Being punished for wearing the "wrong" armor type at 13th level?


Rules Questions

251 to 300 of 311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I still say the argument that's its okay because spells are different or they get less is just dumb.

"Yeah look its balanced he doesn't get as many spells, from these auto scaling feats that also grant proficiency increases to master."

"Stop right there caster! Don't you dare try to get anything but expert proficiency and nothing else with 2 feats, or we'll kick you out for stealing from this poor defenseless martial. Also you must sign this pledge to worship and service [insert god here]."


I mean it's 4 class feats, I wouldn't want to spend 4 class feats to just get proficiency increases.

all the spell caster classes had the luxury of being prepackaged with enough that they made 3 templated feats for each caster. I can't even think of what an equatable thing would be from any given martial.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Casters need to spend 2 class feats (one of which is at lv 14) to get nothing but expert in armor. All the other feats are half level or level 6 feats.

A Champion taking Wizard feats? Well for 2 feats he has trained 3rd lv casting, 3 feats (lv 12) he has expert 6th lv casting, 4 feats (lv 18) he has master 8th lv casting. And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).

Yes that's right it's faster to get expert spellcasting and spell slots than getting expert armor with no other benefits.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:

Casters need to spend 2 class feats (one of which is at lv 14) to get nothing but expert in armor. All the other feats are half level or level 6 feats.

A Champion taking Wizard feats? Well for 2 feats he has trained 3rd lv casting, 3 feats (lv 12) he has expert 6th lv casting, 4 feats (lv 18) he has master 8th lv casting. And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).

Yes that's right it's faster to get expert spellcasting and spell slots than getting expert armor with no other benefits.

and it's only 1 level faster for a wizard to get expert unarmored naturally.

I still don't see it as much of an issue. as a wizard you'll just innately have more spell slots forever and having casting since 1.

to me it seems either(fighter/champion-wizard or wizard-champion) option is more or less equally viable.


Seannoss wrote:
Wouldn't a fighter/wizard who wants to rock that heavy armor be a fighter first and take the wizard archetype? I know it isn't the same amount of spells but characters need priorities, you can't do everything on one character.

Personally I'd go with Wizard with Fighter Dedication.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Seannoss wrote:
Wouldn't a fighter/wizard who wants to rock that heavy armor be a fighter first and take the wizard archetype? I know it isn't the same amount of spells but characters need priorities, you can't do everything on one character.
Personally I'd go with Wizard with Fighter Dedication.

Why ?

Unless I'm mistaken Wizard/Fighter ends up Untrained in Heavy Armor whereas Fighter/Wizard ends up Master in Heavy Armor.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Temperans wrote:
And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).

What feat is that?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

All caster multiclasses get an X Breadth feat along with their basic/expert/master casting for character level 8 or up. Doubles spell slots except for the two highest. So you end up at 20 as
Cantrips, 1st-6th: 2, 7th and 8th 1, none of 9-10 vs full casters getting 3 of all levels except 10th (1 or 2 of that)


Ravingdork wrote:
Temperans wrote:
And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).
What feat is that?

Arcane Breadth

Bloodline Breadth
Divine Breadth
Occult Breadth
Primal Breadth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not to mention in an MCD you should be expected to take at least 3 feats since you can’t even take other Archetypes when you don’t, though not required

The fact that the Wizard doesn’t even really want any of the other Feat benefits except proficiency matching his standard weapons and he has to spend 2 Class Feats just to get it and then find some value in another just to get out of the MCD lock is silly.

“Rules for thee, but not for me“ on the premise of balance need to at least be balanced otherwise it just looks silly.

And a “+2 striking wand” is not necessary given that spells can have their own riders to compensate for that (like Shocking Grasp) and because they always have an affect even in failure (only a strike from a fighter gets that as a Class Feat)

But the to hit is comparable because that’s what’s expected to hit and thus the proficiency should have parity.

I don’t really have a problem with the MCDs anyways because they ultimately won’t matter when new classes get released. The Fighter MCD is probably one of the least appetizing ones in the book anyways.

My main gripe is with the General Feats and excessive proficiency locking around Class Lists, the MCDs just show the mentality for the edition was “put casters in a box, even if that box looks like a coffin”.

Now personally I think casters require specific combinations and builds to work, but are still decent and possibly strong (bard looks really good) but the lack of expansion on the proficiency front is very anti-modular compared to the rest of the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
NemoNoName wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Temperans wrote:
And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).
What feat is that?

Arcane Breadth

Bloodline Breadth
Divine Breadth
Occult Breadth
Primal Breadth

Thanks! I'm not sure how I missed that.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
Ravingdork wrote:
NemoNoName wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Temperans wrote:
And if he want he can even get 5th feat to double his spells slots (lv 8).
What feat is that?

Arcane Breadth

Bloodline Breadth
Divine Breadth
Occult Breadth
Primal Breadth

WHAT!? NO LOVE FOR MY SORCERERS!?

(At least that explains why I never saw it.)

It's right there, Bloodline Breadth.


Midnightoker wrote:

Not to mention in an MCD you should be expected to take at least 3 feats since you can’t even take other Archetypes when you don’t, though not required

The fact that the Wizard doesn’t even really want any of the other Feat benefits except proficiency matching his standard weapons and he has to spend 2 Class Feats just to get it and then find some value in another just to get out of the MCD lock is silly.

“Rules for thee, but not for me“ on the premise of balance need to at least be balanced otherwise it just looks silly.

And a “+2 striking wand” is not necessary given that spells can have their own riders to compensate for that (like Shocking Grasp) and because they always have an affect even in failure (only a strike from a fighter gets that as a Class Feat)

But the to hit is comparable because that’s what’s expected to hit and thus the proficiency should have parity.

I don’t really have a problem with the MCDs anyways because they ultimately won’t matter when new classes get released. The Fighter MCD is probably one of the least appetizing ones in the book anyways.

My main gripe is with the General Feats and excessive proficiency locking around Class Lists, the MCDs just show the mentality for the edition was “put casters in a box, even if that box looks like a coffin”.

Now personally I think casters require specific combinations and builds to work, but are still decent and possibly strong (bard looks really good) but the lack of expansion on the proficiency front is very anti-modular compared to the rest of the game.

shocking grasp is the only spell that i can see that gains a +1 and it's situational, so it at least sometimes puts you on parity with someone of 1 less proficiency with weapons using a +3 weapon.

basically a casting attack proficiency is more or less equal to 1 lower proficiency with a weapon or armor, except for trains which are more equal.

so they get up to master which is more or less equal to expert in weapons or armor.


Bandw2 wrote:


shocking grasp is the only spell that i can see that gains a +1 and it's situational, so it at least sometimes puts you on parity with someone of 1 less proficiency with weapons using a +3 weapon.

basically a casting attack proficiency is more or less equal to 1 lower proficiency with a weapon or armor, except for trains which are more equal.

so they get up to master which is more or less equal to expert in weapons or armor.

I don't think it's been "proven" that it is equal to expert at all, especially not when you consider Specialization effects that only trigger for certain Proficiency tiers.

A "+3 weapon" isn't available to anyone below 16th level, so if your argument is that "The reason your Expert proficiency is okay is because in 4 levels (the level you're even allowed a 16th level item) you'll get a weapon to make up for what you lack in proficiency", then your argument has a lot of holes.

In terms of wealth you can't even afford the weapon even if you spend all of your total wealth until level 15. As if the Wizard could even afford to buy such a weapon to forsake literally every thing else on his person.

Basically, in order to be proficiency as you should be now not only do you have to invest two Class Feats for Fighter MCD (and pick a 3rd to stomach) you also have to spend nearly 10k gold on a weapon you're going to be marginally okay with just to keep up with people of a higher tier (who will also have weapon bonuses, even if not +3).

It's just not feasible at all. The Fighter in the MCD scenario can grab this Weapon and use his spells, Weapon at Legendary Spells at Master, and he had to purchase nothing for his spells to operate this way.

You also conveniently ignored the major reason Spell Proficiency at Master is comparable to Weapon Proficiency at Master:

- Strikes do not have riders or Failure effects unless you have a Feat that overrides or supplements the behavior.

- All Spells have a Critical Failure/Success and a "consolation" prize for when they succeed save/fail your attack.

As if the idea of saying "Oh this Proficiency at Expert is equal to another proficiency at Master" isn't convoluted and unnecessary. It makes no sense to create a unifying system but then say "some proficiency is more equal than others".


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Wooh. Long thread but I've been convinced.

I vote we remove proficiency boosts from MCAs and let the profocincy general feats scale with whatever your class gives you. Just like the ancestory feats.

Fighter and Monk dedication can give a free level 1 feat since they are all about feats having no class paths.

Champion can give reaction or lay on hands.

Rogue, well it was odd that they gave light armor to start with, maybe a free skill feat to go with all the proficiencies.

Of course that means I should probably go work this out in the Homebrew section since anyone who plays PFS or RAW won't care.


Midnightoker wrote:

Dex is a better stat than Str period for a Caster:

Reflex Saves vs no save equivalent
Acrobatics/Thievery/Stealth over Athletics
Ranged Weapon Rolls vs melee damage/thrown damage/to hit melee weapons
You can use Dex for initiative with Avoid Notice in Exploration mode

Now in the case of the Weapons, I'd call it "who cares" because we're talking about a Wizard who spent three general Feats on Armor and can no longer afford Weapon Proficiencies outside the class without blowing Class Feats.

So overall, Casters can take advantage of the things Dex offers far more than they can take advantage of the Str, because even if they wanted to swing melee combat the DPR is still worse than a cantrip due to Proficiency on the weapon gated at Expert (regardless of what you do).

Bulk only matters in the context of needing the Bulk to use the armor. It's a self-fulfilling thing. Wizards are not in need of Bulk usually.

They also aren't like to be needing Athletics, as Swimming, Climbing, etc. are things that can be supplemented with spells, rope, or simply patience. The other activities apply to Melee combat, which just like the weapons, you are going to be poor at and are more likely to crit fail against enemies than succeed past about 13th level.

So you've got 18 Str now, and you can wear Full Plate.

So what? You can't do a bunch of things the guy in Clothes can do, you are investing in a piece of equipment that he doesn't have to, you don't have better reflex saves (only an equivalent helper bonus) and since your Dex is capped and his isn't probably indefinitely, and you're still worse than just about any non-caster combatant in melee combat.

And lest we forget, the Wizard just spent 3 General Feats (more than half your total) to do this.

I dunno about that period. I never liked those "That's it period." statements, seem a bit limiting.

Say we going with fullplate in this example, 18str.
+3 Reflex save from fullplate, that's on par with 16Dex.
Athletics is nice for climbing and swimming, two checks that can even kill you depending on situation, and the boost to maneuvers isn't the worst thing out there, you could debuff an enemy and shove him away if he gets too clingy. Thievery and stealth are a personal choice niche, just like Athletics, except you need to spend more skill increases to keep them relevant.
Initiative defaults to Perception unless you can give a good reason for another skill. I'm not familiar with Avoid Notice, but with that token, you could argue using Athletics Force Open to open up with kicking a door open or climbing up a tree.

If you use proficiencies on weapons, it'd first cost one for simple weapons, then another for martial weapons, and then we'd be back here saying how a martial weapon is being punished because we get Expert in Staff and Clubs. As for the Dex to ranged attacks, I personally don't think that using crossbows, slings or darts is worth it in place of a cantrip. It's as viable as swinging your staff with more accuracy and damage from STR so that's a personal taste.

If they don't need swimming or climbing because spells can supplement that, they won't need acrobatics or sneak either. The only way unarmored gets more relfex save, is if you get dex to 18 or 20, giving +1 or +2 more respectively. The general feat tax isn't that bad due to the alternatives being low. I don't count skill feats since you get those separately anyway. There's 18 general feats total, two of them locked behind legendary skills, and three of them behind 14+ stats. I'd take +4 to hit and to damage with a staff than +4 to hit with a crossbow or sling if it's between str and dex. That gives me versatility at least-

Again, it's personal preference and aesthetics, but a wizard in fullplate has a more impactful aesthetic for those 3 feats than one who grabs the other general feats available at those levels.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
I dunno about that period. I never liked those "That's it period." statements, seem a bit limiting.

Sure.

But then comments like this:

"a wizard in fullplate has a more impactful aesthetic for those 3 feats than one who grabs the other general feats available at those levels"

Also fall into that category right? (also I strongly disagree and there's not much to back up the above statement, since Toughness, increased Investment in Magic, Every Skill Feat, Ancestral Paragon, etc. can all be taken... but whatever).

Quote:

Say we going with fullplate in this example, 18str.

+3 Reflex save from fullplate, that's on par with 16Dex.

Alright, so you're "even" on Reflex saves, but that's until Dex reaches 18 (which it inevitably would) at which point, full plate loses.

Quote:
Athletics is nice for climbing and swimming, two checks that can even kill you depending on situation

I addressed this in my original rebuttal, the Wizard can cast spells to supplement those behaviors and a Wizard isn't going to actively pursue Athletics based checks unless they have to with a high Dex build.

Being good at conditional tasks that can be mitigated with Spells (or patience) is a choice, not a necessity (or even particularly "good" IMO).

Quote:
the boost to maneuvers isn't the worst thing out there, you could debuff an enemy and shove him away if he gets too clingy.

The manuevers that you are more likely to Critically Fail than Succeed at with your "Expert Proficiency" weapons? You're actually better off not even doing it.

And by the time this even comes online (where you ran 18 Str Wizard without Full Plate for several levels) enemies aren't even likely to be within size thresholds consistently enough to do it.

Quote:
Thievery and stealth are a personal choice niche, just like Athletics, except you need to spend more skill increases to keep them relevant.

One, at least Stealth can be used during Exploration mode for initiative.

Two, Stealth can be used in tandem with Invisibility for exceptional effect (and since you can use it on yourself, it's an option).

Three, how are you POSSIBLY going to tell me that Athletics doesn't require Skill Increases to be relevant? If anything it needs more Skill Increases to be relevant. If you mean because I am referencing two skills, that just means the Wizard has choices (if he wants to be a Trap person, or whatever, he can, but Stealth is likely the better choice).

Quote:
Initiative defaults to Perception unless you can give a good reason for another skill. I'm not familiar with Avoid Notice, but with that token, you could argue using Athletics Force Open to open up with kicking a door open or climbing up a tree.

Avoid Notice literally does this, so before you dictate what's inherently "good" about stats, then maybe a full assessment would help.

Quote:
If they don't need swimming or climbing because spells can supplement that, they won't need acrobatics or sneak either.

Not true, because Stealth is an opposed roll, and Invisibility is no longer "automatically hidden forever" like PF1.

Athletics based movement is beaten with level 3 Levitate. It's not really the same comparison.

Quote:
I don't count skill feats since you get those separately anyway.

I didn't know we could just not count things. Duly noted.

So your whole argument literally boiled down to "I spent 3 General Feats and I'm not objectively better, but to me, I think it's better so therefore everyone will always take Full Plate because it's OP"

I disagree, clearly.


Midnightoker wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
I dunno about that period. I never liked those "That's it period." statements, seem a bit limiting.

Sure.

But then comments like this:

"a wizard in fullplate has a more impactful aesthetic for those 3 feats than one who grabs the other general feats available at those levels"

Also fall into that category right? (also I strongly disagree and there's not much to back up the above statement, since Toughness, increased Investment in Magic, Every Skill Feat, Ancestral Paragon, etc. can all be taken... but whatever).

Quote:

Say we going with fullplate in this example, 18str.

+3 Reflex save from fullplate, that's on par with 16Dex.

Alright, so you're "even" on Reflex saves, but that's until Dex reaches 18 (which it inevitably would) at which point, full plate loses.

Quote:
Athletics is nice for climbing and swimming, two checks that can even kill you depending on situation

I addressed this in my original rebuttal, the Wizard can cast spells to supplement those behaviors and a Wizard isn't going to actively pursue Athletics based checks unless they have to with a high Dex build.

Being good at conditional tasks that can be mitigated with Spells (or patience) is a choice, not a necessity (or even particularly "good" IMO).

Quote:
the boost to maneuvers isn't the worst thing out there, you could debuff an enemy and shove him away if he gets too clingy.

The manuevers that you are more likely to Critically Fail than Succeed at with your "Expert Proficiency" weapons? You're actually better off not even doing it.

And by the time this even comes online (where you ran 18 Str Wizard without Full Plate for several levels) enemies aren't even likely to be within size thresholds consistently enough to do it.

Quote:
Thievery and stealth are a personal choice niche, just like Athletics, except you need to spend more skill increases to keep them relevant.
One, at least Stealth can be used during Exploration mode for...

I feel those two differ. But sure, I might have phrased it poorly. If we include skill feats, which even wizard gets ten of, then yes, general feats give a few more options. But if armor proficiency is a feat tax, then downgrading a general feat to a skill feat should be also considered that?

True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)

As for using spells for climb/swim/breakthrough/maneuvers. That varies very much with class. Not all casters can cast underwater, and even waterbreathing has long casting time and requires verbal component, so if you're not planning for a swim, you're not gonna use it. Spider climb requires somatic component, so if you suddenly have a need for climbing, or are dangling on a ledge, you won't be casting it easily. The spells win if you prepare them for the day/repetoir and prepare for the activity. Athletics keeps you passively ready at the least. That's down to preference I suppose. I'd rather use those spell slots for other things, such as Invisibility, which can be cast with two actions, and has no verbal component. If a plated wizard needed to suddenly hide, he can do that. If an unarmored wizard wants to climb or swim, he has to prepare for it for the day.

Initiative wise, you can apply dex if you can find a good reason to use a dex skill, such as Sneaking or Acrobatics, while the Str could use the 4 points into wis for a constant +2, or even charisma for intimidate or diplomacy, giving more versatility. At early levels, it's easier to buff your melee presence than ranged, or so I feel at least, I could be wrong. If you needed a clutch Shove or Trip, you can always use True Strike, which is just level 1, so plenty of that to go around.

I'm not sure if this is optimal, but it doesn't sound period useless in it's entirety. Depending on ancestry and class the heavy armor kicks in earlier, depending on game and gm you could get mithral easy or not and only need 16 Str to have no penalties. Or eat some cost and end up with four property runes. Dex might be better, but it has it's own costs instead of general feats, needing to be maxed out to 20 along with a 20 in casting stat, and comes in with a lack of special material variety other armors have. While Str caster isn't the best in melee, it's more versatile(warpriest?) than a dex one who only functions at range, unless you spend feats on finesse weapons, but then we'll loop back to them being "useless because you get expert in a weapon you're not using." as with armors.

If you want to use general feats for skill feats then go for it. I thought we were using general feats for things skill feats given on the side can't give us, such as the proficiencies.

My "whole argument" is that if you want to build for Dex, then unarmored is better.
If you want to build for Str/other stats, then armor is viable even with lower proficiency.
Both have a cost. One pays up to 3 general feats depending on class, the other pays 4 stat points worth to get to 20 dex while wanting 20 in their casting stat. And has less versatility and special material options.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)

Actually, you're spending most if not all of those increases on STR so that you can overcome the plate's Bulk and STR threshold.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
james014Aura wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)
Actually, you're spending most if not all of those increases on STR so that you can overcome the plate's Bulk and STR threshold.

Up to 18 Str, 16 if you know you can get mithral. Less if you go for something besides fullplate. To max out unarmored AC, you need 20 dex, if you're 18 dex you match the fullplate with it's lower Proficiency. 18 Dex is probably the most cost effective, while 20 dex gives max AC but costs 4 ability points worth. If we stick to 18 dex, then dex wins cost-wise. This all of course varies with ancestry and background. I'm not sure what's the meta on stats in this edition, but if we're focusing casting stat and dex/str, a human artisan for example, could probably start with 14Str, 16Int? Then at level five he could hit 18int, 16str, 12 any, 12 any? I dunno if that's efficient, but I'm assuming same wizard would rush dex and int for AC and spellcasting. The upside to str is that you won't need more than 18 really. And if you're happy matching but not outdoing plate, then 18dex is plenty. But hearing how important that +1AC is, I wonder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)
Actually, you're spending most if not all of those increases on STR so that you can overcome the plate's Bulk and STR threshold.

Up to 18 Str, 16 if you know you can get mithral. Less if you go for something besides fullplate. To max out unarmored AC, you need 20 dex, if you're 18 dex you match the fullplate with it's lower Proficiency. 18 Dex is probably the most cost effective, while 20 dex gives max AC but costs 4 ability points worth. If we stick to 18 dex, then dex wins cost-wise. This all of course varies with ancestry and background. I'm not sure what's the meta on stats in this edition, but if we're focusing casting stat and dex/str, a human artisan for example, could probably start with 14Str, 16Int? Then at level five he could hit 18int, 16str, 12 any, 12 any? I dunno if that's efficient, but I'm assuming same wizard would rush dex and int for AC and spellcasting. The upside to str is that you won't need more than 18 really. And if you're happy matching but not outdoing plate, then 18dex is plenty. But hearing how important that +1AC is, I wonder.

+1 AC at the cost of three general feats and you have an 18str Wizard which doesn’t really get to be “full plate Wizard” until much later, while a full Dex Wizard gets to be optimal for his level at level 1.

Not even speaking the wealth disparity between the two, which massively favors the Wizard with a Dex focus.

Plus making it sound like the Wizard is more MAD in this edition is kinda laughable, you get so many ability increases to sprinkle around you’re not missing out on anything, you can still pick int con Dex and Wisdom at every ability boost interval, and since we just said the Dex Wizard doesn’t need strength, that would have left only charisma (also not huge for Wizard but hey you could choose this over wisdom if you so felt inclined).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I guess the thing about "wrong armor" is "should a barbarian, rogue, or ranger not have less AC for using heavy armor" or "should a monk be not have less AC from any armor"?

It seems to me like "the monk can't wear armor" is fine, since they get that legendary unarmored proficiency, and a "rogue is strongly disincentivized from wearing heavy armor" is fine. So this is mostly an attempt to give more stuff to spellcasters.

Regardless, I think "proficient in light armor, becomes expert at level 13" should be an arcane thesis or an archetype, but going heavier than that encroaches on Magus territory.

But "General feats scale with class features" is a can of worms I don't think we should open.


Except it would apply to any class/concept that wants to use heavier armor. The monk I admit is a weird case, since full scaling armor proficiency would make them legendary in armor, and restricting them would be the same as the current argument.

Trying to fix that would require some fine balancing.

*************
From the Magus perspective, yes giving anything better than expert armor to Wizards would be a problem. But giving 8th level spells to Fighters is also a problem for them. If Magus stays a 6th lv class a multiclass Fighter would out class it at it's own thing; but given how things are making Magus a full caster with better martial proficiencies is basically a kill blow to Wizards.

**************
Some general feats already scale, but yes if done incorrectly it could be very bad. Which is why now that the system has been released there are few ways to design scaling general feats without it getting called powercreep and broken.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I personally want them to design the magus for playtest before we start giving more armor/weapon proficiencies to wizards.


Bardarok wrote:

Wooh. Long thread but I've been convinced.

I vote we remove proficiency boosts from MCAs and let the profocincy general feats scale with whatever your class gives you. Just like the ancestory feats.

Fighter and Monk dedication can give a free level 1 feat since they are all about feats having no class paths.

Champion can give reaction or lay on hands.

Rogue, well it was odd that they gave light armor to start with, maybe a free skill feat to go with all the proficiencies.

Of course that means I should probably go work this out in the Homebrew section since anyone who plays PFS or RAW won't care.

I agree with your sentiment but the ancestry feats include an auto-scaling feat at 13th level. They don't auto-scale weapons until that second feat is taken.


Midnightoker wrote:
Bandw2 wrote:


shocking grasp is the only spell that i can see that gains a +1 and it's situational, so it at least sometimes puts you on parity with someone of 1 less proficiency with weapons using a +3 weapon.

basically a casting attack proficiency is more or less equal to 1 lower proficiency with a weapon or armor, except for trains which are more equal.

so they get up to master which is more or less equal to expert in weapons or armor.

I don't think it's been "proven" that it is equal to expert at all, especially not when you consider Specialization effects that only trigger for certain Proficiency tiers.

A "+3 weapon" isn't available to anyone below 16th level, so if your argument is that "The reason your Expert proficiency is okay is because in 4 levels (the level you're even allowed a 16th level item) you'll get a weapon to make up for what you lack in proficiency", then your argument has a lot of holes.

no it's because generally you'll have at least +2 at the levels stuff like this is really critical.

magic as always is more or less free, so it's got a free +2 and you're shooting laser out your eyes, while the martial is paying up front with a +2 weapon and doing it all day now.

so the magic attack rolls are level+4+abilitymod and the strike attack rolls are level+2+2+abilitymod, increase any given weapon proficiency and magical proficiency.

and so , in my eyes magical proficiency is worth a 1 lesser weapon proficiency. a Fighter with legendary prof is probably going to be hitting more often than a wizard with legendary proficiency.(in weapons and magic respectively)


totoro wrote:
Bardarok wrote:

Wooh. Long thread but I've been convinced.

I vote we remove proficiency boosts from MCAs and let the profocincy general feats scale with whatever your class gives you. Just like the ancestory feats.

Fighter and Monk dedication can give a free level 1 feat since they are all about feats having no class paths.

Champion can give reaction or lay on hands.

Rogue, well it was odd that they gave light armor to start with, maybe a free skill feat to go with all the proficiencies.

Of course that means I should probably go work this out in the Homebrew section since anyone who plays PFS or RAW won't care.

I agree with your sentiment but the ancestry feats include an auto-scaling feat at 13th level. They don't auto-scale weapons until that second feat is taken.

Martial weapons with the ancestry trait become simple for proficiency. For everyone except a wizard this means scaling proficiency for those with only the level one feat.

An elven sorcerer who takes the feat will become an expert with the elven curved blade.

Similar story for the advanced weapons being treated as martial. A dwarven barbarian who takes the feat gets proficiency with a new weapon that scales all the way up to master.

Admittedly there aren't all that many weapons with the ancestry trait but there are only going to be more in the future.

The 13th level feat lets you get scaling proficiency with the weapons that don't have the tag and those with the tag that you needed the general feat to get trained proficiency with (Example wizard needs lvl 1 ancestry feat + weapon proficiency feat + lvl 13 ancestry feat to get scaling)

EDIT: To be perfectly honest though on my first read through I though you would get scaling proficiency with all of the weapons given by the feat due to the way the halfling one is worded since that's the one I turned to do the rules check. Though I think RAW it only means the ones with the actual tag.

"You favor traditional halfling weapons, so you’ve learned how to use them more effectively. You have the trained proficiency with the sling, halfling sling staff, and shortsword.

In addition, you gain access to all uncommon halfling weapons. For you, martial halfling weapons are simple weapons, and advanced halfling weapons are martial weapons. "


I guess the question is "is it okay if Wizards are the absolute worst class with weapons?" Or maybe some other class instead? (I could totally see witches having even more restrictive weapon proficiencies.)

I don't think "a wizard is automatically worse off with a weapon which is not a 'wizard weapon'" is necessarily a problem. We're better off expanding the class of "wizard weapons" or "wizard armor" via feats/archetypes/subclasses than making a general option.

Like monks who want to be "Wuxia armored fighters" should have to take an archetype like "Sohei" or something. One should not be able to grab legendary or master proficiency in the ō-yoroi via spending three general feats on it.


Midnightoker wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)
Actually, you're spending most if not all of those increases on STR so that you can overcome the plate's Bulk and STR threshold.

Up to 18 Str, 16 if you know you can get mithral. Less if you go for something besides fullplate. To max out unarmored AC, you need 20 dex, if you're 18 dex you match the fullplate with it's lower Proficiency. 18 Dex is probably the most cost effective, while 20 dex gives max AC but costs 4 ability points worth. If we stick to 18 dex, then dex wins cost-wise. This all of course varies with ancestry and background. I'm not sure what's the meta on stats in this edition, but if we're focusing casting stat and dex/str, a human artisan for example, could probably start with 14Str, 16Int? Then at level five he could hit 18int, 16str, 12 any, 12 any? I dunno if that's efficient, but I'm assuming same wizard would rush dex and int for AC and spellcasting. The upside to str is that you won't need more than 18 really. And if you're happy matching but not outdoing plate, then 18dex is plenty. But hearing how important that +1AC is, I wonder.

+1 AC at the cost of three general feats and you have an 18str Wizard which doesn’t really get to be “full plate Wizard” until much later, while a full Dex Wizard gets to be optimal for his level at level 1.

Not even speaking the wealth disparity between the two,...

right but remember after 18 all ability boosts are +1 and not +2, you need 6 ability boosts for 20, only 4 for 18. from what I remember, whenever you gain multiple ability boosts at the same time they must be spent on different ability scores.

since dex isn't the wizard's class skill they won't have 18 dex until level 5 and then an Apex for +2 at level 13 or 15(15k for a belt, etc) maybe? that's if they don't get one for intelligence...

so a wizard would get 20 dex at 15 right?

am I right on this? I haven't actually tried to make anything really high level in 2e yet, just like level 1-2...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I guess the question is "is it okay if Wizards are the absolute worst class with weapons?" Or maybe some other class instead? (I could totally see witches having even more restrictive weapon proficiencies.)

I don't think that is the problem. Allowing proficiency to scale doesn't change the fact that wizards have the minimum proficiency in the game (maxing out at expert) and would need to spend more resources than anyone else to get martial weapon proficiency.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I don't think "a wizard is automatically worse off with a weapon which is not a 'wizard weapon'" is necessarily a problem. We're better off expanding the class of "wizard weapons" or "wizard armor" via feats/archetypes/subclasses than making a general option.

Even with scaling proficiency wizards are automatically worse off with a weapon that isn't a wizard weapon. That's why they need to spend feats just to get simple weapon proficiency.

You could do this all through archetypes and sub-classes but in that case the general feat should probably be banned since it's going to be a trap option.

PossibleCabbage wrote:


Like monks who want to be "Wuxia armored fighters" should have to take an archetype like "Sohei" or something. One should not be able to grab legendary or master proficiency in the ō-yoroi via spending three general feats on it.

Why not? You are spending three general feats shouldn't that get you something with having?


It's basically what Mark said on Arcane Mark tonight: the ways to get non-standard proficiencies in weapons/armor should involve a lot more interesting character expression than "taking a general feat."

General feats are the least interesting way to give anyone anything. Sohei is a much more interesting thing to attach to my "armor monk" than "I kept taking that armor feat."


That's going to lead to huge unnecessary system bloat if every combination of profiencies needs it's own archetype. But that's Pathfinders niche I guess.


We should see at least one archetype that's not a multiclass one before we start doomsaying ("Magic Warrior" has some promise). I mean, the Multiclass Archetypes are somewhat underwhelming in large part because the dedication buys you access to all the lower level (i.e. build defining) feats a class will ever get. The other archetypes will unlock things like "new skill feats" and will probably do more as they are not infinitely extensible by nature.

I mean, "I learned to wear plate mail from the Hellknights, or the Grey Maidens" is a lot more interesting (and will unlock much earlier) than "I took the same general feat 3 times".

I mean the point of not giving wizards much in the way of weapons or armor is "you don't learn that stuff in wizard school", if you learned it you learned it from somewhere else or you went to a nontraditional wizard school, so let's drill down on that.


Bandw2 wrote:
Midnightoker wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
james014Aura wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
True, fullplate loses by +1 Reflex if you get 18 Dex, by +2 Reflex if you get 20. But you also pay 4 stats points worth elsewhere (up to 18) for that +1 Reflex/AC. Could get +2 Fortitude/or HP, or +2 Will/Perception, or +2 Skills/languages, or Cha to for social. In that regard, that +1 Reflex/AC is possibly more costly than 1-3 general feats, especially for a caster that might want his Casting Stat at 20 as well. That's 8 stat points worth at the very least. Str can settle on 18 for penalty negation, while unarmored must 20 to pass it in +AC by a whole +1AC if I recall. (5+4=9 vs 6+2=8)
Actually, you're spending most if not all of those increases on STR so that you can overcome the plate's Bulk and STR threshold.

Up to 18 Str, 16 if you know you can get mithral. Less if you go for something besides fullplate. To max out unarmored AC, you need 20 dex, if you're 18 dex you match the fullplate with it's lower Proficiency. 18 Dex is probably the most cost effective, while 20 dex gives max AC but costs 4 ability points worth. If we stick to 18 dex, then dex wins cost-wise. This all of course varies with ancestry and background. I'm not sure what's the meta on stats in this edition, but if we're focusing casting stat and dex/str, a human artisan for example, could probably start with 14Str, 16Int? Then at level five he could hit 18int, 16str, 12 any, 12 any? I dunno if that's efficient, but I'm assuming same wizard would rush dex and int for AC and spellcasting. The upside to str is that you won't need more than 18 really. And if you're happy matching but not outdoing plate, then 18dex is plenty. But hearing how important that +1AC is, I wonder.

+1 AC at the cost of three general feats and you have an 18str Wizard which doesn’t really get to be “full plate Wizard” until much later, while a full Dex Wizard gets to be optimal for his level at level 1.

Not even speaking the wealth

...

Using the wizard example because it's the worst case scenario, if you manage to somehow start with 18 Dex, you can have 20 by level 10th. The most cost efficient way would be to stay at 18Dex, which puts that unarmored expert AC the same as a Trained Fullplate (+4dex+4prof=8 vs +6armor+2prof=8)

The only time fullplate, AC-wise becomes "punished" is if your unarmored character has 20 dex. This of course varies between classes, ancestries and background and personal preferences. Personally I don't find Dex adding that much since we don't /need/ it for ranged spells anymore. Ability scores can also be a little more spread out if you downgrade armor. A breastplate for example, would require only 16 str and provide +4armor+2prof+1dex for a total of +7AC, just +1AC behind Trained fullplate and 18dex unarmored Expert.

I can't tell if the +1-2AC that a wizard using Expert unarmored with 20 dex gains is that much of a game changer, but roleplay wise, I can see it not appealing to everyone. Personally I value putting those 4 ability scores other places than 18-20Dex more than up 3 general feats.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's basically what Mark said on Arcane Mark tonight: the ways to get non-standard proficiencies in weapons/armor should involve a lot more interesting character expression than "taking a general feat."

General feats are the least interesting way to give anyone anything. Sohei is a much more interesting thing to attach to my "armor monk" than "I kept taking that armor feat."

This is interesting, and disappointing too.

Why did they make those general feats, then?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's basically what Mark said on Arcane Mark tonight: the ways to get non-standard proficiencies in weapons/armor should involve a lot more interesting character expression than "taking a general feat."

General feats are the least interesting way to give anyone anything. Sohei is a much more interesting thing to attach to my "armor monk" than "I kept taking that armor feat."

That is disappointing.

How interesting this or that general feat is should be irrelevant to whether picking it and paying a feat slot for a benefit allows you to gain said benefit and without a hidden cutoff date. That's... just simple transactional honesty.

Also, this is a design philosophy that seems dependant on heaping more baggage on the player, rather than less. We don't want to have to multiclass Champion just for armor, we didn't want to have to have our characters be female just to qualify for Gray Maiden in the playtest, and trading RP baggage for other RP baggage isn't an improvement.


It probably was a mistake to leave any weapon or armor proficiency in the general feat category, but the way forward is just to keep making good archetype feats that grant these proficiencies. Technically, this is admitting that the current general proficiency feats are trap feats but I think they were necessary as a holding place for better alternatives to come.


Game also just have limitations. With what it seems like Paizo was going for in PF2E - classes being a much, much greater part of a character's identity than before - such a limitation comes into effect where certain classes just can't do something or use something without significant investment elsewhere.

Thus, wizards at baseline aren't meant to be running around in heavy armor. This is not "all wizards ever in 2E" cannot use heavy armor heavy, but right now, with only Core out and the 'basic' wizard is not a heavy armor user. The general feat might be there as Unicore said to just be like "yeah, you can do it, but it's not as good as a class archetype would be, or a MC archetype".

PF1E had limitations, too, just different ones. Frankly a lot more limitations in some places. Yeah, it sucks you may not be able to fully realize a very specific concept from just Core, but that's fine. The concept is, after all, very specific and may not be all that common to the general playerbase - which the vast majority of I'd wager is not on the forums.


I don't understand why this is necessary. I mean, armoured archetypes are very cool, but they need to provide more than just Expert proficiency with armour.

At the same time, you could have General feats for getting armour proficiencies, if all you want is to be a wearer of armour for more aesthetic reasons (and without making yourself notably weaker for choosing to do so), or you could drop into the Armoured archetype if you want to make your characters focus at least partially revolve about being armoured.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Megistone wrote:

This is interesting, and disappointing too.
Why did they make those general feats, then?

"Interesting" amounts to just side stepping a community want.

There's been enough people talking about the issue, even various new players have even come to the forums just to submit, and that means that it's on their radar.

For whatever reason, the General Feat scaling in any way (or comparable solution) is not being looked at as a solution.

But "there are more interesting ways" is a cop out to me. Here's why:

Quote:

Fighter Dedication

"You become trained in simple weapons and martial weapons. You become trained in your choice of Acrobatics or Athletics; if you are already trained in both of these skills, you instead become trained in a skill of your choice. You become trained in fighter class DC."

So literally, a Class Feat that grants only Proficiency.

No "interesting" Class Features. No AoO. Nothing but Proficiency.

#interesting

Now it grants two tiers worth of Weapons (if you didn't have simple for whatever reason) and one skill. So this super "powerful" Class Feat basically grants the same thing as the General Feat to every Class but the Wizard and then training in Athletics or Acrobatics (or a skill of your choice if you have both) but that's not interesting to me in the slightest.

Lets look at Champion:

Quote:

Champion Dedication

"Choose a deity and cause as you would if you were a champion. You become trained in light, medium, and heavy armor. You become trained in Religion and your deity’s associated skill; for each of these skills in which you were already trained, you instead become trained in a skill of your choice. You become trained in champion class DC. You are bound by your deity’s anathema and must follow the champion’s code and alignment requirements for your cause. You don’t gain any other abilities from your choice of deity or cause."

This is at least slightly better, because you have to choose a Deity and you are bound by that Deity, which means you have at least something besides Proficiency coming into play.

However, what does breaking your anathema actually do in this case?

Nothing.

What happens if you forsake the deity?

Nothing.

So really mechanically all that's happening at all, is the Proficiency.

Thus when I hear a response of "But there's more interesting ways to do it than General Feats!"

All I can think to respond is:

"Oh sure, but then why are Fighter/Champion feats just Proficiency bundles then? And then why do General Feats with an expiration date even exist?"

Long term, I assume archetypes might patch the issue or they might just lock their proficiency increases behind Golarion based factions (like Red Mantis would for instance), in which case, business wise that's a good decision. It means people will buy the books so they can get access to proficiency they otherwise couldn't get.

tl;dr

Its just flowery language to acknowledge the issue while not resolving it in the way the community hoped/expected (however many/little there are that do).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Theoretically, if the "Good at armor" archetype can be taken with purely general feats, and doesn't lock you out of taking other archetypes meanwhile, I would have very little to argue against it.

The class feat bottleneck is a real problem for me, and if it takes class feats just to don armor at a passable level, then that's a "no" from me.

Even with double class feats I find lots of things come online slightly later than I'd like.

Edit: And I flat out refuse to make my players take a multiclass archetype unless they want the flavor of the class. To me, wearing armor or using a weapon is EXACTLY what general feats are for.


The current general feats let you add your level and +2 to AC or attacks when the equipment is used

This is an effective feat up to level 13 and doesn’t cease working just because other armours go up to +4. They just don’t work as well at that point but the trained proficiency bonus is still there

There certainly seems like there should be another set that you can use to push to expert . And perhaps there will be although maybe that Arcane Mark stuff suggests not?

But they do seem to have a place in the game.

Picture if the errata after all these threads was actually to remove them completely. I imagine there would be outcry (even though they won’t be removed it is purely hypothetical)

The next book will give an idea about what other options could be in store. I don’t think paizo expected people to reach level 13 by the end of August . Whilst people don’t like that some of these will be locked behind archetypes and won’t want to play specific ones it will reveal the design intent and parameters


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:

The current general feats let you add your level and +2 to AC or attacks when the equipment is used

This is an effective feat up to level 13 and doesn’t cease working just because other armours go up to +4. They just don’t work as well at that point but the trained proficiency bonus is still there

That's just not true man because it assumes that someone wants to invest and then retrain.

I find it very rare that people select Armor/Weapon choices without an incentive to continue using them. Often times having a concept in mind from character creation. Building towards Full Plate takes planning, you can't just do it in a vacuum from level X and say "see it's fine", the player that levels from 1 to the point of invalidation is going to be upset.

In the case of Armor, you specifically have to allocate STR just to use it properly, which is much harder to retrain.

And it's not even a single feat, if you take the feat multiple times, you now have X feats that are inferior to your standard Armor proficiency from Class.

Stop thinking about it as "+2" and start thinking about it as "Baseline until level 13(11), then it's a -2 to use this item"

Because that's how the enemy Proficiency scales in the game. At 11th level, there is clear intent that "Expert" is the baseline for weapons and 13th for armor.

Quote:
Picture if the errata after all these threads was actually to remove them completely. I imagine there would be outcry (even though they won’t be removed it is purely hypothetical)

I might be salty that it's not possible yet, but I'd be happy they were gone.

If you're going to do something, do it right or not at all IMO.

Quote:
The next book will give an idea about what other options could be in store. I don’t think paizo expected people to reach level 13 by the end of August . Whilst people don’t like that some of these will be locked behind archetypes and won’t want to play specific ones it will reveal the design intent and parameters

I thought the APG wasn't going to be released for a year?

If you mean content via Golarion, then I suppose there could be content to help in the releases but not really something that's going to solve the crux of the issue.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Midnightoker wrote:
Lanathar wrote:

The current general feats let you add your level and +2 to AC or attacks when the equipment is used

This is an effective feat up to level 13 and doesn’t cease working just because other armours go up to +4. They just don’t work as well at that point but the trained proficiency bonus is still there

That's just not true man because it assumes that someone wants to invest and then retrain.

I find it very rare that people select Armor/Weapon choices without an incentive to continue using them. Often times having a concept in mind from character creation. Building towards Full Plate takes planning, you can't just do it in a vacuum from level X and say "see it's fine", the player that levels from 1 to the point of invalidation is going to be upset.

In the case of Armor, you specifically have to allocate STR just to use it properly, which is much harder to retrain.

And it's not even a single feat, if you take the feat multiple times, you now have X feats that are inferior to your standard Armor proficiency from Class.

Stop thinking about it as "+2" and start thinking about it as "Baseline until level 13(11), then it's a -2 to use this item"

Because that's how the enemy Proficiency scales in the game. At 11th level, there is clear intent that "Expert" is the baseline for weapons and 13th for armor.

Quote:
Picture if the errata after all these threads was actually to remove them completely. I imagine there would be outcry (even though they won’t be removed it is purely hypothetical)

I might be salty that it's not possible yet, but I'd be happy they were gone.

If you're going to do something, do it right or not at all IMO.

Quote:
The next book will give an idea about what other options could be in store. I don’t think paizo expected people to reach level 13 by the end of August . Whilst people don’t like that some of these will be locked behind archetypes and won’t want to play specific ones it will reveal the design intent
...

I will admit to not thinking about it as baseline until x and then -2 afterwards . Reversed the perspective on that so need to consider it from that direction

I was referring to the Golarion stuff - whilst I know people don’t always want lore connected things but things like magic warrior, Hell knight and swordlord will show if there are other ways to get proficiencies , what levels they come in at and what type of feats they replace

I expect them to be class feats again which for those who see a bottleneck will not be good news ...


Lanathar wrote:

I will admit to not thinking about it as baseline until x and then -2 afterwards . Reversed the perspective on that so need to consider it from that direction

I was referring to the Golarion stuff - whilst I know people don’t always want lore connected things but things like magic warrior, Hell knight and swordlord will show if there are other ways to get proficiencies , what levels they come in at and what type of feats they replace

I expect them to be class feats again which for those who see a bottleneck will not be good news ...

I figured they were probably Golarion, which is fine, I'll just tailor accordingly if I need to.

On the first point, that's just what the math appears to amount to. There was another thread by Staffan_Johnson where they were talking about it in reference to Skills not being good enough to pass at level tasks with Trained at higher levels as well (though I think Skills are in a better spot than Weapons/Armor in terms of Proficiency due to "base" DCs they offer).

EDIT: (1:41:56 in the video)

So I just listened to Mark Seifter's discussion on Armor General Feat and I can't say that he said anything to denounce/announce this at all:

"That's true, Champion can get a little higher than that and I'm sure there are going to be a archetype higher level armor later on.

We're going to put plenty of options to getting armor later on, it's going to better than a mere 'I can go to Expert' in a type of armor, it's going to have a good feel to it.."

I tried to type this as he was saying it, but he didn't really say the General Feat isn't going to be changed/errata'd or anything specifically about the General Feat.

What he said was that Champion allows it and they want to introduce an Archetype for Armor users that can go above Expert.

To me, the General Feat (with a level 13 bump) and that Archetype can easily live alongside each other.


PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's basically what Mark said on Arcane Mark tonight: the ways to get non-standard proficiencies in weapons/armor should involve a lot more interesting character expression than "taking a general feat."

General feats are the least interesting way to give anyone anything. Sohei is a much more interesting thing to attach to my "armor monk" than "I kept taking that armor feat."

good that's more or less what i've been saying, the most boring thing to do is just give proficiencies. they should be riders on other more interesting options.

I don't think heavy armor is worth 3 general feats nor is it worth a single 1, but if you can attach it to archetypes and feats that do other things, that's ultimately better overall.

in my opinion of course.


Bandw2 wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's basically what Mark said on Arcane Mark tonight: the ways to get non-standard proficiencies in weapons/armor should involve a lot more interesting character expression than "taking a general feat."

General feats are the least interesting way to give anyone anything. Sohei is a much more interesting thing to attach to my "armor monk" than "I kept taking that armor feat."

good that's more or less what i've been saying, the most boring thing to do is just give proficiencies. they should be riders on other more interesting options.

I don't think heavy armor is worth 3 general feats nor is it worth a single 1, but if you can attach it to archetypes and feats that do other things, that's ultimately better overall.

in my opinion of course.

The counter to this from those arguing in favour of the general feat bump is that fighter and champion dedications only give proficiencies and that is arguably “boring” as well

I guess the difference on those is supposed to be that they also unlock access to other feats from the other class which a “boring” general feat would not ...

Still could be called boring though


Exactly. General feats should do this "give you baseline access with scaling" and archetypes should give you special abilites, not just be there to get proficiency.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
PossibleCabbage wrote:

We should see at least one archetype that's not a multiclass one before we start doomsaying ("Magic Warrior" has some promise). I mean, the Multiclass Archetypes are somewhat underwhelming in large part because the dedication buys you access to all the lower level (i.e. build defining) feats a class will ever get. The other archetypes will unlock things like "new skill feats" and will probably do more as they are not infinitely extensible by nature.

I mean, "I learned to wear plate mail from the Hellknights, or the Grey Maidens" is a lot more interesting (and will unlock much earlier) than "I took the same general feat 3 times".

I mean the point of not giving wizards much in the way of weapons or armor is "you don't learn that stuff in wizard school", if you learned it you learned it from somewhere else or you went to a nontraditional wizard school, so let's drill down on that.

You could also just let players make up their own story as that's the point of an RPG. I see the benefit of general feats as something along the lines of a choose your own backstory. You shouldn't need a pre-approved story to twist your concept around a bit. Otherwise you end up with the bad situationwe have now where everyone who wants to wear heavy armor got real religious just for a little bit.

Those options will expands as more things are published sure but that will contribute to system bloat where the number of options becomes difficult to search though. That's why I think it's a bad design decision. I'm sure the Archetypes will be flavorful and great but there will never be enough of them to match the backstories people want.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Unicore wrote:
It probably was a mistake to leave any weapon or armor proficiency in the general feat category, but the way forward is just to keep making good archetype feats that grant these proficiencies. Technically, this is admitting that the current general proficiency feats are trap feats but I think they were necessary as a holding place for better alternatives to come.

It remains to be seen if they're going to do anything interesting in the "General Feat" space, since it really only exists since staples like Toughness, Iron Will, and Improved Initiative don't really belong to a class, ancestry, or skill so we needed to put them somewhere.

Where I think the category will be saved is when we start getting archetypes who have feats with other tags than "Class" where you can spend your skill feats and general feats on things that the archetype grants. Possibly they will let you spend general feats on better versions of things that you can already spend general feats on- like armor proficiency.

251 to 300 of 311 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Questions / Being punished for wearing the "wrong" armor type at 13th level? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.