| 17 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This thread is intended to cosolidate Questions about the Weapon Special Ability (WSA) "Training"
Reference threads:
Gauntlets with Training Echantment [sic]
Training "Drawn and In Hand"
Training Enchantment Qualifying for Feats
Training from D20PFSRD:
Training WSA
Bane FAQ:
Bane FAQ
This WSA appears in Pathfinder Campaign Setting Inner Sea Intrigue on page 52. It is a +1 equivalent.
"a training weapon grants one combat feat to the wielder as long as the weapon is drawn and in hand."
Does this mean that weapons that are not held in a hand (such as Boot Blades, Boulder Helmets, and Armor Spikes) are unable to use this WSA ?
Does this mean that weapons that occupy a hand but are not directly held (such as Gauntlets, Spiked Gauntlets, Cestus, and Shield Spikes) are unable to use this WSA ?
Does the Training WSA work like the Defending WSA in that the weapon must actually be USED for the WSA to function ?
[added per James, below] "Can I put this [Training WSA(improved initiative)] on my offhand dagger I'll never use to attack to gain improved initiative to use my scimitar to attack?"
The WSA rules state "Weapons cannot possess the same special ability more than once.". The Bane WSA FAQ allows that multiple instances of the Bane WSA can be applied.
Is an instance of the Training WSA for feat "A" and an instance of the Training WSA for feat "B" allowable on the same weapon ?
If so, and feat A is a pre-requisite for feat B, will they both function ?
[edited to add Jame's question]
Also "Can I put this on my offhand dagger I'll never use to attack to gain improved initiative to use my scimitar to attack?"
Or on a shield enchanted for use as a weapon?
Sorry, Talonhawke, while I was editing to add your question, my edit window timed out and I can no longer edit my post.
Thats fine i figure that anwering the main question for the most "should" deal with that one.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Crud, I left out the Double-Weapon question(s).
If a different training WSA is on both ends of a double weapon that is simply held, does the training WSA on both ends function ?
If a training WSA is on one end of a double weapon, but that weapon is being used as a single weapon in two-handed mode, does the training WSA function regardless of what end is being used ? That is, if the training WSA is on the end that is NOT being used, does that end still count as drawn and in-hand ?
I have a feeling the intended use isn't many of these ways.
The intended use is most likely "a magic weapon that grants the user proficiency in this weapon" (hence the name "training") but that's not very interesting (and it would limit the weapons it's available on, no "training daggers" say), so they decided to generalize it and open up a can of worms since beyond a certain level a lot of people would be very happy to spend ~8kish for a combat feat.
It's a +1 enchantment, it's going to end up costing a heck of a lot more than 8k in the long run.
Hence the desire for people to put them on armor spikes, boot blades, gauntlets, and other things that people don't intend to be enchanting further.
Also "Can I put this on my offhand dagger I'll never use to attack to gain improved initiative to use my scimitar to attack?"
As long as the dagger occupies your off hand, the enchantment says nothing about actually being used, and all it does is grant the effects of a feat -- so I don't see why not.
The description doesn't say that it applies the combat feat to attacks with that weapon.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
@Quintain, people didn't see why you couldn't have a +5 defending armor spike and run permanently with +5 AC and stack it with a +5 defending gauntlet holding your +5 greatsword for +10 dodge ac.
Two FAQ have shut down that "don't see why not" line of thinking. I suspect if this is used similarly it will get change or at least a FAQ.
I feel like an 8kish item that grants, say, combat reflexes is less of a problem than getting an additional +5 AC from your armor spikes.
AC is a thing that if it gets too high it distorts games, so you want to keep it from getting too high. I don't think "has a combat feat" is open to as many game-breaking abuses. It's possible we ought to have a "pay gold to get a combat feat, it doesn't count for prereqs" as something other than a weapon enhancement.
Items that everybody, or a certain large subset of everybody, wants aren't necessarily a problem. Pretty much everybody gets a stat belt and/or headband. Everybody (except Occultists) gets a cloak of resistance.
I'm not sure there is a collection of combat feats we could stack on melee characters that would make them any more abusive than things that already exist can be.
100% of all MeLee builds will pay 8,000 for a feat.
I've never seen a build under 12th level that doesn't want 1, 2, 6 more combat feats. And I buildmostly MeLee builds.
So, your reasoning for saying it doesn't work is because all melee's will want it?
Every class will want a weapon that gives a needed combat feat, not just melees.
Getting a higher level feat you qualify for without having to spend a feat slot is a god-send for those non-melee characters who would benefit and do not have bonus combat feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, your reasoning for saying it doesn't work is because all melee's will want it?100% of all MeLee builds will pay 8,000 for a feat.
I've never seen a build under 12th level that doesn't want 1, 2, 6 more combat feats. And I buildmostly MeLee builds.
An item that's not part of the big six being exceedingly popular is generally the prelude to a nuke it from orbit nerf, so it might save time to just assume it doesn't work now, before it doesn't work at all.
An item that's not part of the big six being exceedingly popular is generally the prelude to a nuke it from orbit nerf, so it might save time to just assume it doesn't work now, before it doesn't work at all.
It's unlikely considering it's in a Golarion only splat-book. It's already not-approved for PFS, so that incentive isn't there either.
@Quintain, people didn't see why you couldn't have a +5 defending armor spike and run permanently with +5 AC and stack it with a +5 defending gauntlet holding your +5 greatsword for +10 dodge ac.
Two FAQ have shut down that "don't see why not" line of thinking. I suspect if this is used similarly it will get change or at least a FAQ.
This FAQ is kind of funny. I can see why it is roundly ignored. I keep wondering whether there is any sort of intellectual consistency towards the game system beyond number crunching when developing these FAQs.
The reason it is ignored is largely because all it does is inconvenience the user, as you can easily "attack a square" to get the bonus each round as you move into actual combat. You don't even really need to have an opponent by RAW. -- All it does is slow you down a bit.
They could have satisfied all parties by striking "that stacks with all others" from the text of the ability.
Moreover, applying the intent of that FAQ would wholly eliminate having improved initiative as a feat that you could apply, as initiative is rolled prior to combat, and if you haven't acted yet, it completely useless as a selection.
As a suggestion that as a rule, if the enchant chosen has a direct combat modifier applied but has the potential to apply to other weapons being used, like say Power attack, then the feat only applies to attacks made by that weapon. Otherwise, it applies generally (like improved initiative).
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
@Quintain, the main issue is that some (many?) like me see an intellectual consistency in all the FAQ.
Use activated is "turned on by being used". You use a defending weapon by using it to attack.
Things that stack with all others will never stack with the same source unless it says stacks with themselves.
Plus the defense to the use of this Training property for Improved Initiative is "you've not used it yet" to which I counter with "the GM knows if you plan to" so I say it works if you use it as your weapon even if you haven't had a chance to attack with it.
@Quintain, the main issue is that some (many?) like me see an intellectual consistency in all the FAQ.
Use activated is "turned on by being used". You use a defending weapon by using it to attack.
Things that stack with all others will never stack with the same source unless it says stacks with themselves.
Plus the defense to the use of this Training property for Improved Initiative is "you've not used it yet" to which I counter with "the GM knows if you plan to" so I say it works if you use it as your weapon even if you haven't had a chance to attack with it.
'
You don't use AC modifiers in your attack though. It is a general overall buff to your defense, not offense. And there is no such thing as parrying in any sort of core rules for pathfinder. If there was I could see your point. The "you must attack in order to use a defensive buff" idea is ridiculous.
IMO, "the GM knows if you are going to use it" is meta-gaming, and lacks consistency. Either you have it or you do not.
More evidence that this needs a FAQ:
theorycrafting
IMO, "the GM knows if you are going to use it" is meta-gaming, and lacks consistency. Either you have it or you do not.I agree.
But I also disagree.
The ability isn't the best and will take a lot of subjective work from the GM. Mostly why it got banned in PFS.
Here's a non-subjective way to determine if it is applicable or not:
If you threaten surrounding squares with the weapon, and thus have the capability of making attacks of opportunity with the weapon, even if you have no "uses" of AoO available, or are prevented from making attacks of opportunity due to some condition, you gain the feat/effect, whatever.
There. A solid, rules based determination of when the effect applies.
100% of all MeLee builds will pay 8,000 for a feat.
I've never seen a build under 12th level that doesn't want 1, 2, 6 more combat feats. And I buildmostly MeLee builds.
But do they want ones that can't be used as prerequisites? Single stand alone feats not part of a chain? I think the pool of feats wanted drops dramatically with that.
IMO, "the GM knows if you are going to use it" is meta-gaming, and lacks consistency. Either you have it or you do not.I agree.
But I also disagree.
The ability isn't the best and will take a lot of subjective work from the GM. Mostly why it got banned in PFS.
Here's a non-subjective way to determine if it is applicable or not:
If you threaten surrounding squares with the weapon, and thus have the capability of making attacks of opportunity with the weapon, even if you have no "uses" of AoO available, or are prevented from making attacks of opportunity due to some condition, you gain the feat/effect, whatever.
There. A solid, rules based determination of when the effect applies.
This is mostly how I see it. 'Able to threaten and make AoO with'. Simple, easy and requires no mind reading or metagaming guessing from the DM.
You mean, all those things that aren't 'held in hand'?It's a +1 enchantment, it's going to end up costing a heck of a lot more than 8k in the long run.Hence the desire for people to put them on armor spikes, boot blades, gauntlets, and other things that people don't intend to be enchanting further.
I take the "held in hand" to mean 'ready and able to attack and make AoO'. The rules are written with two armed and legged PC just as it assumes weapons are held in hands. For instance just because light weapons says "Light: A light weapon is used in one hand" doesn't mean I have to put a hand on my boulder helmet before I can attack with it. Much the same, "drawn and in hand" is taking about it's readiness to attack and not about it physically being in a hand.
Huntsman WSA share some of the same language as Training WSA.
Price +1 bonus; Aura moderate divination; CL 7th; Weight —
DESCRIPTION
A huntsman weapon helps its wielder locate and capture quarry.
When the weapon is held in hand, the wielder gains the weapon’s enhancement bonus on Survival checks made to track any creature the weapon has damaged in the past day. It also deals +1d6 points of damage to creatures the wielder has tracked with Survival in the past day.
Says Held in Hand, but nothing about drawn.
Huntsman WSA share some of the same language as Training WSA.
** spoiler omitted **
Says Held in Hand, but nothing about drawn.
That one may be just held in hand/equipped.
It already has a trigger that has to happen before it works, the weapon must damage creature first, so the weapon has already been used for it's purpose. As such, it's language is actually pretty different: Training doesn't require an action before 'drawn and held'.
Then there is the other way around. Drawn, but nothing about Held in Hand.
Here's an example.
I am not really saying anything. Just trying to provide a little more information that may prove to be helpful.
The problem seems to be that we don't have clear cut game definition of what is Drawn and Held in Hand.
Nah, the idea of weapons being Drawn or Held in Hand is obvious, meaning things like Spiked Gauntlets and Cestii wouldn't benefit from it. Same goes for weapons outside of your hands, like Armor Spikes, Barbazu Beards, Boot Blades, etc.
The question is whether it's intended to work with weapons that go over your hands, or are your hands, in the former cases. Personally, I'd vote not, both for balance and for wording reasons.
However, a general FAQ answering that it's not the case definitively would be a good idea, since it is something that I've noticed being contested among several weapon properties.
Drawn, past participle of draw.
Draw
1. Pull or drag (something such as a vehicle) so as to make it follow behind. "a cart drawn by two horses" pull or move (something) in a specified direction. "I drew back the blanket and uncovered the body"
2.Extract (an object or liquid) from a container or receptacle.
"he drew his gun and peered into the gloomy apartment"
3.Be the cause of (a specified response). "he drew criticism for his lavish spending" attract (someone) to come to a place or an event.
"you really drew the crowds with your playing"
And I left out draw, to produce (a picture or diagram) by making lines and marks, especially with a pen or pencil, on paper.
If Pathfinder did a Game dictionary. I would buy it in a heart beat.
While not the Paizo definition I find the PoW Mithral Current definition to work well in this case for my own games.
THE FINE ART OF IAIJUTSU
Disciples of Mithral Current are swift striking warriors, and many of their maneuvers gain an added benefit if the disciple “draws their weapon as part of the attack.” For purposes of game mechanics, this means that the disciple has their weapon sheathed before initiating the maneuver, has the Quick Draw feat or a base attack bonus of +1 (allowing them to draw their weapon as part of a move action) and is initiating the maneuver using the weapon that is sheathed, drawing that weapon as a free action prior to initiating the maneuver (this can be done even if it isn’t your turn). As long as all three conditions are met, the Mithral Current disciple meets the requirements for these bonus effects to activate when initiating these maneuvers. A weapon is considered sheathed if it is in a non-threatening position, such as a monk putting their hands at their sides or in their pockets, a spear wielder pointing the tip of their spear into the ground, a soulknife with an unformed mind blade, or even a samurai keeping their katana in its sheath. The terminology of sheathing the weapon is only intended to serve as a shorthand for any number of ways a warrior can present themselves as non-threatening with their weapon.
Draw weapon action: "Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat". So a drawn weapon is one that can be 'used in combat': or as I've said above, 'able to attack with and able to make an AoO with'.
Sheath weapon action: "putting it away so that you have a free hand". So a weapon is assumed to be held in a hand by default.
Adding those two: drawn and in hand = ready to attack with. After all "putting away" a boulder helmet doesn't give you a free hand any more than it being a light weapon makes it require a physical hand.
From the games perspective, armor spikes/boulder helmets/ect are in a 'hand': That's what light weapons require [physically] and attacks require [effort]. Feats and items aren't written with corner cases in mind a lot of the time, like characters with 4 arms, no legs or weapons not physically held in a hand.
I think graystone has the best understanding of Drawn and held in hand, as they stand right now.
Graystone's explanations and reasoning makes a lot sense.
Unfortunately, until we get official rules or explanations, we are all going to use house-rules.
The "hands of effort" are now written. And all pathfinder material have and will continue change. For better or worst.
Who knows what the end results will be? Not me.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
The problem seems to be that we don't have clear cut game definition of what is Drawn and Held in Hand.
We don't. Plus I've seen SKR posts pointing out several different intended interpretations for various "weild" uses. In other words, each rule using weird may not use it in same way!