|
I'm thinking about harvesting parts from any monsters we slay in our campaign and using them as improvised weapons (claws, teeth, tentacles and so on). I'm also thinking of possibly later modifying them with precious materials and runes, if applicable. Is this something that can be done to such an item while keeping its status of an improvised weapon? I mainly ask because I'm wondering if it would still qualify for Improvised Critical as well as keep its GM determined stats. Is none of this addressed in the rules and would it be completely up to the GM?
While you couldn't make monster parts into precious materials, you could use improvised weapons made out of precious materials.
As to runes, yep no issue there: "Improvised weapons are simple weapons" so if you can put runes on simple weapon like a dagger, you can do it to an improvised weapon.
I think once you start putting Runes on them they cross over into weapon territory rather than improvised weapon. And arguably poorly made unless you get somebody to upgrade it, though I don't know if I'd personally rule so.
A cool aspect of that Dedication involves breaking objects to do more damage, so that could get expensive. And the Runes wouldn't stack with Improvised Pummel's dice; it'd be whichever is highest.
I think once you start putting Runes on them they cross over into weapon territory rather than improvised weapon. And arguably poorly made unless you get somebody to upgrade it, though I don't know if I'd personally rule so.
There is no reason a non-weapon object can't be quite sturdy: at least better than "a tree branch or piece of wood" which is what a club, a listed weapon, is. When "weapon territory" includes random branches and logs, it's very hard to disqualify much.
And the Runes wouldn't stack with Improvised Pummel's dice; it'd be whichever is highest.
Sure but you'd be in it for the property runes: Flaming, Frost, ect damage would be additional to Improvised Pummel. Though if you're adding Fundamental runes, you could skip Improvised Pummel and Shattering Strike to avoid the breaking things.
Graystone,
If one's investing in an item enough to apply Runes to it, why bother to call that an improvised weapon?
It may have begun as raw materials not intended to be used as a weapon, but it's hardly improvised any longer. An item attack bonus is saying that item's good at attacking.
And yes, one could skip those feats, but my point was that those feats are what make the Dedication worthwhile. And Improvised Critical would no longer be necessary, since those claws (etc.) would become legit weapons (subject to GM's adjudication as to which weapon group the belong to, much like with the feat anyway).
If one's investing in an item enough to apply Runes to it, why bother to call that an improvised weapon?
Because words and rules have meaning? Magicing up a fire poker in no way makes it innately more weaponlike. Plus, improvised weapons ARE already weapons. ;)
It may have begun as raw materials not intended to be used as a weapon, but it's hardly improvised any longer.
Why? Does a cold iron candelabra work better as a weapon if I hand it to a fighter? If I put runes on it, does it get better compared to a weapon on the actual weapon list for that fighter... No, it doesn't hence it being improvised.
An item attack bonus is saying that item's good at attacking.
And the –2 penalty to attack rolls for improvised weapons says it ISN'T good at attacking: that doesn't disappear, the archetype just gets to ignore it.
And yes, one could skip those feats, but my point was that those feats are what make the Dedication worthwhile.
To you... If someone WANTS to use runes, it's certainly viable and the other feats in the archetype are worthwhile.
And Improvised Critical would no longer be necessary, since those claws (etc.) would become legit weapons (subject to GM's adjudication as to which weapon group the belong to, much like with the feat anyway).
Aren't you assuming that whatever class they are has access to critical specialization effects? Or that those with conditional access might want access all the time [like barbarians or Ruffian rogues?
|
|
If I go down that path I was planning on only taking the initial feat plus Improvised Critical. Using improvised weapons out of monster parts was mainly just for improving upon character concept. As an Investigator, I don't normally get critical specialization so Improvised Critical is a nice incentive for the investment in the dedication.
Graystone, I think we have a fundamental disagreement because I do think magicking up a fire poker does make it more weapon-like. I think the crafting involved does include improving its weapon qualities to where using it as a weapon now suits its purpose more than using it to prod charcoal.
If somebody upgraded harvested monster weapons w/ Runes, I wouldn't apply the -2 penalty. Though I'd note that as a special case. For many of the other instances, like a candelabra, there had been a long, unsettled debate on the forums about whether such tools could accept weapon Runes or not. I can't even recall which side I'd favored since both sides had legit arguments.
Yes, I was underestimating the niche martial situations where PCs don't get critical specialization effects. I doubt I'd ever pay a class feat for those.
---
John R., essentially it's ask your GM territory, though it seems simpler to ask if you could craft weapons with those monster parts, i.e. "Griffon-talon kukri"
And if you're using Int to attack via Devise a Strategem, your PC will need an agile or finesse weapon anyway, traits an improvised weapon cannot have (since they come with zero traits except maybe Versatile for different parts striking).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And if you're using Int to attack via Devise a Strategem, your PC will need an agile or finesse weapon anyway, traits an improvised weapon cannot have (since they come with zero traits except maybe Versatile for different parts striking).
What about the whole "The GM determines the amount and type of damage the attack deals, if any, as well as any weapon traits the improvised weapon should have" part of improvised weapons?
Graystone, I think we have a fundamental disagreement because I do think magicking up a fire poker does make it more weapon-like. I think the crafting involved does include improving its weapon qualities to where using it as a weapon now suits its purpose more than using it to prod charcoal.
The thing is, a +3 major striking firepoker is ALWAYS -2 to hit behind a +3 major striking [fill in the blank weapon] for anyone other than that archetype hence it's being improvised. Nothing in runes makes it more weapon-like it just improves your aim and damage over it's base but the base doesn't change. Crafting runes in no way means you're recrafting the item your attaching them to: I can't find anything in the game that suggests that it literally alters the shape of the item to make it more weapon like. A firepoker with or without runes has the same weight, size/dimensions, balance ect as before.
Runes: Core Rulebook pg. 580 "Rune-etched armor and weapons have the same Bulk and general characteristics as the non-magical version unless noted otherwise." Changing from improvised to not would be a change in "general characteristics".
If somebody upgraded harvested monster weapons w/ Runes, I wouldn't apply the -2 penalty.
Nifty houserule: not really an option for a thread in the "rules discussion" area.
For many of the other instances, like a candelabra, there had been a long, unsettled debate on the forums about whether such tools could accept weapon Runes or not.
I can't see any argument for it not to work: the game LITERALLY calls them out as simple weapons. "Improvised weapons are simple weapons." Saying they can't take runes is like saying a dagger or club can't.
Graystone, you are arguing that "improvised weapon" is a permanent condition based on its consistent shape or original purpose (yet have also pointed out how easy it is for an item to qualify as a weapon, i.e. the club). I find those secondary since "improvised" has a meaning on its own. Once one is no longer improvising with an item, but actually upgrading it and making it into a feasible, go-to weapon, then "improvised weapon" no longer describes it. Hence the -2 would go away because English.
Given the silliness and breadth of weapons which exist on Golarion (i.e. Gnome ladders), a fire poker seems reasonable...once someone's worked on it.
I know this doesn't persuade you because you seem rather entrenched while personally I'm playing more devil's advocate. In fact, I believe I agreed in that thread I mentioned that improvised weapons could take Runes, but John R. should know the matter (AFAI remember) did not get resolved. I believe the counter-argument was whether improvised weapons were innately weapons or just called simple weapons for purposes of determining how to treat them in combat (so somewhat of a temporary/patchwork situation for the item). Also somewhat of a meta or even metaphysical argument, but hey, it is a magical setting.
---
Ultimately, I think asking the GM matters most, not just for body parts maintaining improvised status, but for which such monster bits would be considered Agile or Finesse (if any). Go into detail on every step with them.
In-game, the solution of the PC crafting thematic weapons out of monster parts seems the best route. It's both straightforward and on solid rules footing.
Taking one feat to get rid of a penalty your PC can bypass if they build such weapons plus another feat to get a critical specialization seems like a waste. (That is IMO if putting Runes on them. The route of breaking them on enemy heads still appeals to me though I don't foresee myself building around that.)
Graystone, you are arguing that "improvised weapon" is a permanent condition based on its consistent shape or original purpose (yet have also pointed out how easy it is for an item to qualify as a weapon, i.e. the club). I find those secondary since "improvised" has a meaning on its own. Once one is no longer improvising with an item, but actually upgrading it and making it into a feasible, go-to weapon, then "improvised weapon" no longer describes it. Hence the -2 would go away because English.
Runes: Core Rulebook pg. 580 "Rune-etched armor and weapons have the same Bulk and general characteristics as the non-magical version unless noted otherwise." Changing from improvised to not would be a change in "general characteristics".
Seems plain as day to me. Improvised has a meaning in the game and nothing suggests or implies it goes away. For instance adding +2 shoddy armor in no way removes it's "Improvised or of dubious make" as that's a "general characteristics" of it's being shoddy.
Given the silliness and breadth of weapons which exist on Golarion (i.e. Gnome ladders), a fire poker seems reasonable...once someone's worked on it.
That's the thing... Runes aren't working on it' in a way that alters it's "general characteristics". For instance, the existence of a Gnome ladders doesn't mean any normal ladder I pick up and cast Magic Weapon on loses improvised.
I believe the counter-argument was whether improvised weapons were innately weapons or just called simple weapons for purposes of determining how to treat them in combat (so somewhat of a temporary/patchwork situation for the item). Also somewhat of a meta or even metaphysical argument, but hey, it is a magical setting.
The game quite clearly says they are simple weapons, not treated as. It's not like Dwarven Weapon Familiarity or similar feats that say "For the purpose of determining your proficiency, martial dwarf weapons are simple weapons and advanced dwarf weapons are martial weapons."
|
I would suggest talking to your GM about making a crafting check and spending some downtime to craft a custom weapon. Use a weapon that already exists and work from there. Like, if you take bear claws to make claw gantlets, they could work as normal gauntlets and do slashing instead of bludgeoning. Get creative but don't try to make them overpowered, and always talk with the GM about it.
|
|
I would suggest talking to your GM about making a crafting check and spending some downtime to craft a custom weapon. Use a weapon that already exists and work from there. Like, if you take bear claws to make claw gantlets, they could work as normal gauntlets and do slashing instead of bludgeoning. Get creative but don't try to make them overpowered, and always talk with the GM about it.
This was how I was feeling about primarily using improvised weapons and applying crafting to them in general. Since improvised weapons are already pretty much going to end up as a weapon customized by the GM, I don't see why the player can't work with the GM to modify that customization further through the crafting skill. Whether that weapon ceases to be improvised any further is sort of iffy.... As far as what I am going for, things like bone are usually not as malleable or sturdy as things like metal or even wood and may not be able to take the same exact forms of normal weapons, so I would say such examples would still qualify and require special training to overcome that -2 penalty.
I also feel that if runes can be applied to an improvised weapon, precious metals could be applied in a limited way, in the form of plating, creating maybe up to a maximum of low-grade quality versions of the item. Adamantium plating? Maybe not, considering the iffy material properties of the stuff. Silver plating though seems completely reasonable. From what it seems though through the discussion, most of this still seems to be in the GM dependent gray area for now.
|
|
I would suggest talking to your GM about making a crafting check and spending some downtime to craft a custom weapon. Use a weapon that already exists and work from there. Like, if you take bear claws to make claw gantlets, they could work as normal gauntlets and do slashing instead of bludgeoning. Get creative but don't try to make them overpowered, and always talk with the GM about it.This was how I was feeling about primarily using improvised weapons and applying crafting to them in general. Since improvised weapons are already pretty much going to end up as a weapon customized by the GM, I don't see why the player can't work with the GM to modify that customization further through the crafting skill. Whether that weapon ceases to be improvised any further is sort of iffy.... As far as what I am going for, things like bone are usually not as malleable or sturdy as things like metal or even wood and may not be able to take the same exact forms of normal weapons, so I would say such examples would still qualify and require special training to overcome that -2 penalty.
I also feel that if runes can be applied to an improvised weapon, precious metals could be applied in a limited way, in the form of plating, creating maybe up to a maximum of low-grade quality versions of the item. Adamantium plating? Maybe not considering the iffy material properties of the stuff. Silver plating though seems completely reasonable. From what it seems though through the discussion, most of this still seems to be in the GM dependent gray area for now.
Again, that's up to you and the GM. I can see a savy survivalist making bear gauntlets to fight in the wilds in a pinch, but I also see them making it back to civilization and designing/crafting a new weapon to match what they made in the wilds. It's entirely possible to go from improvised to full weapon as long as the GM is on board.
I would generally say that once you apply crafting to an improvised weapon, it has a chance at transcending "improvised" into all up weapon hood. Improvised weapons are things that you are using in a way that don't serve their actual function. So the aforementioned fire poker is an improvised Piercing weapon that isn't intended for the purpose. But if you spend some time honing and balancing it to act as something closer to a Rapier, then it just becomes a sort of Rapier at a certain point.
Though I could just as easily see justifying the use of crafting to make "monster parts" useable as weapons without making them just an interesting example of a weapon. Fixing a set of teeth into some crude hand wraps could make a gauntlet like improvised weapon. But that is sort of a blurry line to me.
Mechanically this comes down to weapon traits imo. Once you start getting to the part of the conversation where you are trying to convince your GM that you should get Forceful or some other trait usually found on Martial Weapons, that is when you are straying into "weapon" territory.
As long as your improvised weapon isn't competing directly with Martial and Advanced weapons, or some Simple ones like the longspear for instance, then I doubt there is a problem.
|
I say cut out the Improvised Weapon mechanics altogether and just make creating equipment from monster parts and other more exotic materials something that can just be DONE like any other form of crafting.
Just use the printed stats for the equivalent weapons and armor you're making and cook up one or more little bonuses that you think sound fun for your game when using the stuff such as giving bonuses for the kind of "prestige" having a Medusa Hair Whip or a Bulette Matriarch Tower Shield. You could even let thematic stuff work in favor of the concept by providing some minor circumstantial bonuses for things the base creature was especially good at: Gauntlets made from a Giant Sloth - Bonus to Athletics to Climbing Action and Activities and so on.
If you want Monster Hunter, give them Monster Hunter, you shouldn't fuss with the whole Improvised Rules if it's a core and important part of your game, otherwise, you're just laying a trap in the campaign where you need to apply math-fixers to every creatures AC and maybe even to-hit if you use Shoddy Armor as well.