Kukri should not have the Trip trait.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
IIRC the new version of the Archer archetype lets you treat advanced bows as martial. It's also a really strong archtype for the flurry ranger in general.Yeah, because Archer does this makes me inclined to specifically disallow unconventional weaponry for the Daikyu, unless a character's entire deal is specifically something like "I am a horse archer from the steppe". At least until they print a second advanced bow.
I don't understand, why would Archer Dedication being flat out better than Unconventional Weaponry (it doesnt just give you Bows, it gives you crossbows and critical specialisation and access to all other Archer feats) make you want to disallow Unconventional Weaponry for the Daikyu? Because it's Ancestry vs Archetype feat? I feel that the Ancestry feat is weaker enough that it's a non issue.
Though I have to point out I always though Unconventional Weaponry is a very weird feat. Like, in this case By RAW, we're arguing about whether or not it should grant access to what is literally a slightly fancy bow. But nobody here would argue that a random dude in Taldor can't take it to instantly learn how to use the Buugeng or Taw Launcher (uncommon Advanced weapons wielded by a RARE ancestry). At least, not from a rules perspective.
I would have to hear from a PFS player, but it seems Unconventional Weaponry for use with the Daikyu should be allowed. Not sure why it would not.
I don't understand, why would Archer Dedication being flat out better than Unconventional Weaponry
Because the hierarchy of feat power goes class>ancestry>general>skill.
So if something is close to equivalent to a feat either above or below it, I'm going to be suspicious about it.
Like my standard for "Unconventional Weaponry" has always been a "tell me about how this weapon is important to your people" and I will accept any plausible answer, but for some things you're going to have to be pretty specific.
Like the Daikyu is on the level of the Bladed Hoop for "specificity required in backstory" for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't understand, why would Archer Dedication being flat out better than Unconventional WeaponryBecause the hierarchy of feat power goes class>ancestry>general>skill.
So if something is close to equivalent to a feat either above or below it, I'm going to be suspicious about it.
Like my standard for "Unconventional Weaponry" has always been a "tell me about how this weapon is important to your people" and I will accept any plausible answer, but for some things you're going to have to be pretty specific.
Like the Daikyu is on the level of the Bladed Hoop for "specificity required in backstory" for me.
But it's not a close equivalent? Archer dedication is much stronger than Unconventional Weaponry, unless you only want the Daikyu. But it seems to me getting proficiency in one specific weapon is exactly what Unconventional Weaponry is for? So why prevent it's intended use?
Also the daikyu is literally just a japanese longbow. It's nowhere near as wierd as bladed hoops. Also regarding your earlier statement, there are actually two more advanced bows: the Phalanx Piercer and the Hongali Hornbow. Also technically the Taw Launcher, but I really think that one should be reclassified to Crossbow.
The reason to be strict on Unconventional Weaponry is to be careful about making Humans auto-picks because they're stronger by virtue of being able to grab any advanced weapon with a class feat (in addition to powerhouse feats like Natural Ambition and Multitalented). Since "ancestry" is kind of a top level choice in terms of "how you imagine your character" having to think "if I was human instead I wouldn't have to jump through all these hoops" is a bummer.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The reason to be strict on Unconventional Weaponry is to be careful about making Humans auto-picks because they're stronger by virtue of being able to grab any advanced weapon with a class feat (in addition to powerhouse feats like Natural Ambition and Multitalented). Since "ancestry" is kind of a top level choice in terms of "how you imagine your character" having to think "if I was human instead I wouldn't have to jump through all these hoops" is a bummer.
I understand but the cat's kind of out of the bag there and has been for a while. Humans are arguably the best Ancestry overall (or rather, half-elves are). Curtailing Unconventional Weaponry won't really change that, IMO.
Especially since most of the advanced weapons that get taken do have an Ancestry tag (in play I've mostly seen the Barricade Buster, Tricky Pick, Gnome Flickmace and the Dorn Dergar) so unless you as the GM ban the feat outright there's nothing stopping the feat from working.
Side-note, but going back to Advanced weapons not being worth it, why oh why is the Spiral Rapier Advanced? It's literally a rapier that exchanges Deadly for Parry. That's a downgrade.
And speaking of the Dorn Dergar, how come d10 + Reach + Razing is Advanced and Uncommon but the Meteor Hammer is d8 + Reach + Backswing + Trip + Disarm and it's not only Martial, but Common?
(I really need to stop scouring these weapon tables, so much stuff makes 0 sense).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also think restricting Unconventional Weaponry to "not make humans overpowered" is a little...eh, unimpactful? Like, Unconventional Weaponry is effectively an slightly better version of the Weapon Proficiency feat (a general feat, which are feats regarded to be weaker than ancestry or class feats) and even if you took the most overpowered advanced weapon with it it would still be worse than Natural Ambition which gives you a class feat (the strongest set of feats in the system). Do you restrict Natural Ambition as well? or General Training which is a feat of a similar power scale? If that's the case, what's the purpose of playing a human in your table? The whole point of humans is that they are versatile and despite not being as long-lived or born with innate magical powers or inhuman strength they cheat the system due to their adaptability.
Also, this probably could be an unpopular opinion, but despite these three feats I mentioned, human feats tend to suck. Yeah, they have the best ancestry feat in the system, but they certainly compensate by almost not having anything else to choose from.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like my standard for "Unconventional Weaponry" has always been a "tell me about how this weapon is important to your people" and I will accept any plausible answer, but for some things you're going to have to be pretty specific.
That's literally the opposite of Unconventional Weaponry though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's literally the opposite of Unconventional Weaponry though.
Like my standard for "Unconventional Weaponry" has always been a "tell me about how this weapon is important to your people" and I will accept any plausible answer, but for some things you're going to have to be pretty specific.
Yep. The whole feat is about you accessing some strange weapon unusual for where you are for some reason which can be as simple as my uncle gave me the weapon when I was young or I saw it in a shop and bought it and trained with it even if they have no idea where it's from.
I'd like to give all of the Monk weapons where the Monk trait 'costs' an actual useful trait/other feature, to give them something else to make them on par with other weapons. It just seems so unnecessary, especially when there's a Monk trait weapon that doesnt have the trait cost power budget and it didnt break anything. Like, it makes weapon using monks feel more finicky considering its already a feat cost, and it makes it so those weapons are just automatically worse for anyone liking the style of weapon for a non Monk character.
Director of Rules & Lore
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to give all of the Monk weapons where the Monk trait 'costs' an actual useful trait/other feature, to give them something else to make them on par with other weapons. It just seems so unnecessary, especially when there's a Monk trait weapon that doesnt have the trait cost power budget and it didnt break anything. Like, it makes weapon using monks feel more finicky considering its already a feat cost, and it makes it so those weapons are just automatically worse for anyone liking the style of weapon for a non Monk character.
This isn't a thing. Monk is always a zero-cost trait.
Each weapon category (simple > martial > advanced) can have about a minor trait's-worth (1/3 of a die size) flex up or down within it before it changes into a different category, depending on its trait profile. This is in part because a weapon might end up having every single trait that fits its story and not quite hit the ceiling for its category or miss enough to drop into a lower category.
Because monk weapons tend to be the most story-rich and trait-heavy weapons in the game, they experience that trait flex of being a minor trait up or down within their category more often than other weapons. This has been misinterpreted as the monk trait "costing" them a trait that another weapon gets, but that's not what's happening. They just have all the traits that match their story without passing through the floor or ceiling of their category.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Daikyu has forceful. That is going to be a nice weapon for flurry archer rangers. It is still 80 feet. Forceful for a flurry archer ranger allows a lot of arrows.Biggest issue is making the case that it counts for Unconventional Weaponry, since the Daikyu is advanced.
I don't see why the Daikyo being advanced is an issue for Rangers. Rangers are proficient in all martial weapons so Unconventional Weaponry gives them the option to select an uncommon advanced weapon — which the Daikyo is. What am I missing?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see why the Daikyo being advanced is an issue for Rangers. Rangers are proficient in all martial weapons so Unconventional Weaponry gives them the option to select an uncommon advanced weapon — which the Daikyo is. What am I missing?Daikyu has forceful. That is going to be a nice weapon for flurry archer rangers. It is still 80 feet. Forceful for a flurry archer ranger allows a lot of arrows.Biggest issue is making the case that it counts for Unconventional Weaponry, since the Daikyu is advanced.
Basically that the Daikyu has no ancestry trait, so we need to establish the other part of the feat: is the Daikyu common in some other place? If yes, you can take it. If no, you cant.
This is also why Unconventional Weaponry is weird. If we say that yes, the Daikyu is in fact Common in Tian Xia, the it is easier for a character that isnt Tian to obtain proficiency (becaus it is uncommon for them) than it is for the character from Toan Xia (because its common there, so it doesnt qualify)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is also why Unconventional Weaponry is weird. If we say that yes, the Daikyu is in fact Common in Tian Xia, the it is easier for a character that isnt Tian to obtain proficiency (becaus it is uncommon for them) than it is for the character from Toan Xia (because its common there, so it doesnt qualify)
Hear hear. While we're on the subject of unconventional weaponry, I really don't like how it's a human thing. It annoys me (though mechanically I get the logic) that the way to get the most of out advanced weapons is to either be a fighter (fine, make sense) or to pick human. I do wish the weapon profiency feat gave you master in advanced if you have martial in advanced, or something similar. Given the amount of advanced weapons, that's quite a lot of advanced weapons that are essentially "hidden" human ancestry weapons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hear hear. While we're on the subject of unconventional weaponry, I really don't like how it's a human thing. It annoys me (though mechanically I get the logic) that the way to get the most of out advanced weapons is to either be a fighter (fine, make sense) or to pick human. I do wish the weapon profiency feat gave you master in advanced if you have martial in advanced, or something similar. Given the amount of advanced weapons, that's quite a lot of advanced weapons that are essentially "hidden" human ancestry weapons.This is also why Unconventional Weaponry is weird. If we say that yes, the Daikyu is in fact Common in Tian Xia, the it is easier for a character that isnt Tian to obtain proficiency (becaus it is uncommon for them) than it is for the character from Toan Xia (because its common there, so it doesnt qualify)
Would be nicer as a general feat and fit better. No reason an elf or dwarf couldn't learn an unconventional weapon. Anyone really.
I wouldn't be against Unconventional Weaponry (or even General Training or Natural Ambition) to become "universal" ancestry feats, but then what give to humans in compensation? I certainly don't aprove the notion that "humans have to suck" that some people have (not pointing anyone in particular here, just something I seen a few times over the years).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't a thing. Monk is always a zero-cost trait.
Which is, again, kinda why I'd advocate for the removal of the monk trait. If the trait effectively does nothing but restrain monks into using a very limited set of weaponry for almost no reason I'd rather it just not exist and allow monks to pick a weapon for their own story from Monastic Weaponry.
I wouldn't be against Unconventional Weaponry (or even General Training or Natural Ambition) to become "universal" ancestry feats, but then what give to humans in compensation? I certainly don't aprove the notion that "humans have to suck" that some people have (not pointing anyone in particular here, just something I seen a few times over the years).
I mean... if they lose 3 out of the 19 1st level options they have, it's wouldn't be the worst thing to happen.
Would be nicer as a general feat and fit better. No reason an elf or dwarf couldn't learn an unconventional weapon. Anyone really.Hear hear. While we're on the subject of unconventional weaponry, I really don't like how it's a human thing. It annoys me (though mechanically I get the logic) that the way to get the most of out advanced weapons is to either be a fighter (fine, make sense) or to pick human. I do wish the weapon profiency feat gave you master in advanced if you have martial in advanced, or something similar. Given the amount of advanced weapons, that's quite a lot of advanced weapons that are essentially "hidden" human ancestry weapons.This is also why Unconventional Weaponry is weird. If we say that yes, the Daikyu is in fact Common in Tian Xia, the it is easier for a character that isnt Tian to obtain proficiency (becaus it is uncommon for them) than it is for the character from Toan Xia (because its common there, so it doesnt qualify)
I think the problem there is we would in fact invalidate quite a few Class feats.
First, the only classes that gain general training in Advanced anything are Fighters and Gunslingers, but this proficiency is always worse than their proficiency with specific Martial weapons (the Fighter's chosen group; or Firearms/Crossbows respectively.)
Both of these classes have a Feat (Advanced Weapon Training and Advanced Shooter) which makes certain Advanced weapons (the one's in the fighter group; firearms or crossbows) count as Martial for the prupose of proficiency, which means they effectively get a proficiency bump because Martial Proficiency is always > Advanced Profiency.
Monks in PC 2 also get the same with Advanced Monastic Weaponry, which is restricted to Monk Weapons. (Fun fact: all currently available Advanced Monk weapons have the Twin trait. Ain' that interesting).
The problem is that players don't usually want multiple advanced weapons, they want one weapon they'll build their style around. So these class feats are usually not worth it if:
- The weapon in question has an Ancestry trait. In that case, Unconventional Weaponry or the respective Familiarity Feat is better. Heck, I'm sure some people will argue spending a General Feat for Adopted Ancestry and an Ancestry Feat in the required Familiarity Feat/Unconventional Weaponry is better. It'll come online at L5 vs L6, and it will not cost you a Class Feat.
- The Weapon in Question has the Two-Hand Trait, is a two handed melee weapon, is a Bow, or a Crossbow. For the first two, Mauler dedication has you covered . For the latter two, Archer dedication is your thing. Both of these can be taken way earlier (level 2).
As an example, lets say you're a Gunslinger and you want to use an Advanced Firearm. Well, turns out, every single Advanced Firearm currently available has an Ancestry tag. If you're a Gunslinger and you want to use an Advanced Crossbow, Archer Dedication will get you all of them 4 levels earlier than your class feat.
Now, I think these feats (the class ones, I mean) are dead in the water given the host of alternative options a character has if they really, really want to use an Advanced weapon. And I do think making Unconventional Weaponry a General Feat is a great idea. But Paizo clearly doesn't think so.
(And of course we're talking about the Advanced Weapons worth considering. Many in this thread, myself included, have explained most of them are not worth the paper they're printed on.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
This isn't a thing. Monk is always a zero-cost trait.Which is, again, kinda why I'd advocate for the removal of the monk trait. If the trait effectively does nothing but restrain monks into using a very limited set of weaponry for almost no reason I'd rather it just not exist and allow monks to pick a weapon for their own story from Monastic Weaponry.
Apologies for the double post, but this went up when I was writing the other one.
I have to agree with his. I mean, Monk may be a 0 cost trait, but if you look at the printed weapons, there is one thing they all have in common: except for the Khakkara, which is Two-Hand d10, no Monk weapon goes beyond d8 damage.
So if you want to keep that restriction, just do so? Let them Flurry with any weapon of d8 damage or lower. I mean we limit the Ruffian's Sneak Attack, why not limit the Monk's flurry?
This isn't a thing. Monk is always a zero-cost trait.Which is, again, kinda why I'd advocate for the removal of the monk trait. If the trait effectively does nothing but restrain monks into using a very limited set of weaponry for almost no reason I'd rather it just not exist and allow monks to pick a weapon for their own story from Monastic Weaponry.
'
There are some weapons you want to prevent monks from flurrying with (like any of the d12s) but Monastic Weaponry + Unconventional Weaponry could arguably let you slap the monk trait on any agile or finesse weapon.
Do we really need to limit Monks flurrying with d12 weapons, even? Think about the opportunity cost to do so.
1. You're using your 1st level class feat on it. Not a huge cost, but it'd prevent you from grabbing any ranged options or ki spells until next level (where you're now weighing the opportunity cost between EVEN MORE good options).
2. ALL d12 weapons are two-handed. The value of a free-hand is well-known and real in this system, and needing an action tax to readjust your grip to do maneuvers with is a real price to pay.
3. All of the common d12 options have one trait. The uncommon ones are the Backpack weapons and the Butchering Axe, which is an Orc-specific Advanced weapon, which means you now need to spend an Orc ancestry feat to use it. The best common weapon to use would arguably be the Maul, which only has the Shove trait.
4. You cannot use your d12 weapon in most (if not all) of the monk stances, since they require you to use their given unarmed strike.
5. You're going to be even more MAD than a normal Strength monk using a d12 weapon, since you'll need Strength for your weapon, Dex for your AC (no Mountain Stance for you), then Con and Wis for your saves, leaving little room for skills if you want to be safe.
6. Flurry of Blows has no MAP reduction and Flourish, and with you having non-Fighter martial progression, you'll not be really swinging any more than twice a turn ANYWAYS.
For taking all of these into consideration, I think it'd be fine letting Monks pick a one or two-of whatever common weapon they want, since you are REALLY giving up a lot of things to specialize in your big bonk stick.
I mean, if you could flurry with a D12 weapon, that would make dragon stance much less attractive.
Dragon Tail has backswing, which is a MAP reducer, and its stance gives you an extra rider effect.
And again, you still have complete use of both of your free hands in Dragon Stance, which you do not while using a d12 weapon. Maneuvers and free hands are worth a single die size objectively.
Dragon Stance is also one of the few monk stances that DO let you use other Strikes in it, which is not really a point for or against my argument, but just something that I found out right now while checking it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, if you could flurry with a D12 weapon, that would make dragon stance much less attractive.
Flurrying with d12 weapons won't make Dragon Stance less attractive, since it's already pretty unattractive: d10 + Backswing + Ignoring 1 square of DT when you Stride isn't nearly as good as Tiger/Wolf/Stumbling's d8+Finnesse+Agile(+Backstabber, for the latter two), especially because it's a non-Finnesse weapon, so you need high STR, but you don't even have Mountain Stance to compensate for your lower AC.
That being said, Flurrying with d12 weapons is whatever. I'd be more concerned with Monks flurrying with Reach weapons with good traits like Trip or Disarm. Except oh wait, they can already do that, because the Kusarigama exists, so that's not a big deal either.
The only thing off the top of my head that would be really new would be the Glaive. Reach + Deadly + Forceful is a combo that's good for the monk and they don't have an equivalent. But, you know, the Guan Dao (or Kuan Tao, or yan yue dao, or whichever name you prefer) is basically a glaive, and a staple of Wuxia, so Monks really should be able to use it.
but you don't even have Mountain Stance to compensate for your lower AC.
no Mountain Stance for you
Don't forget Dragonblood Heritage has Scaly Hide how, so a monk that takes it at 1st and just tosses one of their 4 ability boosts at 1st into dex is only 1 AC lower than Mountain Stance and without the action cost to go into it. So I'm not sure not having Mountain Stance as an option matters much in the in the calculations here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It still kinda does, since now that's your heritage spoken for, and a 1st level Ancestry feat spent on Scaly Hide instead of something else. That's an opportunity cost that an unarmed Strength monk wouldn't have to make because of Mountain Stance.
Regardless, I think the point still pretty much stands - the Monk chassis is built in such a way that we could do away with the Monk trait on weapons, change Monastic Weaponry around a little bit, and not much would change aside from a less pigeonholed weapon-using Monk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, if you could flurry with a D12 weapon, that would make dragon stance much less attractive.
I think that's a little bit backwards. Access to a 0-hand d10 backswing attack (that also lets you ignore some difficult terrain) makes investing in a d12 weapon that takes up both your hands kind of a bad trade.
I'm not saying Monks need d12 weapons, but giving up both my hands for a single point of damage (really less, since backswing at least has some value) sounds like an awful deal.
but you don't even have Mountain Stance to compensate for your lower AC.no Mountain Stance for youDon't forget Dragonblood Heritage has Scaly Hide how, so a monk that takes it at 1st and just tosses one of their 4 ability boosts at 1st into dex is only 1 AC lower than Mountain Stance and without the action cost to go into it. So I'm not sure not having Mountain Stance as an option matters much in the in the calculations here.
I am aware, and in fact Mountain Stance is such a horrible stance that if Scaly Hide doesnt get errata'd I expect every STR monk to take it, because Heritage + 1st Level Ancestry is a small price to pay for all the bonuses it gets you, and you dont have to deal with Mountain Stance.
That being said not everyone is a huge optimiser who will make their char a half dragon for the convenience, so I was pointing out that in those cases, going STR is a legit disadvantage.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now that Crossbows are their own weapon category, the Phalanx Piercer should be put into the Crossbow group, or have some rider text like "for the purpose of feats, this weapon is considered a Crossbow." I know it's a giant bow, but it needs the help. Currently it doesn't work with most bow feats due to being Reload:1, and it doesn't work with most crossbow feats because it's not a Crossbow. Gunslinger could like it if Phalanx Piercer was a considered a crossbow, but again it's not.
I like the idea of Hobgoblins using these door breaking, dragon slaying, giant Dark Souls bows... But the fantasy doesn't work, they fall into this very specific gap in the system. Just use a Composite Longbow or Arbalest instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This discussion about monks using d12 weapons happened a few months ago before PC2 (I think probably even PC1?) and the overall consensus was that, yeah, a martial flurrying with a greatsword has more downsides than upsides even if you deal more damage. There's very few examples of weapons that could actually be disruptive to balance, but its not like monks don't have similar versions of those weapons either in stances or monk weapons with lower damage, so in most cases you'll be trading a feat for some damage.
I don't see why the Daikyo being advanced is an issue for Rangers. Rangers are proficient in all martial weapons so Unconventional Weaponry gives them the option to select an uncommon advanced weapon — which the Daikyo is. What am I missing?Daikyu has forceful. That is going to be a nice weapon for flurry archer rangers. It is still 80 feet. Forceful for a flurry archer ranger allows a lot of arrows.Biggest issue is making the case that it counts for Unconventional Weaponry, since the Daikyu is advanced.Basically that the Daikyu has no ancestry trait, so we need to establish the other part of the feat: is the Daikyu common in some other place? If yes, you can take it. If no, you cant.
This is also why Unconventional Weaponry is weird. If we say that yes, the Daikyu is in fact Common in Tian Xia, the it is easier for a character that isnt Tian to obtain proficiency (becaus it is uncommon for them) than it is for the character from Toan Xia (because its common there, so it doesnt qualify)
I understand that aspect. But PossibleCabbage stated that there was problem specifically because it was an advanced weapon. That's what I'm confused about.
It seems to me that there are two possible cases:
(1) The Daikyu is not common in any other culture, so a Ranger couldn't select it regardless of whether it were martial or advanced.
(2) The Daikyu is common in another culture, so a Ranger could select it regardless of whether it were martial or advanced.
In both cases, the same outcome results regardless of whether the Daikyu is martial or advanced. So how is it relevant (to a Ranger) that the Daikyu is an advanced weapon as opposed to a martial weapon?
I understand that aspect. But PossibleCabbage stated that there was problem specifically because it was an advanced weapon. That's what I'm confused about.
The problem is that Unconventional Weaponry gives both access and proficiency.
Were it a martial weapon, all you'd need to do is obtain access (which shouldn't be too hard given GM guidelines), but as an advanced weapon you also need to find some way to wield it properly, which gets somewhat more expensive if Unconventional is off the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tod Culter's Weird Weapons Playlist is made for threads like these.
Now that Starfinder 2E has introduced the Breakdown trait there's no reason we can't have a spring-loaded mod for polearms.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The point is that you cannot guarantee that you can use Unconventional Weapon for a given weapon unless it is marked with an ancestry trait or a book specifically says "weapon [x] is common in [place]." You are asking a GM to make a call, and that is going to invite table variation. I'm not allergic to table variation, I think it's fine, but it's a caveat for "the Daikyu is great on a flurry ranger" since it's entirely plausible a flurry ranger would have neither proficiency in nor access to it.
The remastered archer fixes the proficiency aspect of it (but costs a class feat) but access might still be an issue since access to uncommon weapons is sometimes a function of "the aesthetics of the campaign."
|
|
There are a couple Starfinder weapon traits I hope bleed over into PF2E. Unwieldy is another one I'd personally be interested in seeing played with.Tod Culter's Weird Weapons Playlist is made for threads like these.
Now that Starfinder 2E has introduced the Breakdown trait there's no reason we can't have a spring-loaded mod for polearms.
I will engage in no small amount of discontent if we don't see Unwieldy make the jump.
I'd love to see some net options that let it scale better without having to be a frog.
The point is that you cannot guarantee that you can use Unconventional Weapon for a given weapon unless it is marked with an ancestry trait or a book specifically says "weapon [x] is common in [place]." You are asking a GM to make a call, and that is going to invite table variation. I'm not allergic to table variation, I think it's fine, but it's a caveat for "the Daikyu is great on a flurry ranger" since it's entirely plausible a flurry ranger would have neither proficiency in nor access to it.
Once again, I understand that, but it isn't relevant to my question of why it matters that the Daikyu is an advanced weapon.
(1) If the GM decides that a particular non-ancestral weapon is not a common weapon in another culture then, whether it is martial or advanced, the Ranger can not select it using Unconventional Weaponry.
So if the GM decides the Daikyu is not common in another culture then it makes no difference whether the weapon was martial or advanced.
(2) If the GM decides that a particular non-ancestral weapon is a common weapon in another culture then, whether it is martial or advanced, the Ranger can select it using Unconventional Weaponry.
So if the GM decides the Daikyu is common in another culture then it makes no difference whether the weapon was martial or advanced.
So the only thing that matters is whether or not the GM decides that the Daikyu is common in another culture. The question of whether it is a martial or advanced weapon doesn't affect the outcome in either case. So why did you say that it being an advanced weapon affected how Unconventional Weaponry would function?
Tod Culter's Weird Weapons Playlist is made for threads like these.
Now that Starfinder 2E has introduced the Breakdown trait there's no reason we can't have a spring-loaded mod for polearms.
So cool!
Thanks for sharing this!
So the only thing that matters is whether or not the GM decides that the Daikyu is common in another culture. The question of whether it is a martial or advanced weapon doesn't affect the outcome in either case. So why did you say that it being an advanced weapon affected how Unconventional Weaponry would function?
Because if a weapon fails the test of:
1) "a trait corresponding to an ancestry"-or-
2) "common in another culture"
Then you simply cannot select it with Unconventional Weaponry. So a hypothetical martial, but uncommon, Daikyu has questions about access. If a player really wants to build around a specific uncommon option, there's a good chance they will be able to do, but you're less likely to encounter a Daikyu just randomly in a loot pile (in a published adventure, say) because it is advanced and there's reason to assume anybody in the party can even use it effectively.
I'd love a combination weapon between... a tetsubo or greatclub, with a hand cannon... unless a hand cannon with a reinforced stock is enough.
Also, the forked bipod serves... no purpose at all. I'd like to get traits that allow better aiming with firearms.
|
First of all... Personally, I want to be able to use a Halfling Sling-staff as both a ranged AND melee weapon. Never understood why it could be both in PF1e but only a ranged weapon in PF2e.
Next, I'd like to see more cane-based weapons. Not sword canes or pistol canes, just plain canes. I'd also like to see the probing cane go from a martial to a simple weapon. I mean, it's a cane. A mobility aid. Why should you need special training (here defined as being a martial class) to use a cane as a weapon (Griffon Cane can remain martial though, I can see how the claws would make it rather unwieldy in the hands of someone without special weapons training).
And one last think I'd like to see, which I fully admit is solely because I'm an anime loving weabo Kamen Rider fanboy: scarf weapons. Could be some variant of an updated Bladed Scarf, could be its own concealable thing, or could be some kind of magic weapon that moves like it's got a mind of its own. Heck, wouldn't mind some kind of niche Archetype based around using the Bladed Scarf as a weapon of choice.
On that note, I wouldn't mind seeing a return of the 'Silk to Steel' spell from PF1e either.