| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Take Monastic Weaponry from an archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've got no other idea RAW, but you could also ask your GM to just give the rogue full martial proficiency. We know for a fact that its limited list is purely a legacy thing.
Archer dedication will give scaling proficiency with all simple and martial bows. Mauler dedication will do the same with all simple and martial 2-handed weapons. Technically, if you took both...?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually mauler alone should accomplish scaling proficiency
I think that would only grant scaling proficiency for the melee usage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Take Monastic Weaponry from an archetype.
Add Monastic Archer Stance and you can apply Monk abilities in both melee and ranged modes.
Look, I see very little advantage compared to having a bow in one hand and a 1-handed weapon in the other.
Because the Combination trait takes a Interact action to change modes anyway. As the bow is a 1+ hand weapon, you can use this same action to draw/sheath another one-handed weapon and thus change modes in the same way without having to invest in feats and still maintaining specific benefits of each weapon individually like the bow's deadly trait.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Look, I see very little advantage compared to having a bow in one hand and a 1-handed weapon in the other.
You share runes on the combo weapon: that's the main thing IMO.
Looks cool. But mechanically it only works well even if your melee attack kills the target and you use the switch to attack another target further away. Because in the end the ranged attack still suffers MAP and still triggers reactions like AoO and you still end up having to spend an action to switch to ranged mode if you want to continue attacking from a distance.
Combination weapons have many mechanical traps. They look more cooler than they currently are. The only real advantage is that was pointed by graystone, that you share runes between two modes.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks cool. But mechanically it only works well even if your melee attack kills the target and you use the switch to attack another target further away. Because in the end the ranged attack still suffers MAP and still triggers reactions like AoO and you still end up having to spend an action to switch to ranged mode if you want to continue attacking from a distance.
Oh, it's worse than that. You can't use the switch to attack a target further away. The target has to be the same one you hit with the melee attack.
On the bright side, though, the thing you say about MAP isn't quite right. You need the sucecssful melee attack to be "your last action". If I'm understanding the rules right, that means that if you successfully hit with a melee attack as the last action of round 1, then you can use a ranged attack on the same target as the first action of round 2, assuming you didn't make any reactions in between. Alternately, if you hit someone with an opportunity attack and they kept going, you're all set up to send a ranged attack after them first thing the next round.
Still... this is all very niche.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Looks cool. But mechanically it only works well even if your melee attack kills the target and you use the switch to attack another target further away. Because in the end the ranged attack still suffers MAP and still triggers reactions like AoO and you still end up having to spend an action to switch to ranged mode if you want to continue attacking from a distance.Oh, it's worse than that. You can't use the switch to attack a target further away. The target has to be the same one you hit with the melee attack.
On the bright side, though, the thing you say about MAP isn't quite right. You need the sucecssful melee attack to be "your last action". If I'm understanding the rules right, that means that if you successfully hit with a melee attack as the last action of round 1, then you can use a ranged attack on the same target as the first action of round 2, assuming you didn't make any reactions in between. Alternately, if you hit someone with an opportunity attack and they kept going, you're all set up to send a ranged attack after them first thing the next round.
Still... this is all very niche.
Stuff like that has to be used in the same round. They answered that in the "Ask a Developer" series, but hopefully it will be included in the clarifications in the future.
Oh, it's worse than that. You can't use the switch to attack a target further away. The target has to be the same one you hit with the melee attack.
Oh! I didn't notice that. Thanks for fix.
Stuff like that has to be used in the same round. They answered that in the "Ask a Developer" series, but hopefully it will be included in the clarifications in the future....
On the bright side, though, the thing you say about MAP isn't quite right. You need the sucecssful melee attack to be "your last action". If I'm understanding the rules right, that means that if you successfully hit with a melee attack as the last action of round 1, then you can use a ranged attack on the same target as the first action of round 2, assuming you didn't make any reactions in between. Alternately, if you hit someone with an opportunity attack and they kept going, you're all set up to send a ranged attack after them first thing the next round.Still... this is all very niche.
Yes I agree if you use as last action you cannot do another attack. But it's not like do an additional attack with ranged part was a good option anyway.
I'm just sort of darkly amused at the byplay.
YuriP: "So the feature isn't as good as you might think. There's really only one use for it, and it's very niche."
Sanityfaerie: "Actually, that use doesn't work... but there is this other use that's very niche."
Karmagator: "Actually, that use doesn't work either."
Like... we keep trying to squeeze value out of this thing, and we keep failing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As graystone said, the thing combination weapons are for is sharing runes between a ranged and melee weapon. In all other respects, they are basically just worse weapons. They are extremely niche.
So if you are not looking for that amount of investment (or like me have been playing with ABP for years), combination weapons are not worth looking at.
I'm just sort of darkly amused at the byplay.
YuriP: "So the feature isn't as good as you might think. There's really only one use for it, and it's very niche."
Sanityfaerie: "Actually, that use doesn't work... but there is this other use that's very niche."
Karmagator: "Actually, that use doesn't work either."
Like... we keep trying to squeeze value out of this thing, and we keep failing.
The current mechanic value is to save some money with runes.
Yet it has it's own flavor charm (I like the idea of thrust someone with a bayonet than shot) it's just too similar to attack with 2 weapons.The main real problem here is that the currently rogues need to waste some feats to use it. That's why probably is better to just use a short bow + melee weapon even wasting more money than use a archetype dedication feat or use a simple melee throw weapon like a spear instead.