| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing about making the archetypes feats is that in a campaign like Skull and Shackles, you could reward the players for accomplishing certain tasks in their piratical career by giving pirate feats as a bonus. Not entirely sure how to handle the dedication lockout in this situation right now.
But APs give characters bonuses that aren't on the normal advancement track all the time.
And furthermore if you don't like a feat you can always retrain - even the dedication feat
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The feats do seem pretty weak. Maybe roll the three into two? I feel like “don’t suck at a skill, but only on a ship” should be the sort of thing handed out reasonably cheaply.
Pirate dedication gives you a bunch of minor benefits and makes Acrobatics a signature skill for you.
Pretty sure that to get a feat a signature skill it will take a feat on its own unless it is part of this kind of bigger "feat package".
So if you want Acrobatics as a signature skill you either spend a feat for JUST that or for that, plus the pirate stuff?
(this assumes being a signature skill is meaningful and worthwhile).
The same goes for Sea Legs and Athletics- spend a feat on 'Signature skill: Athletics" or on Sea Legs and get that, plus fringe benefits relevant to ships?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I suspect that the pirate archetype will be far more useful for building npcs than it will be for player characters
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It’s not a feat chain. You’d pick Sea Legs and Boarding Action over the other options if you expect to be on a boat for awhile. If the situation changes, you can retrain to lose your Sea Legs and get something more appropriate.Pirate Dedication is a prerequisite for Sea Legs. That seems like a feat chain to me.
Prerequisites do not a feat chain make. Rope Runner and Boarding Action are a feat chain. Sea Legs is an archetype option.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I could see this being an archetype purchased with a skill feat. I don't think we have a good grasp on how strong those are but Pirate seems like it'd fit in nicely there.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I could see this being an archetype purchased with a skill feat. I don't think we have a good grasp on how strong those are but Pirate seems like it'd fit in nicely there.
Honestly yeah. All the feats they showcased in the Pirate archetype are kind of inline with the things I thought skill feats would give you. Really don't think they are worth class feats.
One thing about making the archetypes feats is that in a campaign like Skull and Shackles, you could reward the players for accomplishing certain tasks in their piratical career by giving pirate feats as a bonus. Not entirely sure how to handle the dedication lockout in this situation right now.
But APs give characters bonuses that aren't on the normal advancement track all the time.
I think this will probably turn out to be one of the most common uses of universal archetypes, especially ones with incredibly focused benefits. If you were doings something like skull and shackles, or let your party have a floating dedication feat that could change after X amount of downtime spent doing an activity, you could do stuff like have an early encounter where they don't have this boon, and then let them have it by a particularly difficult encounter it would apply for, and it could serve to make the encounter all the more fun as they get to take advantage of the environmental hazards and effects. I feel like there are a fair number of feats and traits in PF1 that pretty much fall into the same category of situationally interesting that no one picks voluntarily as a limited resource.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
1. Very much agree
2. If you are actually playing as pirates and boarding ships, it would come in handy for a class that doesn't get Sudden Charge. Rogues, bards, and clerics of Besmara want to keep up with their fighter friends getting into the action.
|
|
Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
1. Very much agree
2. If you are actually playing as pirates and boarding ships, it would come in handy for a class that doesn't get Sudden Charge. Rogues, bards, and clerics of Besmara want to keep up with their fighter friends getting into the action.
2. Sure, but I'm in the middle of Skulls and Shackles (we just finished book 3), and my gunslinger (buccaneer, human gunslinger archetype) would have been the perfect character to add this archetype, since I built him to be the swinging, climbing, swimming master. I took the feats and traits to boost those skills. And while swinging on a rope is one of his hallmarks (the archetype actually gives a deed that makes swinging on a rope more useful and easier), this archetype would only be useful during 1 or 2 encounters in Book 1 of Skulls and Shackles, a large portion of the monotonous part of Book 2, and just 2 or 3 encounters in Book 3. Its also looking like the teasers we've gotten for Book 4, will mean it will be mostly useless. This is a pirate campaign, and the pirate archetype would be largely useless for it. That doesn't track.
|
|
2. Sure, but I'm in the middle of Skulls and Shackles (we just finished book 3), and my gunslinger (buccaneer, human gunslinger archetype) would have been the perfect character to add this archetype, since I built him to be the swinging, climbing, swimming master. I took the feats and traits to boost those skills. And while swinging on a rope is one of his hallmarks (the archetype actually gives a deed that makes swinging on a rope more useful and easier), this archetype would only be useful during 1 or 2 encounters in Book 1 of Skulls and Shackles, a large portion of the monotonous part of Book 2, and just 2 or 3 encounters in Book 3. Its also looking like the teasers we've gotten for Book 4, will mean it will be mostly useless. This is a pirate campaign, and the pirate archetype would be largely useless for it. That doesn't track.Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
1. Very much agree
2. If you are actually playing as pirates and boarding ships, it would come in handy for a class that doesn't get Sudden Charge. Rogues, bards, and clerics of Besmara want to keep up with their fighter friends getting into the action.
The whole Pirate archetype or one feat from the Pirate archetype?
If the next part or three won't include ship-to-ship action, it might make sense to retrain to more appropriate feats from the archetype.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
2. Sure, but I'm in the middle of Skulls and Shackles (we just finished book 3), and my gunslinger (buccaneer, human gunslinger archetype) would have been the perfect character to add this archetype, since I built him to be the swinging, climbing, swimming master. I took the feats and traits to boost those skills. And while swinging on a rope is one of his hallmarks (the archetype actually gives a deed that makes swinging on a rope more useful and easier), this archetype would only be useful during 1 or 2 encounters in Book 1 of Skulls and Shackles, a large portion of the monotonous part of Book 2, and just 2 or 3 encounters in Book 3. Its also looking like the teasers we've gotten for Book 4, will mean it will be mostly useless. This is a pirate campaign, and the pirate archetype would be largely useless for it. That doesn't track.Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
1. Very much agree
2. If you are actually playing as pirates and boarding ships, it would come in handy for a class that doesn't get Sudden Charge. Rogues, bards, and clerics of Besmara want to keep up with their fighter friends getting into the action.
The whole Pirate archetype or one feat from the Pirate archetype?
If the next part or three won't include ship-to-ship action, it might make sense to retrain to more appropriate feats from the archetype.
I hate the idea of retraining. I don't think that's a valid argument for why something should exist as a weak or highly specific set of abilities.
Pirate Dedication and Boarding Action are highly specific feats that only really work while on board a ship. The Acrobatics and Athletic signature skills are worthwhile, and potentially something I could have waited until level 4 to take the second one. I don't feel that the signature skills thing is good enough to make the rest of the things the feats give you so highly dependent on being aboard a ship.
Sea Legs could be useful in several other encounters and locations in the first three books of Skulls and Shackles, largely due to the swimming and holding your breath aspects. And could be useful in many non-pirate or ship-based campaigns.
If the probably perfect character designed, playing in the perfect campaign, to take this archetype, wouldn't really want to have this archetype because of how highly specific most of its feats are (including the entry Dedication feat), then its not a very well designed archetype. And the availability of retraining should never be an argument for why the archetype is valid. The archetype should be able to stand on its own as a good option, even if the option is only for specific types of campaigns, without worrying about getting rid of part, half, or all of it when you realize its not very good or is no longer useful.
And it is unlikely that the playtest, as currently designed, is going to be able to test the actual usefulness in game play of this archetype. So all they will have to go on is suppositions and theory-crafting.
Bottom line though, the archetype is way to specific to be any good to take, even in Paizo's water-based, pirate campaign. Which is a clear indicator that it needs to be redesigned.
Unless the retraining works at the speed of the Brawler's ability to gain feats in a single round it's really not sufficient.
But, I think that somewhat narrow feats that provide a solid non-situational bonus (Signature Skill: Acrobatics/Athletics), and situational additional benefits are worthwhile.
|
|
Unless the retraining works at the speed of the Brawler's ability to gain feats in a single round it's really not sufficient.
But, I think that somewhat narrow feats that provide a solid non-situational bonus (Signature Skill: Acrobatics/Athletics), and situational additional benefits are worthwhile.
I'll agree with that, as long as the situational additional benefits aren't so situational to be only usable in about 10% of an Adventure Path that's perfectly themed for such a feat.
I'll agree with that, as long as the situational additional benefits aren't so situational to be only usable in about 10% of an Adventure Path that's perfectly themed for such a feat.Unless the retraining works at the speed of the Brawler's ability to gain feats in a single round it's really not sufficient.
But, I think that somewhat narrow feats that provide a solid non-situational bonus (Signature Skill: Acrobatics/Athletics), and situational additional benefits are worthwhile.
I think that's a problem specific to the AP, and a bit more generally to pirate games.
I've been involved in several of them- everyone likes the idea of a Pirate game, but the pirate game isn't actually a very good game to run/play in, so it inevitably morphs into something different.
Even watching something like Pirates of the Caribbean most of the encounters don't occur on ships- just a few memorable ones, then they go land side a lot.
The kind of "Pirate" who really wants these feats is the one whose doing actual piracy, which is really rare in RPGs, and would get a bit repetitive/dull if you actually followed through on using that in a game for an entire campaign.
|
|
I'll agree with that, as long as the situational additional benefits aren't so situational to be only usable in about 10% of an Adventure Path that's perfectly themed for such a feat.Unless the retraining works at the speed of the Brawler's ability to gain feats in a single round it's really not sufficient.
But, I think that somewhat narrow feats that provide a solid non-situational bonus (Signature Skill: Acrobatics/Athletics), and situational additional benefits are worthwhile.
I think that's a problem specific to the AP, and a bit more generally to pirate games.
I've been involved in several of them- everyone likes the idea of a Pirate game, but the pirate game isn't actually a very good game to run/play in, so it inevitably morphs into something different.
Even watching something like Pirates of the Caribbean most of the encounters don't occur on ships- just a few memorable ones, then they go land side a lot.
The kind of "Pirate" who really wants these feats is the one whose doing actual piracy, which is really rare in RPGs, and would get a bit repetitive/dull if you actually followed through on using that in a game for an entire campaign.
The romanticized pirate idea, that you've seen in Hollywood and read about in books by Robert Louis Stephenson and Jules Verne and other authors, is not a solely ship-born character. They go to shore often. Whether that's to explore an island to hide/find treasure or go to port and have a city adventure. Skulls and Shackles actually works quite well as a pirate adventure. Except book 2, which is extremely monotonous as you spend a lot of time doing the specific ship to ship piracy thing.
A pirate archetype should be able to be useful to the romanticized pirate that players will want to play, not only useful to a very singular and specific type of encounter that piracy is likely to encounter.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A pirate archetype should be able to be useful to the romanticized pirate that players will want to play, not only useful to a very singular and specific type of encounter that piracy is likely to encounter.
Do you have a defined threshold for usefulness? I'm trying to apply your opinion to a hypothetical undead-hunting archetype or feat option. How many encounters in a chapter have to be against undead for such a feat to be useful?
I would say you need a 10% chance of encountering undead, per feat, to justify taking a feat that only worked on Undead.
Things that make you spend General/Class Feats into what could be Skill Feats are weak and not useful.
|
|
A pirate archetype should be able to be useful to the romanticized pirate that players will want to play, not only useful to a very singular and specific type of encounter that piracy is likely to encounter.Do you have a defined threshold for usefulness? I'm trying to apply your opinion to a hypothetical undead-hunting archetype or feat option. How many encounters in a chapter have to be against undead for such a feat to be useful?
For instance:
Boarding Action -- why is it only useful if you are swinging on a rope from ship to ship? Swinging on a rope in most situations would be something that's difficult. Learning to swing on a rope from ship to ship should allow me to get similar benefits from swinging on a rope in a bar (or swinging on a chandelier or the hanging chain holding an overhead lantern) or down a staircase, over a pit, etc. Its still highly specific--Swinging on a rope. but it doesn't confine it to not only on board a ship, but specifically to swinging from one ship to another while attempting to make an attack.I'd probably be even more inclined to like this option if it was any rope swinging on a ship, not just during a boarding action.
I don't know if there is a specific line one can draw, but rather a "know it when you see it" sort of thing. But if its only ever going to be useful for 10% of a campaign specifically designed for the theme of the feat, then its not useful enough.
If you are playing in a campaign filled with all sorts of undead, all over the place. Then yeah, a feat that is specific to killing undead would be fine. But if this feat only made it useful about 10% of the time in a predominately (you are going to fight undead) themed campaign, then it isn't a well-designed feat.
|
|
A pirate archetype should be able to be useful to the romanticized pirate that players will want to play, not only useful to a very singular and specific type of encounter that piracy is likely to encounter.Do you have a defined threshold for usefulness? I'm trying to apply your opinion to a hypothetical undead-hunting archetype or feat option. How many encounters in a chapter have to be against undead for such a feat to be useful?For instance:
Boarding Action -- why is it only useful if you are swinging on a rope from ship to ship? Swinging on a rope in most situations would be something that's difficult. Learning to swing on a rope from ship to ship should allow me to get similar benefits from swinging on a rope in a bar (or swinging on a chandelier or the hanging chain holding an overhead lantern) or down a staircase, over a pit, etc. Its still highly specific--Swinging on a rope. but it doesn't confine it to not only on board a ship, but specifically to swinging from one ship to another while attempting to make an attack.I'd probably be even more inclined to like this option if it was any rope swinging on a ship, not just during a boarding action.
Isn't the Rope Runner feat what you are thinking of? The ability to swing from a rope to move around a ship/ from ship to ship? The Boarding Action feat is what it says: a boarding action charge with some bonus damage. It is a specific action you can take with your general rope swinging ability.
Rope Runner gives you the general rope swinging maneuverability, useful in any combat on your ship. You'd only take Boarding Action if you expected to board other ships.
Big things I don't like about this archetype:
1) Sea Legs is the name of a feat that really has nothing to do with what Sea Legs are. Its named incorrectly.
2) The ability to swing on a rope should not be relegated to only a ship and then only during a boarding action. This ability is so highly specific, that it likely wouldn't get used all that much.
I'm extremely underwhelmed by this archetype. I don't mind it being an archetype. But even in a mostly ship-based, piratey campaign, this is a pretty useless archetype in my view.
2) I'm pretty sure Rope Runner is the actual feat that you're looking for that does the rope-swing.
Also remember that Boarding Action applies whenever you board or disembark any ship.
IIRC, PF2 modules will use milestone advancement by default (punctuated by downtime I expect). The way I recall it, experience points are basically an 'optional rule for monty haul campaigns' now.
That being said, I think Adventure Paths will frequently make 'adjustments' to the standard advancment system; such as granting you the benefits drawn from the Sailor background and Pirate archetype automatically at particular points in the story. Thus freeing players to 'play what they want' more, and 'what they need to not suck' less.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is why always applicable feats will always be first picks even if they are a smidge weaker.
Niche feats need to give a significant boost over a general feat to be worth the fact that you will only be using them 1 encounter in 5 if you are lucky.
I hate the idea of retraining.I hope you reexamine this feeling when we see the new retraining rules. I think the system could be an excellent vehicle for lateral character growth without falling into the problems of PF1's version.
The problem I see is that it doesn't matter how good the system is, there are a large number of GMs and players who dislike retraining and the easier it is the more they hate it, it's unrealistic or ruins immersion or ... something ...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It isn't growth though. It's treating professional or personal skill like going to a garden shed and swapping a shovel for hedge clippers.
Deleting part of your character like it never happened and picking up something completely unrelated for no reason beyond 'you can do this at level 5' isn't even remotely growth. Just build shenanigans.
----
The pirate archetype has several major problems.
First, terminology (the edition's big bugbear). Sea legs has a specific meaning- adjusting your balance to being on board a ship.
Second, its inherently limiting. Why do you need any of this to get on a boat and steal things from other boats? Hellknight makes sense for an archetype, it's not just about being a member of an organization or indulging in a hobby/profession, it's about specific skills, training and methodology. Piracy doesn't require anything but the ability to buy or seize a ship, and a willingness to steal and/or murder.
Third, its mechanically terrible. It just shouldn't be taking up space in a printed product.
|
|
A pirate archetype should be able to be useful to the romanticized pirate that players will want to play, not only useful to a very singular and specific type of encounter that piracy is likely to encounter.Do you have a defined threshold for usefulness? I'm trying to apply your opinion to a hypothetical undead-hunting archetype or feat option. How many encounters in a chapter have to be against undead for such a feat to be useful?For instance:
Boarding Action -- why is it only useful if you are swinging on a rope from ship to ship? Swinging on a rope in most situations would be something that's difficult. Learning to swing on a rope from ship to ship should allow me to get similar benefits from swinging on a rope in a bar (or swinging on a chandelier or the hanging chain holding an overhead lantern) or down a staircase, over a pit, etc. Its still highly specific--Swinging on a rope. but it doesn't confine it to not only on board a ship, but specifically to swinging from one ship to another while attempting to make an attack.I'd probably be even more inclined to like this option if it was any rope swinging on a ship, not just during a boarding action.
Isn't the Rope Runner feat what you are thinking of? The ability to swing from a rope to move around a ship/ from ship to ship? The Boarding Action feat is what it says: a boarding action charge with some bonus damage. It is a specific action you can take with your general rope swinging ability.
Rope Runner gives you the general rope swinging maneuverability, useful in any combat on your ship. You'd only take Boarding Action if you expected to board other ships.
I only have the blog to go off of right now, and Rope Runner is not in the Blog.
|
|
The problem I see is that it doesn't matter how good the system is, there are a large number of GMs and players who dislike retraining and the easier it is the more they hate it, it's unrealistic or ruins immersion or ... something ...I hate the idea of retraining.I hope you reexamine this feeling when we see the new retraining rules. I think the system could be an excellent vehicle for lateral character growth without falling into the problems of PF1's version.
It's hard to shake those subjective opinions, but I hope the concerns can be at least partially addressed in the retraining write-up. Working with a system designed with retraining in mind might help people accept the mechanic on its narrative terms.
|
|
This is why always applicable feats will always be first picks even if they are a smidge weaker.
Niche feats need to give a significant boost over a general feat to be worth the fact that you will only be using them 1 encounter in 5 if you are lucky.
The problem I see is that it doesn't matter how good the system is, there are a large number of GMs and players who dislike retraining and the easier it is the more they hate it, it's unrealistic or ruins immersion or ... something ...I hate the idea of retraining.I hope you reexamine this feeling when we see the new retraining rules. I think the system could be an excellent vehicle for lateral character growth without falling into the problems of PF1's version.
I'm willing to examine them and see how they might fit into games I'm running or playing in and whether that paradigm fits with what I like.
However, I do not think that the existence of retraining should, in any way, affect game mechanics and balance. In other words, "Oh, well we balanced this feat in this way because you can just retrain it later." That sets a really bad design precedent I feel.
|
|
I only have the blog to go off of right now, and Rope Runner is not in the Blog.Well, the Boarding Action previewed in the blog doesn't give you any ability to swing on a rope. So make of that what you will.
This is what's in the Blog:
[[AA]] BOARDING ACTION FEAT 6
Archetype
Prerequisites Rope Runner
Swing on a rope or Stride up to twice your Speed. As long as you either boarded or disembarked a boat during this movement, make a Strike and deal an extra die of damage if you hit.
Bolded is what I'm talking about. Sure, it says "Rope Runner" is a prerequisite, but I have no idea what rope runner is.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I only have the blog to go off of right now, and Rope Runner is not in the Blog.Well, the Boarding Action previewed in the blog doesn't give you any ability to swing on a rope. So make of that what you will.This is what's in the Blog:
[[AA]] BOARDING ACTION FEAT 6
Archetype
Prerequisites Rope Runner
Swing on a rope or Stride up to twice your Speed. As long as you either boarded or disembarked a boat during this movement, make a Strike and deal an extra die of damage if you hit.
Bolded is what I'm talking about. Sure, it says "Rope Runner" is a prerequisite, but I have no idea what rope runner is.
That doesn't give you any new ability, or do you think the feat allows you to Stride as well?
The feat is telling you to do things you are already capable of, namely swinging on a rope or Striding across the deck.
|
|
The problem I see is that it doesn't matter how good the system is, there are a large number of GMs and players who dislike retraining and the easier it is the more they hate it, it's unrealistic or ruins immersion or ... something ...I hate the idea of retraining.I hope you reexamine this feeling when we see the new retraining rules. I think the system could be an excellent vehicle for lateral character growth without falling into the problems of PF1's version.It's hard to shake those subjective opinions, but I hope the concerns can be at least partially addressed in the retraining write-up. Working with a system designed with retraining in mind might help people accept the mechanic on its narrative terms.
If the system is good and meaningful, then I'll probably see about using it. But I don't need to see it to reject the idea of the mechanics and balance of a system being built around the idea that you just take one thing for awhile until you retrain it.
Things should not be balanced based on the fact that you can retrain it later.
|
|
I only have the blog to go off of right now, and Rope Runner is not in the Blog.Well, the Boarding Action previewed in the blog doesn't give you any ability to swing on a rope. So make of that what you will.This is what's in the Blog:
[[AA]] BOARDING ACTION FEAT 6
Archetype
Prerequisites Rope Runner
Swing on a rope or Stride up to twice your Speed. As long as you either boarded or disembarked a boat during this movement, make a Strike and deal an extra die of damage if you hit.
Bolded is what I'm talking about. Sure, it says "Rope Runner" is a prerequisite, but I have no idea what rope runner is.
That doesn't give you any new ability, or do you think the feat allows you to Stride as well?
The feat is telling you to do things you are already capable of, namely swinging on a rope or Striding across the deck.
But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.
After all, they don't seem to care about naming conventions being meaningful to the ability (i.e. See Sea Legs.)
|
|
But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.
Just because Boarding Action only gives benefits on a ship (It doesn't need to be ship-to-ship, just either from a ship or to a ship), doesn't mean Rope Runner is similarly restricted. You are assuming a lot about a feat you haven't seen.
I only have the blog to go off of right now, and Rope Runner is not in the Blog.Well, the Boarding Action previewed in the blog doesn't give you any ability to swing on a rope. So make of that what you will.This is what's in the Blog:
[[AA]] BOARDING ACTION FEAT 6
Archetype
Prerequisites Rope Runner
Swing on a rope or Stride up to twice your Speed. As long as you either boarded or disembarked a boat during this movement, make a Strike and deal an extra die of damage if you hit.
Bolded is what I'm talking about. Sure, it says "Rope Runner" is a prerequisite, but I have no idea what rope runner is.
That doesn't give you any new ability, or do you think the feat allows you to Stride as well?
The feat is telling you to do things you are already capable of, namely swinging on a rope or Striding across the deck.
But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.
After all, they don't seem to care about naming conventions being meaningful to the ability (i.e. See Sea Legs.)
Or swing off a ship into ground. Or walk off a ship. Or walk onto a ship.
All of these are valid moves for that feat.
Interestingly enough, you can actually use this insanely well with a ranged weapon.
|
|
But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.Just because Boarding Action only gives benefits on a ship (It doesn't need to be ship-to-ship, just either from a ship or to a ship), doesn't mean Rope Runner is similarly restricted. You are assuming a lot about a feat you haven't seen.
I'm not assuming anything about rope runner. You seem to be misreading what I'm writing.
|
|
I'm not assuming anything about rope runner. You seem to be misreading what I'm writing.But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.Just because Boarding Action only gives benefits on a ship (It doesn't need to be ship-to-ship, just either from a ship or to a ship), doesn't mean Rope Runner is similarly restricted. You are assuming a lot about a feat you haven't seen.
I think you are misreading Boarding Action.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Things should not be balanced based on the fact that you can retrain it later.I reasonably disagree. Retraining exists as a core mechanic and its existence should be taken into account when designing feats.
I think we will forever be at an impass on this point. Something being a core mechanic does not mean it needs to be included in the discussion for the balance of feats (caveat: If balance of a feat being trained into is considered, to devalue the ability to later train into a feat that could otherwise break the game because you can train into it, then sure.)
In other words, don't build a crappy feat with the intent that its necessary now to do something, but its crappy now because you can train out of it later.
Do make sure that the balance of feats is considered with what could happen to the power level of the character if you suddenly trained into a feat, to make sure it doesn't explode.
|
|
I think you are misreading Boarding Action.I'm not assuming anything about rope runner. You seem to be misreading what I'm writing.But only if you are doing so from ship to ship. You can swing on a rope anywhere. So why wouldn't I be able to swing on a rope in a construction site or off the chain dangling from the ceiling holding a chandelier and still get that attack? Its still the concept of swinging on a rope. Just because you name something "Boarding Action" doesn't mean you have to build something with such a narrow focus that its nigh unusable.Just because Boarding Action only gives benefits on a ship (It doesn't need to be ship-to-ship, just either from a ship or to a ship), doesn't mean Rope Runner is similarly restricted. You are assuming a lot about a feat you haven't seen.
I'm not. I even quoted it above.
You can swing on a rope or stride up to double your speed and as long as the movement includes an embarkment or disembarkment from a boat, you get to attack at the end of the action.
But why does the swing on a rope have to involve a boat to get the extra strike? Ropes can hang from anywhere.
I would let you activate broarding action's strike by em/disembarking similar structural elements (gallows, rafters, open staircases, etc). I would have also used kinder phrasing like "a vehicle (or similar structural element)" instead of "a boat".
A munchkin might carry a Tiny Rowboat to always have something to disembark. Since the feat didn't say the boat had to be appropriately sized, or that it couldn't be beeched...
|
|
I would let you activate broarding action's strike by em/disembarking similar structural elements (gallows, rafters, open staircases, etc). I would have also used kinder phrasing like "a vehicle (or similar structural element)" instead of "a boat".
Yup, this is what I'm thinking.
A munchkin might carry a Tiny Rowboat to always have something to disembark. Since the feat didn't say the boat had to be appropriately sized, or that it couldn't be beeched...
I hadn't thought of that, but yeah. The attempt to be super clear with language, but brief, in almost every instance I've read in the blogs so far, leaves things incredibly open to needing GM rulings. Which is not a good thing.