Hellknight Armament


Rules Discussion


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Is their any reason why hellknight armament, hellknight armor proficiency doesn't scale with your highest armor proficiency and is stuck on being expert. Since both that and order weapon seem more like caster scaling which is weird since regular hellknight for martials.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Because aside from Champion and Fighter armor proficiencies don’t go past Expert until level 19.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm kind of confused by this as well. The Hellknights are typically big, armored juggernauts quoting laws and punishing flaws, but this makes them ... less so. I'm liking the rest of their feats, the order abilities are top notch, it's just this one that sticks in my craw some.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

How so?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Thoroughly disappointed myself, as well, and it makes no sense. Certainly, we expect the Champion and Fighter to tread the ground of heavy armor mastery, as that’s what stirs in the imagination when these classes are mentioned (typically).

Hellknights? As above, armored juggernauts, quoting laws, the whole shebang. Heck, the armor itself, stylized and intimidating and covered in iconography in fluff and art is the image of the Hellknight (typically). Helllknight -Plate- is as much a part of this organization as anything else, and they end up shorted on mastery? It steals some of their thunder, their flavor and their charm. Going into a Hellknight archetype should carry with it the assumption “I’m going to be an armored judge by dedicating my character’s development career to this”. It seems like an oversight.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I never felt like Hellknights were _masters_ of heavy armor in the past. They wore it for its shock/intimidation value. It makes them a symbol and sets them apart from the people they police. But it didn't feel to me that heavy armor was part of their 'fighting style'. So getting to expert feels about right. They wear it all the time, so they are familiar with it past 'trained', but its primarily a prop to them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think you are trying to justify being a hellknight in order to unlock plate proficiencies.

Remember that you can be part of an order and still not being able to use part of the stuff, if it is not related to your class.

For an instance, it is Normal that a mage wouldn't be proficient as a champion while wearing a plate. And probably a mage wouldn't have any interest in wearing a massive amount of metal.

In this system, even a +1 is s huge bonus, simply because of how it works the success and critical success.

If you are a fighter or a champion, you will be used to wear armors.

Other classes simply won't.
And joining a brotherhood or an order won't make a rogue a plate user.

Because of both lore and balance.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It’d be quite weird for Monk Hellknight to be the best armor-user in the game.


For monk hellknight most of their class feats like stances would interfer so not much of problem, more that for martials they should get it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Monks are the only class that would gain anything before level 19 from that change. I don't think a hell knight ranger gaining master heavy armor at 19 and 20 would break anything, but it seems like a fairly minor concern.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Perhaps we should parse the hell knight as it has existed from 1e and into 2e, and I'm talking at it's most basic and accessible. Both first edition prestige classes that come to mind have class features that specifically deal with armor, either a variant of armor training, or a straight-up original buff to wearing 'Hell Knight Plate'. Furthermore, utilizing their unique, heavy armor grants them supernatural defenses in the form of resistances and skill boosts for doing so.

If we take a look at the 2nd Edition, a similar trend follows. Four out of the five options available are defensive in nature, and half of those are physical defense or specifically armor related in LOWG. Expand this to Hellknight proper in LOCG, and we see a similar emphasis. Half of the feats for the Hellknight grant some boon to armor, specifically Hell Knight Plate. Even the ostensibly spellcasting Signifer gains not just medium, but -heavy- armor proficiency boosts.

OP's concern is that this seems like a good track to take; they are following in the footsteps laid out in the setting. They are simply not enough. Hell Knights should be intimidating, certainly, but they should also be skilled in the use of this armor. This armor should be intrinsic to that dedication, and that implies better than merely expert.

Try though we might, we cannot divorce the armor, the defense and the plated-mastery this Golarion staple has broadcast over the years. This is an important element to the theme of this organization, from its flavor and aesthetic, to its mechanical emphases. And arguing against as much is arguing against the setting itself as it has been laid out from the beginning.

I feel like there's been a worrying trend on the forums. That if there is a design flaw with the system or a break with continuity or some in-congruence with previously laid down material, there must be some justification conjured to obfuscate a potential oversight by the developers.

I love our game, and I want our game to grow, to sell books, to enthrall storytellers, the lot of it. But working backwards from published source material to scrub the unsightly bits that might not work is not the way to do it. Maybe we'll see an update to these dedications in the future; I certainly hope so. And God knows errata is a part of every new system anyway, there is simply no way around it to 100% playtest all material and involve all variables in a creative endeavor like this.

Until that time, I pray we don't keep trying to justify decisions by the developers that may not have been thought 100% through, and it seems like their attitude on these forums has been fairly amicable to us voicing these concerns and inconsistencies, with a salutary “We'll take a look!” for the most part. Providing them with an echo chamber gives them no ammunition to better our game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
NielsenE wrote:
I never felt like Hellknights were _masters_ of heavy armor in the past. They wore it for its shock/intimidation value. It makes them a symbol and sets them apart from the people they police. But it didn't feel to me that heavy armor was part of their 'fighting style'. So getting to expert feels about right. They wear it all the time, so they are familiar with it past 'trained', but its primarily a prop to them.

They're one of the only organizations in the game (if not the only) that has their own, specially branded armor and they're so universally known for the stuff that even their spellcasters are trained to wear plate.

I don't really know how we can turn around and say it's not a core part of their identity given that.

And I mean, even that aside. It's just kinda dumb to be put in a position where you get to wear your awesome full plate and then all of the sudden at exactly level 19 it becomes a balance issue and you have to hang it up or potentially deal with penalties.

Silver Crusade

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

It's more a response to overblown negative hyperbole than blind defense.

Aka you're allowed to point out things you don't like, and others are allowed to point what they like, and of course those two cross.

Trying to scuttle conversations by attributing malicious subservience on those you disagree with and fearmongering of "echo chambers" doesn't do your stance any favors. The fact that there's so much disagreement and back and forth outright disproves the echo chamber fear from the get go. Calls for those to stop disagreeing when someone is displaying a negative is literally an echo chamber. So the arguments stay, lest we have an echo chamber of nothing but complaints and hyperbole.

Continue to point out things you don't like, but don't take grievance when someone disagrees or points out a way that you are wrong.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Squiggit wrote:
And I mean, even that aside. It's just kinda dumb to be put in a position where you get to wear your awesome full plate and then all of the sudden at exactly level 19 it becomes a balance issue and you have to hang it up or potentially deal with penalties.

You have to get to level 19 first though, and even then it's 2 AC.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

It's more a response to overblown negative hyperbole than blind defense.

Aka you're allowed to point out things you don't like, and others are allowed to point what they like, and of course those two cross.

Trying to scuttle conversations by attributing malicious subservience on those you disagree with and fearmongering of "echo chambers" doesn't do your stance any favors. The fact that there's so much disagreement and back and forth outright disproves the echo chamber fear from the get go. Calls for those to stop disagreeing when someone is displaying a negative is literally an echo chamber. So the arguments stay, lest we have an echo chamber of nothing but complaints and hyperbole.

Continue to point out things you don't like, but don't take grievance when someone disagrees or points out a way that you are wrong.

I think this is attributing a lot more animus to my post than is present, and certainly a lot more than I ever intended. With that said, I don't intend to apologize, because this forum, for all its benefits as a resource, is rank with apologists for the developers. There's nothing wrong with that, certainly, but I don't think their presence is healthy for the game when they are arguing against very setting specific and long-standing elements.

This was by no means an attempt to 'scuttle' a conversation. I gave information from both editions that anyone can see to back my points. Anyone can see for themselves the basis of my argument, because that argument is an attempt to maintain continuity for factions we know and love.

When the Hell Knights are mentioned, something stirs in the imagination of those familiar with the organization. Images, descriptions, feelings. The Hell Knight Plate is a part of that. There's simply no denying that. Working backwards to find some contrived answer to why the developers -may- not have precisely balanced things appropriately with their newest release, which likely should have a bit of errata, is unhelpful and working against the setting itself.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
RCJak wrote:
I think this is attributing a lot more animus to my post than is present, and certainly a lot more than I ever intended.
Quote:
I feel like there's been a worrying trend on the forums. That if there is a design flaw with the system or a break with continuity or some in-congruence with previously laid down material, there must be some justification conjured to obfuscate a potential oversight by the developers.
Quote:
Until that time, I pray we don't keep trying to justify decisions by the developers that may not have been thought 100% through,
Quote:
Providing them with an echo chamber gives them no ammunition to better our game.
Quote:
With that said, I don't intend to apologize, because this forum, for all its benefits as a resource, is rank with apologists for the developers.
Quote:
There's nothing wrong with that, certainly, but I don't think their presence is healthy for the game when they are arguing against very setting specific and long-standing elements.

Not really.

RCJak wrote:
This was by no means an attempt to 'scuttle' a conversation.

Describing people disagreeing with you as a "worrying trend" and implying they should stop lest they create an echo chamber (which would ironically create an echo chamber for your stance) is dropping any pretense of maintaining your stance or argument in attempt to get those in contention with you to leave or be quiet, rather than continue the debate earnestly.

RCJak wrote:
Working backwards to find some contrived answer to why the developers -may- not have precisely balanced things appropriately with their newest release, which likely should have a bit of errata, is unhelpful and working against the setting itself.

And it continues, applying wide catching negative views and implications on those disagreeing with you rather than continue the argument.

What do you even mean by "balanced" in this situation? Everyone getting the same benefit? Everyone having the same expenditure?


Rysky wrote:
RCJak wrote:
I think this is attributing a lot more animus to my post than is present, and certainly a lot more than I ever intended.
Quote:
I feel like there's been a worrying trend on the forums. That if there is a design flaw with the system or a break with continuity or some in-congruence with previously laid down material, there must be some justification conjured to obfuscate a potential oversight by the developers.
Quote:
Until that time, I pray we don't keep trying to justify decisions by the developers that may not have been thought 100% through,
Quote:
Providing them with an echo chamber gives them no ammunition to better our game.
Quote:
With that said, I don't intend to apologize, because this forum, for all its benefits as a resource, is rank with apologists for the developers.
Quote:
There's nothing wrong with that, certainly, but I don't think their presence is healthy for the game when they are arguing against very setting specific and long-standing elements.

Not really.

RCJak wrote:
This was by no means an attempt to 'scuttle' a conversation.

Describing people disagreeing with you as a "worrying trend" and implying they should stop lest they create an echo chamber (which would ironically create an echo chamber for your stance) is dropping any pretense of maintaining your stance or argument in attempt to get those in contention with you to leave or be quiet, rather than continue the debate earnestly.

RCJak wrote:
Working backwards to find some contrived answer to why the developers -may- not have precisely balanced things appropriately with their newest release, which likely should have a bit of errata, is unhelpful and working against the setting itself.

And it continues, applying wide catching negative views and implications on those disagreeing with you rather than continue the argument.

What do you even mean by "balanced" in this situation? Everyone getting the same benefit? Everyone having the same expenditure?

Well, that's quite a lot of decoupage you've done there regarding my posts. I'm very flattered, but that's really not what this thread is about. Love the system? Awesome. Have some problems with it? Awesome, likewise. My critiques were directed towards those that seem to attempt to justify the walking back of certain, very clearly, established setting elements that aren't exactly jiving with setting-junkie expectations.

Hell Knights. Heavy armor users? Sure. Masters of it? I'd like to think so. That's what my argument boils down to, and when speaking from both flavor and mechanics, this is what the system bears out. It bears it out in every single instatiation of the class (until now). In both editions (to a lesser degree than expected in 2e). Across spellcasters and martials alike. In almost every incarnation of this faction in almost every supplement in almost every era of this setting in which this faction has existed.

Truly, no ill will, but trying to argue against a truly monumental amount of evidence to the contrary seems like it does little but coo to the developers about what may not have been the best design choice. And that's what it was. It was a design choice that may not mirror everything their fluff has led us to believe.

As for me? I'd like these things to dialogue with one another and create a coherent archetype for us. This is a staple of our game world. We can't just scrub out a very important element of it in favor of the ease of mechanical expediency. With respect, I'm not expecting my Aldori Swordlord to start diving into primal spellcasting and fey temptations in his or her dedication.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

"My critiques were directed towards those that seem to attempt to justify the walking back of certain, very clearly, established setting elements that aren't exactly jiving with setting-junkie expectations."

But there's not been any walking back, that's the thing.

Fighters and Champions, the most common type of Hellknights, are still the masters of armor. Signifers were not. They were casters that could wear armor, that was their thing.

"As for me? I'd like these things to dialogue with one another and create a coherent archetype for us."

Define coherent, since the issue seems to be one of investment required, not a lack of coherence.


But there has been. Hell Knight has been relegated to a generic category of law-evangelizing true-believers, rather than the heavily armored Judge-Dredd-esque enforcers they are meant to me. I expect a bard can be a Hell Knight. If he is? He's likely wearing heavy armor and singing truly epic Gregorian chant ala Dies Irae. Ranger, Order of the Nail? I'm expecting him not to come up in rags and hides, representing the Chelaxian paradigm. Casters? Look to Signifer alone, both editions, to see my point.

If you want to become a Hell Knight, it seems like part of the deal is to be able to throw that armor proficiency around. You're a caster, who is masked in iron and casts in full plate. You're a rogue, but you make your deft maneuvers and subtle machinations work in full plate. You're an alchemist, but you brew and utilize mutagens -in full plate-. We don't expect Firebrands to all be bards and rogues, right? We certainly don't expect all Lastwall Knights to be Fighters or Champions; they welcome a heck of a lot more than that. Why do we just assume “well, this archetype is purely these two classes, so why bother giving them that signature proficiency up?”. That's not how players think; that's not how Gms think, and that's not how the devs think either, if their adventure paths are anything to go off of.

If you're desperate for heavy armor proficiency, I know an organization that can teach you. You may not like their methods, and their results may be pretty grisly, but by gods, you'll get to know your hell plate. That seems apt for this organization. And that seems to be what the fluff has made clear up until 2e. Why demand only two classes of a many-classes system only get access to this particular lever to pull? My contention is that the Hell Knight love to pull that lever, and they encourage those that survive their trials to pull that lever to the fullest. I really don't think I can convince myself that I'm wrong, given the fluff and art we're bombarded with regarding these knights.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Quote:
Hell Knight has been relegated to a generic category of law-evangelizing true-believers, rather than the heavily armored Judge-Dredd-esque enforcers they are meant to me.

How?

Ranger's couldn't sensibly take the Hellknight class due to the armor restrictions so Hellknight Ranger is something entirely new. Bards could maybe be Signifiers.

Quote:
Casters? Look to Signifer alone, both editions, to see my point.

What point?

Quote:
If you're desperate for heavy armor proficiency, I know an organization that can teach you. You may not like their methods, and their results may be pretty grisly, but by gods, you'll get to know your hell plate. That seems apt for this organization. And that seems to be what the fluff has made clear up until 2e.

Well the fact that you're calling something supposedly important to you fluff kinda gives it away, but "heavy armor proficiency" is not what the Hellknights were known for. It was for being fanatical Law obsessed mercenaries. The armor was a visual, not the purpose or the point, and not why people signed up.

Quote:
Why demand only two classes of a many-classes system only get access to this particular lever to pull?

Yes, classes that already have Heavy Armor Proficiency have an easier time moving into Hellknight. In P1 those same two classes really synced well with Hellknight over others as well.

Quote:
My contention is that the Hell Knight love to pull that lever, and they encourage those that survive their trials to pull that lever to the fullest. I really don't think I can convince myself that I'm wrong, given the fluff and art we're bombarded with regarding these knights.

You lost me.

Dark Archive

I can understand this debate from both sides since Paizo forum posters do tend to get overly defensive(they seem to be afraid that people are too mean and cause depression and burn out for developers) but at same time people are way too fast to jump on the "Defenders are trying to silence the criticism!" wagon even when nobody throws out the "If you don't like the game, just play different one and stop complaining on this forum" card :p This is one of those rare "both sides should actually calm down" situations.

Umm, yeah, I got lost at the bard hellknight part because I can't think of example from 1e or even how rules would make it work well O_o; Like wouldn't bard hellknight be a signifer instead of melee character?.. Ranger hellknights did use to be a thing though and are good fit because of tracking abilities.(they did have to use feats to get armor profiency though so it was bit of feat tax)

I do think that hellknights outside of champions and fighters shouldn't be as good in armor as fighter and champion hellknights would be and wizard signifer with expert in heavy armor still has better ac than wizard with expert in unarmored ac. Since signifers don't get into melee much anyway, not sure why they would need master profiency.

So let me back down a bit: Is this argument for "all hellknights should have master profiency at least regardless of their base class"? I don't really agree with that and it would bit sound like some sort of power keep.

I do agree though that hellknight armiger isn't really useful for signifers outside of allowing to qualify for it so it'd be nice if there was alternate archetype for signifers in training :p Like sure, it does accurately allow you to pick signifer dedication at level 6(picking heavy armor profiency at level 3 from general feat, armiger dedication at level 4, signifer dedication at level 6) but I think 2 feats in total to be signifer would feel way better tahn 3 feats for it where one is essentially flavor one.

(on that note I suppose I can agree, if signifer archetype DID make you eventually be master or better in heavy armor, or at least earlier than level 19, it would actually make it worth it to spend general feat to gain proficiency to qualify for armiger in first place)

...Actually wait a sec, isn't it more feats than that since you also need to be trained on order's favored weapon to qualify for armiger? Signifers don't even use weapons much sooo yeah kinda feels like there should be caster variant of armiger dedication for signifers.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

The Ranger not mixing well with Hellknight is due to Ranger class abilities shutting down if they’re wearing heavy armor, not because they don’t have Heavy Armor Proficiency starting out.

Dark Archive

Rysky wrote:
The Ranger not mixing well with Hellknight is due to Ranger class abilities shutting down if they’re wearing heavy armor, not because they don’t have Heavy Armor Proficiency starting out.

Oh, forgot about that.

Well sucks for mr. Master of Blades Leuden Mardinus (LN male human ranger 6/HellknightISWG 2) xD I guess writer for that one didn't actually check that the class would work with prestige class. That or assumed they don't actually use the uniform

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

*nods*


CorvusMask wrote:
So let me back down a bit: Is this argument for "all hellknights should have master profiency at least regardless of their base class"? I don't really agree with that and it would bit sound like some sort of power keep.

I can't speak for everyone but I wasn't thinking that, myself. I was wondering why the proficiency with your Hellknight plate didn't keep up with what your class gave you, i.e., going to master at 19th. It feels off to me, though, given that the champion feat at 14th level for their multiclass archetype does the same thing I can say that it is at least consistent within the rules presented so far.

On the positive side, order abilities are amazeballs, and the fact that lesser order abilities are divorced from the greater ones--you don't have to take the prior to get to the latter--is cool.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Hellknight Armament All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.