I only see two significant differences between a composite shortbow and a shortbow.
1) The composite shortbow has the propulsive trait, letting you add half your Strength modifier to the damage. This is a benefit of the composite shortbow.
2) The composite shortbow is incredibly expensive. This is a drawback of the composite shortbow.
That drawback is entirely eliminated if you add a +1 potency rune to both weapons, since the Price of each weapon become the Price of all its runes combined, regardless of the original weapon. Does this mean that (for any character with Strength modifier exceeding -1) there is absolutely no reason to use a +1 shortbow as opposed to a +1 composite shortbow?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
using a composite bow without getting the benefit of adding half your STR to damage (in cases of +1 and +0 STR) only opens you up to getting your damaged reduced by Enfeebled. Better to stick to a non-composite bow in those cases.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly it's just a bit redundant. If you have a Str bonus more than +1 you you can take composite bows if you don't have makes no difference.
It's more like a legacy from D&D that could be easily removed but that came to PF2e without changes for some reason and maybe it could be removed or change in next PF versions.
So it's not a problem it's just an idiosyncrasy.
Longbows have the Volley 30ft trait which means they take a -2 to targets within 30ft. Shortbows do not and are therefor better for ranged combatants that expect to end up in near-melee ranges with their target but do not want to or cannot take the Point Blank Stance feat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Longbows have the Volley 30ft trait which means they take a -2 to targets within 30ft. Shortbows do not and are therefor better for ranged combatants that expect to end up in near-melee ranges with their target but do not want to or cannot take the Point Blank Stance feat.
True, but the comparison here is between shortbows and composite shortbows, not shortbows and longbows. Neither type of shortbow has the volley trait.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Longbows have the Volley 30ft trait which means they take a -2 to targets within 30ft. Shortbows do not and are therefor better for ranged combatants that expect to end up in near-melee ranges with their target but do not want to or cannot take the Point Blank Stance feat.True, but the comparison here is between shortbows and composite shortbows, not shortbows and longbows. Neither type of shortbow has the volley trait.
Ah! That's what I get for posting after a long day.
Ah! That's what I get for posting after a long day.Longbows have the Volley 30ft trait which means they take a -2 to targets within 30ft. Shortbows do not and are therefor better for ranged combatants that expect to end up in near-melee ranges with their target but do not want to or cannot take the Point Blank Stance feat.True, but the comparison here is between shortbows and composite shortbows, not shortbows and longbows. Neither type of shortbow has the volley trait.
It's an easy assumption to fall into given that comparisons between bow types here are almost always about the longbow group vs shortbow group.
It's an easy assumption to fall into given that comparisons between bow types here are almost always about the longbow group vs shortbow group.Ah! That's what I get for posting after a long day.Longbows have the Volley 30ft trait which means they take a -2 to targets within 30ft. Shortbows do not and are therefor better for ranged combatants that expect to end up in near-melee ranges with their target but do not want to or cannot take the Point Blank Stance feat.True, but the comparison here is between shortbows and composite shortbows, not shortbows and longbows. Neither type of shortbow has the volley trait.
It's probably because Taking20 famously forgot about the volley trait when bashing PF2e in a comparison with D&D5e.
I always thought non-composite bows let you keep your Strength penalty to damage, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I always thought non-composite bows let you keep your Strength penalty to damage, too.
By default, ranged weapons ignore your Str modifier for damage.
The exceptions are those with the Thrown trait (which add your full Str modifier) and those with the Propulsive trait (which add half the modifier if it is positive or add the full modifier if it is negative).
Since the non-composite shortbows lack both the Thrown and Propulsive traits, they ignore your Str modifier for damage no matter what it is.
There is one more difference. Favored Weapon for a couple of deities. Which will make a difference for some clerics.
There is one more difference. Favored Weapon for a couple of deities. Which will make a difference for some clerics.
A lot of GMs will let you use the composite bow in place of that, though.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is one more difference. Favored Weapon for a couple of deities. Which will make a difference for some clerics.A lot of GMs will let you use the composite bow in place of that, though.
Yeah, mainly because they say "Any time an ability is specifically restricted to a shortbow, it also applies to composite shortbows unless otherwise stated" and "Any time an ability is specifically restricted to a longbow, such as Erastil's favored weapon, it also applies to composite longbows unless otherwise stated." I'd say favored weapon falls under that.
Why would a weapon become free just because you added a rune to it?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The pricing of magic weapons includes the cost of the base weapon. So all +1 weapons are 35gp regardless of what the base weapon is.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don't need to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These weapons are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as cold iron.
I'll keep that in mind next time I order a shipment of clockwork macuahuitls for resale. ;P
I strongly suspect that phrase was intended to serve as reminder text, indicating that you don't need to adjust RUNE prices based on the base weapon's various properties (being wood or metal, light or bulky, simple or martial, or any other parameters) like you do with weapon bulk and special materials. Short of a developer saying otherwise, I really don't think you can get weapons for free.
Also, what of base magical armor? It appears to have a similar table setup, but seems to be lacking some of the same verbiage.
|
|
It’s been confirmed by designers. I have no idea where anymore, but this has been a confirmed thing all the way back to launch. Armor is, I think, a different story, because of things like full plate, that are much more common than the clockwork weapons.
Re: Armor. Nevermind. Archives of Nethys has the same text for Magic Armor. Now I’m wondering if they’ve added that on both. It’s not marked as a note or anything.
The Prices here are for all types of armor. You don’t need to adjust the Price from leather armor to full plate or the like. These armors are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as dawnsilver.
The pricing of magic weapons includes the cost of the base weapon. So all +1 weapons are 35gp regardless of what the base weapon is.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don't need to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These weapons are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as cold iron.
I’m surprised this didn’t update. Exquisite sword canes are now cheaper as +1s than stock, 35 vs 90 gold. I can see this in the first printing, neither sword canes nor macuahuitls were in core, but at this point? I’d flex GM fiat of ‘ridiculous consequences’ to override that.
|
|
I’m surprised this didn’t update. Exquisite sword canes are now cheaper as +1s than stock, 35 vs 90 gold. I can see this in the first printing, neither sword canes nor macuahuitls were in core, but at this point? I’d flex GM fiat of ‘ridiculous consequences’ to override that.The pricing of magic weapons includes the cost of the base weapon. So all +1 weapons are 35gp regardless of what the base weapon is.
The Prices here are for all types of weapons. You don't need to adjust the Price from a club to a greataxe or the like. These weapons are made of standard materials, not precious materials such as cold iron.
Exquisite Swordcane is an AP item. It’s not likely going to get errata, but it’s also an easy one for the GM to just disallow, as PFS does.
Yeah, Exquisite Sword Cane just shouldn't exist.
Yeah, Exquisite Sword Cane just shouldn't exist.
Why? I mean I get that it adds the parry and twin traits to the 1d6 P agile finesse concealable sword cane. So it is a strict upgrade. But the twin is a d4 weapon.
I'm not finding it mechanically strong at all. There are other d6 parry weapons.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ii3?Advanced-Weapon-Weirdness
See comments from Mark and Michael there.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks.
Interesting that they moved on with a new baseline.
Personally it is the d4 weapons which I find too weak.
Very occasionally I might use the Exquisite Sword Cane but still generally not. So even though it is good for what it is, I still typically prefer an actual Shield and Shield Boss.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs43ii3?Advanced-Weapon-Weirdness
See comments from Mark and Michael there.
|
|
I think at the time, there also weren't any Finesse, Agile, Parry weapons. I think this, because I remember wanting one for my Rogue, and not being able to find many other than the exquisite sword cane, which isn't PFS legal. Although I think proficiency would have still been an issue. Now there are a bunch of them, including the tekko-kagi, which adds free-hand and disarm and monk as well (though only at a d4).
I think at the time, there also weren't any Finesse, Agile, Parry weapons.
...
The main-gauche has always existed in PF2.