Speaking of Druids, never understood why they have prof. w/ the scimitar, doesn't fit with the rest of their weapon choices. I wish they got stuff like blowgun, bolos, boomarang, great club, light flail, net, etc..
|
Darkwood?Not sure players liked paying an extra 200 and 450 gp for a suit...
Also for extra, there's dragonhide. Shell out the gold and a nice dragonhide breastplate can be yours, if the GM allows.
(Based on the price, I house-rule that 'dragonhide' can come from other dragon-type creatures, not just true dragons, and that the vast, vast majority of inexpensive 'dragonhide' comes from drakes and wyverns, not actual big D dragons.)
Speaking of Druids, never understood why they have prof. w/ the scimitar, doesn't fit with the rest of their weapon choices.
As I recall, it was because a scimitar resembles a sickle, and a sickle is a tool of farmers, who care for the land. At least, that was the rationale we heard way back in the late 1980s. It's always been a stretch, though.
Don't forget metal armor made with the ironwood spell replacing the metal with ironwood works, so Druids can wear any armor.
Druids get 3/4 BAB, 9 level spellcasting, spontaneous summons, and the ability to shapeshift.
Limiting armor (since they aren't actually limited in weapons, just get different weapon proficiencies.) To a class whose class abilities can give them significant natural armor boosts is right and good.
"But clerics"
No, channel energy and domains are nowhere near as powerful as wildshape and a spellcasting cleric doesn't shapeshift into an air elemental fly out of reach and start casting.
Well, the book doesn't actually let you use Permanency on Iron Wood, so in theory you cannot do so without GM intervention.
That said, it's a 6th level spell and you get those at 11th level so at a day/level you only have to spend one 6th level spell every 11+ days, so outside of organized play it isn't really a hindrance if you want to be a heavily armored druid.
Druids get 3/4 BAB, 9 level spellcasting, spontaneous summons, and the ability to shapeshift.
Limiting armor (since they aren't actually limited in weapons, just get different weapon proficiencies.) To a class whose class abilities can give them significant natural armor boosts is right and good.
True, but... having less available options without considering special materials and spells is a downer.
All it needed was like 2 more Medium armors and 1 more Heavy armor. That's it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Druids get 3/4 BAB, 9 level spellcasting, spontaneous summons, and the ability to shapeshift.
Limiting armor (since they aren't actually limited in weapons, just get different weapon proficiencies.) To a class whose class abilities can give them significant natural armor boosts is right and good.
True, but... having less available options without considering special materials and spells is a downer.
All it needed was like 2 more Medium armors and 1 more Heavy armor. That's it.
Nah..they dont need any new armors.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Limiting armor (since they aren't actually limited in weapons, just get different weapon proficiencies.) To a class whose class abilities can give them significant natural armor boosts is right and good.But it's a weird limit. Why not give them Light Armor only with no weird restriction? As JiCi posted earlier, that's effectively what they get.
Theme
(Based on the price, I house-rule that 'dragonhide' can come from other dragon-type creatures, not just true dragons, and that the vast, vast majority of inexpensive 'dragonhide' comes from drakes and wyverns, not actual big D dragons.)
Ohhh. Stealing this idea.
(Based on the price, I house-rule that 'dragonhide' can come from other dragon-type creatures, not just true dragons, and that the vast, vast majority of inexpensive 'dragonhide' comes from drakes and wyverns, not actual big D dragons.)Ohhh. Stealing this idea.
Didn't realise that was a house rule, I'd assumed it.
Would have liked more rules about armor, shields, clothing, and other objects made from various monsters.
Also rules for "natural" magic items, basically stuff like body parts(horns, teeth, feathers, etc.) that kept/gained their magical properties from a defeated monster, natural object that gained magical abilities from being in a place with(or exposed to) strong magic, a piece of a broken magic item that gains it's own abilities over time, etc.
Alternate weapon prof. rules as well as alternate weapon prof. list for classes based on culture and time period.
Domains, favored weapons, favored animals, and other information for deities from real world cultures such as Aztec, Greek, Japanese, Norse etc.
Wish the jump DCs were much lower, we are in a fantasy setting, so if someone wants to be able to jump 20'+ without needing a +60(or better) bonus to jump, then why not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In short, many, many... MANY archetypes could have use a reworking, to make them better or at least more playable and fun to play.
Animal and vermin controlling/using options for the kineticist would have been cool. Also it would have been nice if Wood got the ability to control plants and Void got the ability to control undead.
Weapon clarifications:
Flying Talon
"Due to the weapon’s unwieldiness, you cannot make attacks of opportunity with a flying talon and do not threaten any squares with it."
So... you are provoking attacks of opportunity every time you attack?
Katana, double walking stick
"When drawn, the blades use the statistics listed on the table. When the blades are concealed in their case, this weapon can be used as a quarterstaff."
So... the blades are Light weapons, and staff is a Two-handed Double weapon? Can they both be enchanted? Can staff feats apply to it?
Thorn bow
"This polished rosewood bow is studded with thorns and tiny flowers; treat it as a shortbow."
And??? It has a worse rnage than a regular shortbow, so what's the point???
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) why would you?
Because you are not threatening squares. I keep seeing rules that if you're not threatening your own area, you provoke AoOs when attacking, similar to a whip or any range weapon.
2) I’d allow it, enchanting the blades and case all separately.
I would allow it too, but... the stats are out of whack, like it should have needed 2 blocks: one for the blades being Light and one for the case, being Two-handed.
3) it’s pretty. Not snarky, that’s it’s thing, it’s a pretty shortbow.
Why spending a Proficiency feat on that? It looked like a signature weapon for druids, but that rule got dropped for some reasons.
|
1) it has nothing to do with threatening squares, firing a ranged weapon provokes, and a whip has this line
Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.
2) yeah I can see this being a headache, since it’s basically 3 weapons.
3) Yeah I’d say it’s not worth it, but it’s been printed three different times so that’s what it is. I want to say you could/were supposed to be able to use it as a melee weapon as well but that just might have been a house rule we used.
1) it has nothing to do with threatening squares, firing a ranged weapon provokes, and a whip has this lineUsing a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.
Then what's with the "do not threaten any squares" part? Just say that you cannot make AoOs under any circumstance, that's it.
I'm asking this because it's the only Light Reach weapon that also should be used at close-range with a mode switching mecanic.
2) yeah I can see this being a headache, since it’s basically 3 weapons.
Took me a while to understand the "3" :P
3) Yeah I’d say it’s not worth it, but it’s been printed three different times so that’s what it is. I want to say you could/were supposed to be able to use it as a melee weapon as well but that just might have been a house rule we used.
Odd... just odd...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would have liked more rules about armor, shields, clothing, and other objects made from various monsters.
Also rules for "natural" magic items, basically stuff like body parts(horns, teeth, feathers, etc.) that kept/gained their magical properties from a defeated monster, natural object that gained magical abilities from being in a place with(or exposed to) strong magic, a piece of a broken magic item that gains it's own abilities over time, etc.
Yeah, both as an example of some rare cases of creatures whose power concentrates in a certain area / body part that can be used somehow, such as a phoenix feather or unicorn horn, but also in a more specialized case of a class or archetype or feat that allows someone to concentrate power from a slain creature into a specific part, and tap it later, creating one-shot magic items akin to potions or scrolls from a slain magical beastie. (Or the rarer permanent item, like the dragon-hide armor that granted a bonus to energy saves to it's wearer, from older editions of AD&D.)
Yeah Set, stuff like that.
I do recall some D&D 3.5 books detailling spell components made from monsters, dragon parts used as items and monster grafts.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do wish we got the kineticist much earlier in 1e so it could have gotten more love.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would have liked feats like weapon finesse, power attack, combat expertise, etc. was built into the system, not feats though still should meet the requirements to use. Also combat maneuvers don't provoke as long as you have a +1 BA.
Magic item creation should be based on having the right number of ranks in the proper craft skill then needing a feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More things
In bestiaries i wish a number of things were always included for every monster.
1. Leadership level to take the monster as a cohort or N/A if its too powerful.
2. Edible or not, value of trophies or other mats scavengeable from the corpse with what rolls.
Also, formalize weapon groups as a general rule rather than fighter only. No treating "not technically thrown" weapons in the thrown group as different from any other weapon in the group for the purposes of feats or class abilities.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I got a little curious when Paizo added the real-life Egyptian Deities as Ancient Orision Deities. Following this, they added the Lovecraftian Great Old Ones and we have gotten Demon Lords based on the Ars Goetia.
So... I kinda wished that we have gotten more pantheons based on real-life mythologies. The Asgardian Pantheon would have worked as Ancient Lands of the Linnorm Kings/Irrisen, the Greek/Roman Pantheon for Taldor, the Babylonian/Mesopotamian Pantheon for Ninshabur and so on.
I wish that Pathfinder adjust the weapon and armor for all classes because this like example barbarian can use all simple and martial weapon it like to say he my family in the mamut land have a very large armory and we travel like nomad whit the armory
I wish that Pathfinder adjust the weapon and armor for all classes because this like example barbarian can use all simple and martial weapon it like to say he my family in the mamut land have a very large armory and we travel like nomad whit the armory
While complicated to balance, a fighter could have been proficient with all simple weapons and say, weapons in 2 chosen weapon groups, either by you or by the region the fighter comes from ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Oracle should have gotten universal revelations that any mystery could take. An example would be one that lets them add spells to their spell list that fit their mystery like earth/stone spells for stone, fire spells for flame, air/electricity spells for wind, etc.
I wish that Pathfinder adjust the weapon and armor for all classes because this like example barbarian can use all simple and martial weapon it like to say he my family in the mamut land have a very large armory and we travel like nomad whit the armoryWhile complicated to balance, a fighter could have been proficient with all simple weapons and say, weapons in 2 chosen weapon groups, either by you or by the region the fighter comes from ;)
I disagree with the idea that martials need more limitations on what is frankly the one thing the game lets them do.
While I agree, I also feel like "can use any weapon" is a weird "strength" unless the GM is specifically making loot weapons random. It's right there with "cannot be disarmed" on my list of "things that suggest GMs and players should be targeting weapons left-and-right".
Its really more "martials have a basic competence and training which allow them to use almost any weapon with a baseline of ability". Weapon focus/specialization/improved critical are representations of high skill with a weapon. Proficiency is familiarity enough to use it without cutting your own leg off or bashing yourself in the head, and BAB is basic combat competence and awareness. 90% of weapons aren't really that different from one another in basic principle.
I'd rather see opposition schools go back to no memorization and clerics to get 2nd edition domain access before paring away at the weak classes.
This is why I mentionned this, because fighters are gear-dependant, but cannot make full use of these.
The problem isn't about proficiencies, it's about uses. The Weapon Training feature, before Advanced Weapon Training, was rather useless, because there was no reason to get bonuses on multiple weapon groups, when you're likely not gonna carry this many weapons. You're good with a melee weapon, a ranged weapon and probably a backup weapon, but that's it.
If the fighter picked a weapon group or two, and that weapon training applies to all of them, to the point which even Advanced Training does, that would have been more appealing. Furthermore, what would have been nice is to get special attacks according to the chosen weapon group as a base class feature, and not via an archetype.
This is why I mentionned this, because fighters are gear-dependant, but cannot make full use of these.
The problem isn't about proficiencies, it's about uses. The Weapon Training feature, before Advanced Weapon Training, was rather useless, because there was no reason to get bonuses on multiple weapon groups, when you're likely not gonna carry this many weapons. You're good with a melee weapon, a ranged weapon and probably a backup weapon, but that's it.
If the fighter picked a weapon group or two, and that weapon training applies to all of them, to the point which even Advanced Training does, that would have been more appealing. Furthermore, what would have been nice is to get special attacks according to the chosen weapon group as a base class feature, and not via an archetype.
See my philosophy here is to make the solution feat based.
Step 1: Codify the weapon groups completely in base rules rather than just fighters.
Step 2. Weapon focus/specialization/Improved critical et al apply to whole weapon groups rather than simply a single weapon type. Let the master of 1 weapon be relegated to archetypes rather than feats.
Honestly i've actually made perfectly good use of multiple weapon groups selected as a switch hitter fighter, bows and heavy blades. Pick up a great sword and you really only need like 2 maybe 3 feats to do competitive damage all the way up, and beyond that its generally good to have a ranged option.
This is why I mentionned this, because fighters are gear-dependant, but cannot make full use of these.
The problem isn't about proficiencies, it's about uses. The Weapon Training feature, before Advanced Weapon Training, was rather useless, because there was no reason to get bonuses on multiple weapon groups, when you're likely not gonna carry this many weapons. You're good with a melee weapon, a ranged weapon and probably a backup weapon, but that's it.
If the fighter picked a weapon group or two, and that weapon training applies to all of them, to the point which even Advanced Training does, that would have been more appealing. Furthermore, what would have been nice is to get special attacks according to the chosen weapon group as a base class feature, and not via an archetype.
See my philosophy here is to make the solution feat based.
Step 1: Codify the weapon groups completely in base rules rather than just fighters.
Step 2. Weapon focus/specialization/Improved critical et al apply to whole weapon groups rather than simply a single weapon type. Let the master of 1 weapon be relegated to archetypes rather than feats.
Honestly i've actually made perfectly good use of multiple weapon groups selected as a switch hitter fighter, bows and heavy blades. Pick up a great sword and you really only need like 2 maybe 3 feats to do competitive damage all the way up, and beyond that its generally good to have a ranged option.
That would have been the best course of actions.
The Tribal Warrior archetype (not to be mistaken for the Viking :P), has a similar feature, but... I don't think I've seen this for other archetypes. You always have to pick a specific weapon instead of applying a feature to all related weapons.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Having played during 2nd Edition and before when Fighters had to spend their minuscule 3 weapon proficiencies on weapons individually I can in fact say with certainty that starting with "all simple and martial" is the much better system.
|
I wish that Pathfinder adjust the weapon and armor for all classes because this like example barbarian can use all simple and martial weapon it like to say he my family in the mamut land have a very large armory and we travel like nomad whit the armoryWhile complicated to balance, a fighter could have been proficient with all simple weapons and say, weapons in 2 chosen weapon groups, either by you or by the region the fighter comes from ;)
This is pretty much how Spheres of Might handles it. Everyone gets Simple Weapon Proficiency, Light Armor, and Bucklers, and the Martial Tradition(how the character learned to fight) you pick at first level determines other proficincies as well. Knightly Training gets weapons armor suitable for a medieval Europeon knight, while Guild Training grants you weapons more commonly seen with rogues.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, formalize weapon groups as a general rule rather than fighter only.
Agreed, but I also think that fighters should have proficiency with exotic weapons as well. Why is a long sword ok, but a bastard sword not? Why are daggers ok but not throwing stars? It should be a tower shield situation where no other class gets this except fighters, but there shouldn't be a martial weapon (not including firearms) that a fighter can't just pick up and use.