PSA Champion Blade Ally / Blessed Armament - A Nerf No One Asked For


Rules Discussion

51 to 53 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Baarogue wrote:
Errenor wrote:
Oh, and another thing. We've already talked about specific magic weapons. But what about common weapons without any runes? Or weapons with Striking runes only? So, (property) rune abilities don't work for them at all? That's laughable.
This is a good argument, and I'm glad you brought it up. It caused me to go looking for the exact rules for runes in the remaster and begin drafting a post in my head about another unintended consequences of reducing wordcount, but I can't find anything about extra property runes suppressing existing runes (yes, the "rule" I referred to above but couldn't look up right away but was sure someone would), nor can I find it in the premaster 2e CR. As you rightly answered, the only rule I could find is about if you transfer potency runes such that the weapon has more property runes than its potency one can support

Well, there's nothing about suppressing exactly, but there is more:

"The number of property runes a weapon or armor can have is equal to the value of its potency rune." - the first Runes section in the chapter and
"The armor can be etched with <quantity> property rune<s>." - potency rune entries
But I couldn't find anything else.
And I'd remind everyone again that the chapter is about real equipment, not abilities. And while abilities sometimes give 'real' things, it's almost always actions. Yes, a Strike from an ability is the same as normal Strike (plus possible changes from ability). But no ability gives real permanent 'physical' runes as far as I know. Which could be transferred and sold, for example.
Baarogue wrote:
Just because they work one way (go dormant if their potency rune is transferred off) or work a certain way because of some spells and abilities (do any of them say they're doing so "as normal?") does not mean they necessarily work in the way we've been arguing here IF we've only arrived at this argument due to extrapolation

There's another thing with this extrapolation btw: what would you do exactly, make a rune from ability suppress an existing permanent one or just make it do nothing? Without explicit rule text the choice is not obvious.

Unless you refuse this 'game' entirely and just allow rune abilities work as literally written: simply add runes and suppress only when the ability says so.


Squiggit wrote:
Finoan wrote:
Yes, it means that you don't have a superpowered weapon that is better than anything money can buy.
That's a really funny and not at all loaded way to describe someone using a class feature.

Wait till they find out about vicious strike ;)

Jokes aside, I will houserule this for my players. I am not a fan of a class feat being quite this meaningless, it is worse than the battle oracle focus spell imo.

It isn't like champions are topping any damage charts even if they get an extra 1d6, weakness coverage is nice and all, but champions get fewer attacks than most martials if they are playing to their strengths.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Unless they're justice champions @TheGleefulGrognard. Getting up to three reaction attacks per round (quick shield block's extra reaction being substituted with shield of reckoning to get both shield warden and champion reaction).

51 to 53 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / PSA Champion Blade Ally / Blessed Armament - A Nerf No One Asked For All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.