I was flipping through in my Ultimate Equipment and noticed that knuckle axe, a monk weapon, is not in the Monks Weapon Group. It's in the axes Weapon Group. So I decided to take a closer look and found that Temple Sword and Nunchaku are also not on the Monks Weapon Group, yet the table listed them as monk.
Is this an error somekind? Which is right?
Are there any more weapons missing from their Weapon Groups that I should be aware of?
I looked on the paizo wed site and found Nunchaku under Monks Weapon Group, but not temple sword or knuckle axe.
Nope not all monk weapons are in the monk weapon group and not all weapons in the weapon group are monk weapons.
What Talonhawke said, the weapons groups are a class feature. They don't have to reflect any other part of the game.
What Talonhawke said, the weapons groups are a class feature. They don't have to reflect any other part of the game.
The problem is when you have similar terminology like this and then other parts of the game brings up "monks weapons" but is in a section dealing with mostly weapon groups.
This is not limited to monk weapons.
Rhomphaia is in no weapon Group at all. Are you telling me this is on purpose?
Rhomphai: This Bronze Age weapon is an early polearm consisting of a long, single-edged blade attached to a sturdy staff, sometimes slightly curved. It serves as both a cutting and a thrusting weapon.
This affect a number of feats folks. Like Defensive Weapon Training and Martial Focus.
I don't know how many other feats and abilities are affected by this as well.
The weapon groups only include what is written in the most recent revision. If you don't see a weapon in the groups its because they aren't part of the groups. Talk to your GM to see if they will let you add one for a home game.
This is not limited to monk weapons.
Rhomphaia is in no weapon Group at all. Are you telling me this is on purpose?
Rhomphai: This Bronze Age weapon is an early polearm consisting of a long, single-edged blade attached to a sturdy staff, sometimes slightly curved. It serves as both a cutting and a thrusting weapon.
This affect a number of feats folks. Like Defensive Weapon Training and Martial Focus.
I don't know how many other feats and abilities are affected by this as well.
That one probably is a mistake in being missed though there was a blog post that might have it in it looking for it now.
Tepoztopilli another Primitive weapon left out of the loop.
Tepoztopilli: The head of this wooden Stone Age polearm is edged with jagged bits of obsidian, glass, teeth, or similar materials. The wide head serves well for both piercing and slashing attacks.
Both Rhomphaia and Tepoztopilli are in Ultimate Equipment.
I would assume they were missed due to being period weapons. That being said if you plan on using one with a class that needs to know grouping ask your GM to make a ruling.
Found the blog post not in it either.
Tri-Point Double-Edged Sword is listed as a monk weapon with reach, but is not a Polearms, spear or sword.
Most reach weapons I am aware of fall into the spear or polearms group.
Tri-Point Double-Edged Sword: Topping the head of this 5-foot-long shaft are three long, backward-curved blades fashioned in the appearance of a blossoming lotus. The unusually large head is designed to land heavy blows and cause multiple wounds that open away from each other.
I don't think this weapon is a sword, but it does sound like a polearm of some type.
All these examples are building up to something.
Haven't fingered what yet.
Paizo is in need of more editors perhaps? I just don't know anymore.
It's hard for me to play any game if the rules are unclear and inconsistent.
They aren't building up to anything the team missed 2 weapons the others are listed as they found appropriate. And if it's such a huge issue that you can't seem to play the game over it I would recommend emailing customer service. But seeing as this is the first thread worried about 2 corner case weapons not having groups I found on searching for either weapon it's far less of an issue than you seem to want it to be.
Edit: As to the tri-point it is only on the Monk list meaning it shares more in common with that group than it does polearms or swords.
The rules are clear.
Weapons with the monk ability is not synonymous with the monk weapon group. They are different rule sets that do not interact. It's not like it's the worst culprit for one word having multiple meanings.
The decision on which weapons fall into which weapon group, and which ones are privileged to be assigned to multiple groups are not so much inconsistent as arbitrary. Many weapons can fall into multiple weapon groups, and as with so many rules someone will go "what were they thinking?" while someone else is all "makes perfect sense to me".
This is an amateur player flicking pages in a book to look on ways on how to play a game better. And finding inconsistent data on a very simple subject. But this is a subject where pro players just shrug their shoulders on.
This is Monopoly's Free Parking all over again. The rules state it is a free space and no money is earned, but some folks say "Hand over the cash please". Monopoly is a game that is very simple and at it's highest level, A Professional player can earn a very nice living on.
I don't think Pathfinder will go that far. But for organized events like PFS, this could cause some issues.
On a personal note, I don't care for any of the weapons mentioned, I wouldn't use them. There are better choices out there.
But what if, as I dig deeper, that your favorite weapon, feat, ability or combo comes up. How would YOU feel and react.
I would imagine you wouldn't enjoy the experience.
This is why clear and consistent rules are the backbone of every game that have and will ever be made.
Any rule made for arbitrary reasons, are poor rules indeed.
Just remember that I am an amateur, just starting out. I just scratched the surface of this game.
I think it is my responsibility as a player of this Game to point out any errors or unclear subjects with the material. I do it not to start an argument, but to prevent such things from happening in the first place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the central difference between Monopoly and Pathfinder is that the latter assumes that it will be adjudicated by a person who is enabled to make interpretations or rulings based on their understanding of the game or on common sense (even PFS does this to some degree.)
So if you have a weapon that's not in a weapon group, or is in the wrong weapon group in your opinion, you can ask the person with the power to make this decision to make a ruling, and if you don't like the ruling they made (by default weapons not listed in any weapon group are in no weapon group, and thus do not benefit from weapon training, etc.) just don't use that weapon. In 2015 the Pathfinder Society Folks actually did bother to organize a bunch of weapons in weapon groups so it was even worse before!
I feel like "I want every single piece of this game to make sense and be organized perfectly" is pretty much inimical to the way that tabletop roleplaying games actually work.
I do it not to start an argument, but to prevent such things from happening in the first place.
Did you check the Errata document for this book? It was written in 2012, and thus there have been a lot of typos and other issues already acknowledged by Paizo.
Paizo handles errors in printed material in several ways. They may issue a FAQ, they may create an errata document that is available once the next edition of the book is printed, etc.
You may want to familiarize yourself with the FAQ about errata documents, as well as the actual errata documents for this book, which is found on the store page for the book.
I feel like "I want every single piece of this game to make sense and be organized perfectly" is pretty much inimical to the way that tabletop roleplaying games actually work.
Although the Game Master is the final arbiter of the rules, the Pathfinder RPG is a shared experience, and all of the players should contribute their thoughts when the rules are in doubt.
As PossibleCabbage points out, any discrepancy in the rules is decided by the Game Master. That's how it works in any Pathfinder game, including PFS.
You're never going to find published material that doesn't have errors.
To CrystalSeas, I found your link to be informative and helpful.
After some searches I found Paizo Product Page and a title called "Ultimate Equipment Errata". I have some reading to do and hope this tread is the track on what to be on.
To everyone, as an amateur gamer, I found some of comments lacking and nonconstructive. Terms like "common sense", and "corner case" are not useful, as they are subjective views.
You're never going to find published material that doesn't have errors.
I think it was about Pathfinder material, not literally all published material.
"Never", is a powerful word and should not be used lightly. Please be more careful with your words.
Most of you are wondering why I am such a word Nazi. I am deaf, the written word is my main form of communication. My whole life I have to figure out the difference between, "What is said" vs "What you meant".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Never", is a powerful word and should not be used lightly. Please be more careful with your words.
Please do not tell me how I "should" write.
Publicly tone-policing other people by applying your idiosyncratic personal standards to their comments is out-of-line behavior.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You're never going to find published material that doesn't have errors.I think it was about Pathfinder material, not literally all published material.
"Never", is a powerful word and should not be used lightly. Please be more careful with your words.
As a professional librarian I can say that "never" is very close to the truth for printed materials. Printing a book without errors is extremely costly as it require human supervision.
Add that Paizo books need to respect the word count of the first edition of the book, so some correction can be printed only in latter books and that some material was printed almost 10 years before some different rule interacted with it or some different item was introduced, so there are constant difficulties with keeping all retro-compatible and coherent.Pathfinder has several thousands pages of rules and game materials, so perfection is even more difficult.
The only game I know with an extensive rule set and the kind of precision you want is Starfleet Battles. But reading a rule set that say things like:
Rule 34.7.8.3 [....] This rule change rule 1.1.34 so and so, add this to rule 23.4.56
and so on is very dry reading.
And as to my use of the wording "Corner Case" I stand by it here the 2 weapons you note as missing will probably never see use outside of a game set in that period or through GM intervention of placing one as loot that is so good it can't not be used.
Both weapons are in the same classification as the Bardiche (Martial 2h) which has both brace and reach a d10 dice and a 19-20 threat range for roughly the same price. All without the fragile property to hold it back at all.