| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... This seems to be getting much attention in a certain minmax mindset.
1H Reach does seem like it can potentially be a bit too powerful...
Thinking how it could be amended, I thought maybe only give it +5' reach for your own actions (not reactions).
That seems like it's still worthwhile as a weapon and even Uncoventional Weaponry etc, but no SO disruptive...Thoughts???
Considering the whip exist, and has disarm, fitness, reach, nonleathal, and trip... I don't see it as disruptive.
Maybe reduce it to a d6 and add forceful. That will reduce the damage on reactions, but keep multi-attack about the same.
Considering the whip exist, and has disarm, fitness, reach, nonleathal, and trip... I don't see it as disruptive.
Maybe reduce it to a d6 and add forceful. That will reduce the damage on reactions, but keep multi-attack about the same.
Then you have missed all the early “optimisation” guides that basically say you should bend over backwards to get this weapon. Any means necessary.
It may be an initial kneejerk but anything that elicits that kind of response , especially as a single weapon, points to some kind of design issue
Rightly or wrongly I would strongly consider making it gnome only in my home games. Basically disallowing unconventional weaponry for race specific weaponry and disallowing adopted ancestry to be taken on race specific weapons. I understand that paizo seem to be trying to open up as many options as possible and I applaud things like the stat system meaning dwarf boards and sorcerers aren’t useless / a waste of time
But some things probably should be walled off
Doesn’t really help the OP premise on balancing
Perhaps dropping it a damage dice ? Or linking it to some other cry specialisation effect such as the club one - treating it like a mace rather than a flail ?
It really makes me think of the 3rd edition spiked chain. That also granted reach while eliminated a downside. That is the spiked chain allowed you attack adjacent targets, while the flick mace is one handed.
In PF1 the designers realized having one clearly superior weapon (with reach) was a problem and removed it's reach. This lesson seems to have been forgotten in PF2.
Eh, if I saw it as a problem I'd just houserule it down to a d6 and call it a day. I'm kind of expecting that change as errata honestly.
I want one handed spears with reach!
I want one handed spears with reach!
Not unreasonable given historical use. But I would imagine they have to be braced to use with both reach and one handed otherwise getting force behind them might be quite hard
(Note: I don’t really know much about spear use!)
Eh, if I saw it as a problem I'd just houserule it down to a d6 and call it a day. I'm kind of expecting that change as errata honestly.
I do hope there is some kind of errata so that I don’t have to implement house rules
I have already seen more posts than I would like that mention they have a flickmace user in the party of a game they are playing. And said character is never a gnome ...
Considering the whip exist, and has disarm, fitness, reach, nonleathal, and trip... I don't see it as disruptive.
Hmm...
Well, Nonlethal should be a flaw, but it seems only Constructs are immune, it works even on Undead... Weird IMHO.With nonlethal no-longer negated for free on top of any healing AFAIK, it just doesn't seem sufficiently distinct anymore.
But at least theoretically/technically, getting rid of it should still be bonus for Flickmace even if just Constructs are immune.
Personally I kindof think Whip and Flickmace should have a Reload like Ranged, but YMMV.
I don't even see where a Bladed Whip would fit into things (VS normal Whip), I guess d6 slashing maybe, but... ugh.
d6 does seem reasonable damage and perhaps enough to balance weapon...?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do hope there is some kind of errata so that I don’t have to implement house rules
I have already seen more posts than I would like that mention they have a flickmace user in the party of a game they are playing. And said character is never a gnome ...
Yes. Some people will pick mechanics first, and then backstories to justify them. That is not new, and really has nothing to do with the flickmace. Even if they only got 0.1% more damage, they would still do it.
The real question is, does the flickmace user make all the other weapon users feel inadequate?
I want one handed spears with reach!
Agreed.
Hasta: 1d6, Martial, 1 handed, reach.
Hmm... I kind of like 1d6 with trait for 2-Handed(1d8).
Maybe add Trip too, seems reasonable and still lacking Disarm (distinguished from Whip).
Kindasorta better than Whip, but not by so much across the board, which seems legit point of balance.
EDIT: I also wonder about the design space of adding traits (like Trip) as sub-trait to 2-Handed, i.e. requiring 2H grip to function. Could be useful here, but seems like interesting design space for weapons, regardless, although 2-Handed trait doesn't currently seem to envision it, I don't see any fundamental barrier.
It may be an initial kneejerk but anything that elicits that kind of response , especially as a single weapon, points to some kind of design issueOr that people are just really overvaluing the item. It wouldn't be the first or last time people had weird first impressions about something in a game.
There were a lot of really odd takes in the early days of 3.5 and PF1 too.
Out of interest what were some of the odd PF1 and 3.5 takes ?
*
In my game the player most likely to pick this is also least likely to have a detailed backstory. So even if it is arrived at in the route I would prefer least (picking mechanics and then justifying with story) we would get something.
And I can’t resume my teasing about being the largest man in the gnome village - he one picked a “small” 2 handed spear to give him one handed reach at a -2. No idea if that was the correct rules Interpretation but every pc and NPC did some light teasing
Okay, so maybe for the flickmace you have to adjust the grip as an action to change the reach?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I want one handed spears with reach!Not unreasonable given historical use. But I would imagine they have to be braced to use with both reach and one handed otherwise getting force behind them might be quite hard
(Note: I don’t really know much about spear use!)