum of 9-10k gp.
The artificial inflation of the Luck Bonus with cheap traits is what prodded the change to the deflection bonus. They could probably have made it a competence or insight bonus, but eh.
==Aelryinth
If by "unaffiliated" you mean "slotless," then that's clearly incorrect.
If by "unaffiliated" you mean "shouldn't grant AC," then a citation from the book would be needed. Even without the book citation, I will go ahead and say that there are precedents, both historical and literary, that would disagree with your claim of a helm being "unaffiliated" with protecting you, especially if we want to consider what a helmet designed for war is supposed to do (though as of recent history, isn't particularly helpful).
And guess what, the artificial inflation applies to more than just the Jingasa, why not change them to a different bonus type too?
I said unaffiliated, and meant unaffiliated.
Rings are affiliated with all effects...you can stuff any spell effect on a ring and it will be the minimum price.
Look at the elemental resistance things for armor. Compare the price to a ring. They are unaffiliated effects, and they cost more.
The Helm slot is not affiliated with Luck or Deflection bonuses to AC.
Look at the Helm of teleportation. Then look at boots of teleportation. They do the exact same thing, and the helm costs 50% more, because boots are affiliated with movement slots, and Helms are not.
So, the 10-11k price range is not bogus, it's an estimate based on existing magic items.
Critical deflection is an armor-slot affiliated item, not a helm item. So we know the price is going to be higher there.
The ability of the Jingasa is MUCh more powerful then the Buffering Hat. The Buffering Hat makes you still eat the crit damage, and doesn't do anything for sneak attacks. Both work once a day.
So, with a Luck bonus in an unaffiliated slot, we're looking at either 3750 or 5000, depending on how unaffiliated they rule it.
The crit negation ability is easily twice as strong as the buffering hat, so a base of 4k at the very least for a reusable, strong ability like this. This is going to be increased 50% for being on an unaffiliated slot.
So, a minimum of 9-10k, and probably 11k would be my estimate of its value, compared to other items. The fact you now can't get a Luck bonus to AC anywhere else is completely superfluous. Deflection bonuses are priced the same as Luck bonuses, so the price is still accurate if the only thing changed was the deflection bonus.
Oh, Double, your tone aside, Fortune's Favored is more powerful then almost any general feat you can take, simply because it adds bonuses to hit, damage, skill checks, and saving throws, all by itself, with only a small amount of investment.
Traits are supposed to be HALF the power of a feat, not twice or more. There's a Halfling only worshipper of a specific god feat which I think grants +1 Luck to all saves.. Fortune's Favored does that and more besides.
it's overpowered, everyone knows it, that's why they pick it. You can call the rest garbage, but what they are is generally on the same level. Fortune's Favored should never have been a trait at all.
The Bracers of Falcon's Aim have been known to be underpriced for YEARS. All you had to do was look at Bracers of Archery, which is Rule#1, similar items, to realize how much better it was, and for less cost. Someone looked at the table and used level 1 spell to permanent effect for the pricing, and completely ignored existing items.
Now, they idea they maybe should have repriced bracers of archery, too, is a different argument.
As for using UMD and wands...that's the double whammy of buff time and massive investment in UMD to be able to do this. That's neither cheap nor easy. The short buff duration of the wands is just going to make it annoying, and you won't have time to do so once combat starts.
Now, I think they should have increased the price rather then nerfing the effect, but I expect that people loving the underpriced item would have protested regardless.
==Aelryinth
Are you friggin kidding me? You want to bar ALL access to magic by non casters!? That's just hilariously bad.
Maybe there shouldn't be any wondrous items which replicate spell effects. That's what wands and scrolls are for.Actually, were they really too
Yes. The current version is overpriced. But maybe the Bracers of Falcon's Aim never should have existed at all.
Yeah, I meant spells like Mage Armor, Shield of Faith, Nereid's Grace, which just grant bonuses to stats. I'm editing my previous post.
This goes beyond the magic item price guide, especially as the magic item price guide has already obviously been thrown out the window as the original Bracer's of Falcon's Aim (BoFA) were correctly priced according the that guide and the new BoFA should be 360gp as it's (1) Command activated, and (2) Once per day use. You don't even need the pricing guide to know that's a bad deal, just consider the CL1 potions you can get for 50gp each comapred to 4000gp for the "New Coke" version of Bracers of Falcon's Aim.
Do remember that as a personal spell, falcons aim is a little more powerful than a spell that can be targeted on other people.
The pricing guidelines are just that, guidelines. Not hard and fast rules. Often eyeballing it gets you a far better, more reasonable answer for an items cost.
@Aelryinth
Just one thing you might want to edit in your previous post.
Deflection bonus to AC is actually cheaper than Luck.
Deflection: 2000 * X^2
Luck: 2500 * X^2
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Alex, the Jingasa is an unaffiliated slot for AC bonuses. The price would be doubled.
The Jingasa at 5k giving both the +1 Luck Bonus AND the crit negation is underpriced by the very rules. Given the example of the Buffering Cap being 2000 gp and not even NEGATING the crit, the Jingasa should have been an absolute minimum of 9-10k gp.
The artificial inflation of the Luck Bonus with cheap traits is what prodded the change to the deflection bonus. They could probably have made it a competence or insight bonus, but eh.
==Aelryinth
The trait was the real problem, and they should have changed the trait. The jingasa, in and of itself, was just about spot on. It was a hugely unnecessary change.
A lot of the other changes seem draconian to me. I'm reasonably sure a more moderate change would have been better.
Yeah, I meant spells like Mage Armor, Shield of Faith, Nereid's Grace, which just grant bonuses to stats. I'm editing my previous post.Are you friggin kidding me? You want to bar ALL access to magic by non casters!? That's just hilariously bad.
Maybe there shouldn't be any wondrous items which replicate spell effects. That's what wands and scrolls are for.Actually, were they really too
Yes. The current version is overpriced. But maybe the Bracers of Falcon's Aim never should have existed at all.
Well, by Double's calculations, I should be able to make a Shield of Faith ring as a permanent item, and get +2 Deflection for 2000 gp, not the 8k price of an actual ring, right? Or use Nereid's Grace to get +3 to +6 for the same price, right?
Tch.
==Aelryinth
@Aelryinth
Just one thing you might want to edit in your previous post.
Deflection bonus to AC is actually cheaper than Luck.
Deflection: 2000 * X^2
Luck: 2500 * X^2
whoops, you are right. But a difference of 500-750 gp isn't going to change the fact the Jingasa was extremely underpriced just with its base abilities. That crit and sneak attack negation ability is extremely potent, and much better then the 2k helm slot item that tries to do the same thing, and still makes you eat the damage, even if it doesn't kill you.
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
+3 Competence bonus on Percept Checks, 900 gp.
+1 Competence bonus on all ranged attacks. 2500 gp, based on dusty rose prism ioun stone? Maybe 2k gp, since restricted to missile weapons?
keen on all bows and crossbows, stacking with weapon enhancements...?? 10k? 20k?Unaffiliated slot for all of this? x 1.5, x2?
There's no way you can justify the Bracers of Falcon's Aim being the price they were. You have to ignore ALL the pricing guidelines and go right to the dumbest one to get the price they were at.
==Aelryinth
Sorry for being overbearing with the corrections, it's just that I've discussed the pricing of Bracers of Falcon's Aim/Archery alot the last two days.
A +1 competence bonus to hit has a price of 2000 gp.
Okay, so you based it on the pale green cracked instead of the dusty rose. Difference 500 gp.
Perfectly fine going along with that.
Still doesn't explain a 4k price for all of that. The stacking Keen/Crit mod+ effect ALONE is worth at least 10k. Add on the unaffiliated slot, and you're at 20k EASY.
More amusing, Fortune's Favored can grant a STACKING +1 Luck bonus on AC, saves, skill checks, ability checks, to hit and to damage (and formerly to AC). A luck bonus is priced like an insight bonus, so the dusty rose is a good guideline, but it doesn't affect damage rolls. It modifies one more thing the luckstone does (attack rolls) which is priced at 20k. So, another 10k for that +1 damage? Or just 5k? With AC on top, you're talking another 5-10k.
That means the trait is worth the same as a probably 35-40k magic item, 40-50k with AC included.
That's one hell of half a feat.
==Aelryinth
And what is done with that uniqueness and importance? All the power without the responsibility. They don't want to be "just the party scroll reader" yet when a level 1 wizard NPC is introduced precisely to do that job who is the first and loudest to object that NPCs not be in the group? Everything has to revolve around them.
The tyranny of casters must end!
I'm allowing personal spells in potions and I'm dropping a lot of them and no one has any good reason why I shouldn't houserule that. Certainly not the special snowflake who says they should be the one handling buffs... when they can't or won't.
Wouldn't it be better to lower the cost of Potions instead of allowing personal spells?
Everyone using Potions of Shield just forces you to increase the Attack of monsters to compete with your player's AC. Which in turn just makes personal spells obsolete (at least the lower level ones).
PC's who can't cast having access to personal spells...50 gp.
Casters never having to memorize personal spells again...priceless.
Hooray for balance!
==Aelryinth