| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's looking like all weapons that were multiple dice are now just single dice. Greatsword for example is 1d12 instead of 2d6.
If it was 2d4 it should go to 10d4...but all signs point to it being 1d8 (or whatever).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
The grim reaper previewed at paizocon has a +5 scythe that does 6d10, so a standard scythe must be a d10 now.
The grim reaper previewed at paizocon has a +5 scythe that does 6d10, so a standard scythe must be a d10 now.
Great catch!
I thought the maximum amount of Potency runes a weapon could have would be +3... Don't remember where I hears this, but was weeks ago.
I thought the maximum amount of Potency runes a weapon could have would be +3... Don't remember where I hears this, but was weeks ago.
I think that is the maximum potency a master quality weapon can have. Legendary can have up to +5.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The reaper's scythe is also keen and has deadly 3d10, while a redcap's is deadly 1d10 so maybe the keen weapon property increases the number of damage die for deadly and even gives non-deadly weapons deadly.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, a weapons's damage die increase by 1 for every size category above Medium (like how 5th Ed does it)?
I'm sure PCs will not be able to use oversize weapons ala the redcap, as that's been a monster feature since 3rd Ed.
Considering it's a thing players could do since 3e (Monkey Grip in 3e, and Titan Mauler in Pathfinder) and that the Iconic Barbarian of Pathfinder uses an oversized weapon it would be rather unfortunate if it was monster only (removing the barbarian iconic would probably be seen as a poor move).
Weren't size/dmg differences between weapons removed? at least small weapons don't deal less dmg then medium sized (It was mentioned in the weapons blog) - therefore titan mauler, monkey grip etc wouldn't make sense
Which is somewhat unfortunate - sometimes I like characters with comically huge weapons
(And titan mauler was totally useless after the errata)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Weren't size/dmg differences between weapons removed? at least small weapons don't deal less dmg then medium sized (It was mentioned in the weapons blog) - therefore titan mauler, monkey grip etc wouldn't make sense
You can remove size differences from Small and Medium, without removing it from other size categories.
Which is somewhat unfortunate - sometimes I like characters with comically huge weapons
It also means the iconic barbarian doesn't make any sense.
(And titan mauler was totally useless after the errata)
Actually the opposite, since the errata added in text that allowed you to actually wield two-handed weapons for creatures that are one-size larger than you.
|
Weren't size/dmg differences between weapons removed? at least small weapons don't deal less dmg then medium sized (It was mentioned in the weapons blog) - therefore titan mauler, monkey grip etc wouldn't make sense
What they seem to have done based on the Redcap is as follows:
-All weapons of the same type do the same damage if wielded by a character sized appropriately for them.
-However, if you somehow get the ability to wield weapons one size category up, you get an extra weapon die to damage (so the Redcap, a small creature, wielding a Medium Scythe does 2d10 with it).
Of course, that's based on one monster which might be an exception to the rules. But it's interesting if true. It may also come at some cost (not adding your Str mod to damage with the weapon seems to be the Redcap's price of admission).
Or maybe the Redcap just gets an extra damage die on everything. Who knows.
The reaper's scythe is also keen and has deadly 3d10, while a redcap's is deadly 1d10 so maybe the keen weapon property increases the number of damage die for deadly and even gives non-deadly weapons deadly.
You have keen eyes.
I'd welcome clarification of how various buffs that affect damage dice interact. A few campaigns back we had a strengthened, enlarged monk with... something else going on (extra long arms?), and between a table full of programmers and other smart people, we could not work out what he was supposed to roll.
It sounds like the whole damage dice system is getting overhauled, so I hope and expect they're considering odd buff interactions as part of that. Having a straight track which different feats/spells/abilities all fall on, rather than each ability making up its own unique way of altering the dice, would be the way to go.
Considering it's a thing players could do since 3e (Monkey Grip in 3e, and Titan Mauler in Pathfinder) and that the Iconic Barbarian of Pathfinder uses an oversized weapon it would be rather unfortunate if it was monster only (removing the barbarian iconic would probably be seen as a poor move).So, a weapons's damage die increase by 1 for every size category above Medium (like how 5th Ed does it)?
I'm sure PCs will not be able to use oversize weapons ala the redcap, as that's been a monster feature since 3rd Ed.
Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.
Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Maybe Barbarians being able to wield BFS' will be a Core ability?
|
|
Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
It's not that hard to retool that so she took a giant shortsword/longsword, which works as a greatsword for human sized people.
|
It's not that hard to retool that so she took a giant shortsword/longsword, which works as a greatsword for human sized people.Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
I think trhe problem here is that it's said she can only use it in rage, so yeah, I would be really surprised if there wasn't AT THE VERY LEAST a rage power that let you use over-sized weapons.
What they seem to have done based on the Redcap is as follows:
-All weapons of the same type do the same damage if wielded by a character sized appropriately for them.
-However, if you somehow get the ability to wield weapons one size category up, you get an extra weapon die to damage (so the Redcap, a small creature, wielding a Medium Scythe does 2d10 with it).
This would actually make no sense for creatures of small and smaller size. A medium creature and a small creature both wield the same weapon. And yet, somehow, the small creature is doing extra damage? Does it scale further with more sizes? If somehow, someway, a fine-sized creature managed to wield a medium size weapon, would it be doing four dice extra of damage above the creature that such a weapon was actually designed for?
Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Large longsword is equivalent to Medium greatsword, so I fail to see the point here.
I think trhe problem here is that it's said she can only use it in rage, so yeah, I would be really surprised if there wasn't AT THE VERY LEAST a rage power that let you use over-sized weapons.It's not that hard to retool that so she took a giant shortsword/longsword, which works as a greatsword for human sized people.Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
I'm pretty sure iconics will change their abilities and backgrounds slightly to fit the new edition.
We don't even know if barbarians will have rage yet, for example. Yes, it's a pretty safe bet, but it could be a completely different mechanic. Seelah no longer has Smite Evil as we knew it, it's a reaction now.
I think trhe problem here is that it's said she can only use it in rage, so yeah, I would be really surprised if there wasn't AT THE VERY LEAST a rage power that let you use over-sized weapons.It's not that hard to retool that so she took a giant shortsword/longsword, which works as a greatsword for human sized people.Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
She values her oversized sword (even though she can only truly wield it properly when her blood rage takes her), but never speaks of the circumstances that forced her to flee her homeland. Some things are better left unsaid.
She can use it normally (or she would have been built as a switch-hitter), it's just flavored that the Rage bonuses compensate the oversize penalty, and I remember someone from Paizo confirming that concept, which means no, her rage isn't technically truly required.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Large longsword is equivalent to Medium greatsword, so I fail to see the point here.Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
Probably cause you moved the goalposts. You were saying just give her a Greatsword, which would change her backstory with her weapon, and now you’re saying to give her a giant Longsword to treat as a Greatsword, which is more in tune with her backstory.
Probably cause you moved the goalposts. You were saying just give her a Greatsword, which would change her backstory with her weapon, and now you’re saying to give her a giant Longsword to treat as a Greatsword, which is more in tune with her backstory.Large longsword is equivalent to Medium greatsword, so I fail to see the point here.Um, yeah it would. She got that sword from the Giant that was using it. Giants wouldn't be using an undersized sword.Greatswords are also massive. So massive they require two hands to use. Just like a Large Bastard Sword. There's nothing really stopping the developers from doing this without ignoring backstory.Iconic characters can change weapons and still be the iconics. Valeros did it. Harsk did it. Why not Amiri? Just change it to a greatsword and call it good.Because for Amiri the significance of her weapon a pretty big part of her backstory. She doesn't just use a massive sword because it deals lots of damage.
My point there was that using a different weapon that is oversized just to fit the backstory (using the Large Longsword/Medium Greatsword example) isn't a very compelling argument when you have two weapons that are statistically identical.
wuxia sized weaponry is something a lot of people really like.
Mark Seifter specifically noted in one of the Blog threads (I forget which...maybe the Fighter one?) that there are too many people who like oversized weapons for them to remove it from the game.
I like that, sounds a bit like option for fighter and barbarian too me
Mark Seifter specifically noted in one of the Blog threads (I forget which...maybe the Fighter one?) that there are too many people who like oversized weapons for them to remove it from the game.
I really feel like you should be wearing a cape.
wuxia sized weaponry is something a lot of people really like.That would be Anime/Manga-sized (Wuxia films do not feature longboard-sized weapons), and is something a lot of people really hate.
Some people like it, some people hate it - if you don't like it don't take the option.
Some people like it, some people hate it - if you don't like it don't take the option.wuxia sized weaponry is something a lot of people really like.That would be Anime/Manga-sized (Wuxia films do not feature longboard-sized weapons), and is something a lot of people really hate.
Well, I am sure that a lot of people see cartoonish shenanigans in the system and that sort of ruins the immersion for them. I can understand that sentiment and I could recommend other more “grounded” systems and settings. At the end of he day, I think the designers are the ones who get to decide on the exact tone of the game based on their own sense of aesthetics even where they might differ from my own.