|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is something I've wanted to see clarified for a while, but I was hoping the wording would be cleared up. My specific example is from Kholo Weapon Familiarity, but I expect this pops up in other places.
When an Ancestry Feat gives you "familiarity" with an uncommon weapon, is it also giving you access?
You gain access to all uncommon weapons with the kholo trait. You have familiarity with weapons with the kholo trait plus the flail, khopesh, mambele, and war flail—for the purpose of proficiency, you treat any of these that are martial weapons as simple weapons and any that are advanced weapons as martial weapons.
At 5th level, whenever you get a critical hit with one of these weapons, you get its critical specialization effect.
The Khopesh and Mambele are both uncommon weapons, but neither has the kholo trait. If you take this feat, do you have access to either or both of them?
I think the answer by RAW is no, except that it seems ridiculous that the weapons would be called out without giving access.
In a home game I would give access without question, but play enough PFS that I want to clearly understand RAW.
(A complicating factor for PFS is that PFS will give you access to uncommon options native to your region -- but the khopesh and mambele are considered native to different regions, so I am not sure how you would build a character that could wield both.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is probably something that you would have to ask specifically in a PFS forum.
I would say that by the strictest of pedantic RAW reading that you are right in thinking that you don't get access to the uncommon weapons that don't have the ancestry trait.
Which doesn't make much sense. Normally a GM would just use their GM powers to grant access to the uncommon option. Or would refuse to do so because they hate your character concept specifically and are trying to forbid you from playing it without actually forbidding you from playing it.
But for PFS specifically, the GM may not feel that they have the authority to grant the uncommon access that strict RAW doesn't give.
It's not a question that should go to a PFS specific forum, no. This is the correct place for "what does the written rule of this feat mean?"
Unless you meant that "what PFS specific option are there to gain Access, separate from this feat?" should be asked there. That would be totally appropriate. For that question, the World Traveller boon would be one possible way.
It's not a question that should go to a PFS specific forum, no. This is the correct place for "what does the written rule of this feat mean?"
OK.
So, will you answer the question then? For all tables including both PFS and non-PFS ones?
Because I'm not sure that I would be willing to do that.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ancestry tag on a weapon basically serves to say "these are the weapons of this people" if you're one of those people, you should have access to them regardless of whether or not you take the familiarity feat.
Like if you're an Elf Fighter who wants to use the Branch-Spear for a finesse reach weapon, you don't need the familiarity feat since that feat is redundant with your class features. You can buy it because you're an Elf, you grew up with Elves, and a large portion of the people you know are also Elves.
‘Uncommon’ on gear means in the Circle Sea area. For one, katanas are not uncommon in katana-infested areas of Tian Xia. Kholoville should have mambeles.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That may be RAI, but I don't see that as RAW.
Ancestries don't automatically give access to weapons of uncommon rarity that have the matching ancestry trait. I'm not seeing that written anywhere. Also the line of rules text in the ancestral weapon feats that give exactly that access would be redundant.
And while Kholoville should have mambeles in every weapon shop, is there anything that says that they actually do?
|
|
Maybe I'll ask the question a different way.
If a weapon appears in the "XXXX Ancestry Weapon Familiarity" feat, does that imply that it should be treated as having the "XXXX Ancestry" trait?
There is a now a weapon with the Kholo trait, the Spirit Thresher (uncommon advanced weapon).
But the flail, khopesh, mambele, and war flail don't have the Kholo trait -- presumably so that they aren't restricted to Kholo. But does listing them in the Weapon Familiarity Feat mean that the ancestry should be able to treat them as if they did?
(One of the weird things about premaster Gnoll Weapon Familiarity is that there were zero weapons with the Gnoll trait or Gnoll in the name, so absent this interpretation, the access part of the feat didn't do anything.)
My gut tells me that this is RAI, but that it isn't RAW.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uncommon is not supposed to be an especially high hurdle to clear. As long as you have some strong case for having access to an uncommon option (including "they are listed in my ancestry's weapon familiarity list" IMO) then you should have access to it.
This still effectively gates people from taking all uncommon options under the sun, since you're not going to be every ancestry or from every place, but you should absolutely let PCs get access to all of the stuff that's related to their people or their homeland.
|
|
I would say "no" to RAW. RAI... this is a weird one.
The "Catfolk Weapon Familiarity" feat for instance specifically names the kukri and kama twice; once in the list of non-catfolk-tagged weapons that it grants 'trained' proficiency in, and once as a list of weapons that it grants access to despite them not having the Catfolk tag.
So that's interesting, because they have changed the wording of the Catfolk feat. It now reads exactly parallel to the Kholo feat.
You gain access to all uncommon weapons with the catfolk trait. You have familiarity with weapons with the catfolk trait plus the kama, kukri, scimitar, and sickle—for the purpose of proficiency, you treat any of these that are martial weapons as simple weapons and any that are advanced weapons as martial weapons.
At 5th level, whenever you get a critical hit with one of these weapons, you get its critical specialization effect.
Which means that RAW, Catfolk have lost access to kama and kukri.
This may be the better feat to ask for clarification on, since intent probably hasn't changed.
EDIT: APG text for comparison:
You favor weapons that you can use with quick, darting slashes like a cat's claws. You are trained with the hatchet, kama, kukri, scimitar, and sickle. In addition, you gain access to kama, kukris, and all uncommon catfolk weapons. For you, martial catfolk weapons are simple weapons and advanced catfolk weapons are martial weapons.
Full disclosure, I have previously never interpreted these ancestry feats to mean anything other than giving rarity access to all of the weapons mentioned anywhere in the feat. It took pH unbalanced asking the question and me going to the rules text with a more pedantic analytical mentality in order for me to see any problem at all.
In a home game, I see absolutely no good reason to prevent access to a weapon listed in the feat as being trained. It is almost certainly RAI that it does give access.
I suspect that even in PFS if you don't ask the question and just have both the ancestral weapon feat and the weapon in question listed on your character sheet, that no GM is going to notice or think anything is strange.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'll note that Gnome Weapon Familiarity specifically grants access to the kukri (uncommon rarity) along with those weapons that have the gnome trait.
You favor unusual weapons tied to your people, such as blades with curved and peculiar shapes. You gain access to kukris and all uncommon weapons with the gnome trait.
It looks like that rule was added in the errata for the first printing of the CRB.
Page 44: Gnome Weapon Familiarity grants access to kukris as well as all uncommon gnome weapons. Change the first sentence of the second paragraph to “In addition, you gain access to kukris and all uncommon gnome weapons.”
So it seems that the initial lack of access was overlooked rather than intended.
Based on this example, my guess is that the problems with access for those other ancestries were similarly overlooked.
|
I can see a GM reading this RAW and not giving access to the non-Kholo weapons.
After all, a weapon having the Kholo trait does not restrict it to Kholo users. It just makes it easier for them to get access to it.
For PFS, my usual advice is : "Prepare for the worst (ie, here, No access) and plan accordingly."