Proposal: Weapon Training Feats are not Multi-Class Feats
garyh
First Post
It's comments like these that make me lament that L4W has grown so much I no longer have time to read along with all the adventures.
elecgraystone
First Post
Kenhood was suggesting that we replace the superior weapon proficiency with the training proficiency. [see msg #13, this thread] Therefor ALL spiked chains would always be lightblade. The base weapon would for all intents and purposes disappear since anyone that could use it would be using it at 'full' power. Since light blades isn't a transitory weapon group for it, mage weapon could be put on it.
As far as Arcane Implement, you may use a mage weapon with the dagger proficiency. So you a using a light blade proficiency to wield it. Therefor I don't see any issue with Arcane Implement. [you are using a light blade proficiency to wield a light blade]
Quite true. I'd meant to put shurikens. Same argument and nearly the same stats.
Sorry kenhood but the weapon training feats DO involve learning an encounter, utility and daily power. Instead of a feat [skill training] and an ability they give a feat [weapon prof] and an ability [upgraded weapon stats]. I'm sorry but I can't do as you ask and not point out that training feats are EXACTLY like multclass feats. If you can't see that, I'm sorry but it doesn't make it untrue. The fact that WOTC did it to start off with would seem to imply that they think so too.
Last edited:
TwoHeadsBarking
First Post
Well, not exactly. He's suggesting we remove the multi-class part of the Weapon Training feats. The Proficiency feats would still be there, they'd just be unoptimal for anyone who qualified for Training. Even if the stat and martial class requirements got removed, the Proficiency feats wouldn't disappear.
Even if Training does replace Proficiency, I don't think that's a valid conclusion. You still need the feat to use it as a light blade. It's not the weapon that's getting better; it's the user.
Yes, for all intents and purposes except two. First, you don't need Weapon Training or Proficiency to use a spiked chain. You don't get the bonus to hit, but you can still use it. Which means there will be people in whose hands the spiked chain is not a light blade. This people also aren't getting +3 to hit with their attacks with the chain, and they should probably be using a different weapon, but unless everybody in the game, including all npcs, got this feat for free, there will still be people who can use the chain, but not as a light blade.
In fact, even if everyone did get the feat, it's only a light blade when you're wielding it. If you put it down, it's just a flail.
Second, it's not a light blade for purposes of enchanting. Why would my being really good with a weapon mean that someone else could enchant it with a property that normally couldn't go on a chain?
You're being circular with your use of Mage Weapon. Say proficiency with the chain means you can use it as a light blade. So if you can enchant the chain with Mage Weapon, you can use it as a light blade. Fine. But you can't enchant the chain with Mage weapon without it already being a light blade.
elecgraystone
First Post
I'm not being circular at all. If the weapon proficiency has a set of abilities, you have them. If a spiked chain has light blades with the prof, it ALWAYS has it. The weapon listing IS what you get with the feat. If the training feats replace the weapon feats then the listing changes and ALL chains get those abilities. If you don't have the prof, then it's an improvised weapon and gets not of those properties.
Let me put it this way. You need the prof to use a longsword as a heavy blade too, so you can't put the enchantment of it? It's the same argument you are using. If you change/replace the weapon feat with the training feat it fundimentally changes the spiked chain for everyone. The old base listing wouldn't exist anymore, replaced with the training one.
If this isn't true then how would you EVER be able to use the base weapon stats? If you know how to use the weapon, then it's a light blade. If you don't, it's an improvised weapon. It's never the 2d4, reach flail again.
Let me put it this way. You need the prof to use a longsword as a heavy blade too, so you can't put the enchantment of it? It's the same argument you are using. If you change/replace the weapon feat with the training feat it fundimentally changes the spiked chain for everyone. The old base listing wouldn't exist anymore, replaced with the training one.
If this isn't true then how would you EVER be able to use the base weapon stats? If you know how to use the weapon, then it's a light blade. If you don't, it's an improvised weapon. It's never the 2d4, reach flail again.
Last edited:
TwoHeadsBarking
First Post
Um, you can use a weapon you're not proficient with and it keeps all it's properties. The only thing you lose is the proficiency bonus, but it's not an improvised weapon. At least, that's my understanding, which seems to be backed up by the "Prof" entry under "Reading the Weapon Tables" on page 219, and how also on page 219 the examples of improvised weapons are things you just pick up, like a rock or a chair, rather than a weapon you don't know how to use. I would think that if using a weapon you weren't proficient with made it an improvised weapon, they'd spell that out pretty clearly. But then again, just a few days ago I was proven wrong about another rule I was 100% certain of, so there's no reason I couldn't be wrong here.
If you could show me the rule (like, page number or link to the FAQ or something) that says that if you aren't proficient with a weapon, you use it like an improvised weapon and it loses all its keywords I'll have no choice but to concede the point. Because if that is the case, then I think you're right. However, as I said before, I'm fairly sure the mechanism for using a weapon untrained is just losing the bonus to hit.
And I still think it's weird that it's the weapon that gets better, not just the user.
If you could show me the rule (like, page number or link to the FAQ or something) that says that if you aren't proficient with a weapon, you use it like an improvised weapon and it loses all its keywords I'll have no choice but to concede the point. Because if that is the case, then I think you're right. However, as I said before, I'm fairly sure the mechanism for using a weapon untrained is just losing the bonus to hit.
And I still think it's weird that it's the weapon that gets better, not just the user.
Last edited:
elecgraystone
First Post
You may be correct. I've always played at as improvised. Hmmm...
However, it really doesn't change my argument though. If ALL a weapon proficiency does is give you the weapons prof bonus, then the spiked chain would STILL be a light blade [or never be a light blade]. [PHB pg#201, weapon proficiency] All it does is give proficiency. So if the training feat alters the weapon's stats, the only way to replace the weapon feat is to keep one set of stats.[either the base or the enhanced]
While you find it weird that it's the weapon that gets better, not just the user; I find it weird that the weapon is different if you know how to use it. Not a special technique or anything, you're JUST proficient in it. it boggles my mind that sitting on the table it's one thing, but if I learn how to use it, it gets a whole new set of stats. If that's the case, why aren't the stats the same?
However, it really doesn't change my argument though. If ALL a weapon proficiency does is give you the weapons prof bonus, then the spiked chain would STILL be a light blade [or never be a light blade]. [PHB pg#201, weapon proficiency] All it does is give proficiency. So if the training feat alters the weapon's stats, the only way to replace the weapon feat is to keep one set of stats.[either the base or the enhanced]
While you find it weird that it's the weapon that gets better, not just the user; I find it weird that the weapon is different if you know how to use it. Not a special technique or anything, you're JUST proficient in it. it boggles my mind that sitting on the table it's one thing, but if I learn how to use it, it gets a whole new set of stats. If that's the case, why aren't the stats the same?
Only as additional power-swap feats. Bloodline feats allow the same (cf. Dragon 371, 'Playing Dhampyr'), but a character may possess a bloodline and a multi-class feat. It shouldn't be such a far step to permit a character to possess a multi-class, bloodline, and weapon training feat.
I think this is where we come to the root of our disagreement. I'm arguing based on the spirit of the feats; you're arguing based on the mechanics.
- Multi-class represents learning the rudiments of another profession.
- Bloodline represents special abilities as a result of a character's heritage.
- Weapon Training represents specialized training in a weapon.
Mechanically, they all have the same structure: introductory feat, power-swap feats. True. However, my proposal is that because of the spirit of the feats, a character should not be excluded from weapon training feats because that character also has a multi-class feat. Is it so inconceivable that a character could be a fighter with training as a thief (multi-class) who spent time in the arena mastering the net and spiked chain (weapon training)?
Does it really bother you that much that I won't agree with you?
ryryguy
First Post
How about this?
1. The current weapon mastery feats still exist as written, as multiclass feats, and are the ones you need to open the power swap feat chain.
2. There are new "improved weapon" feats that grant the goodies that the weapon mastery feats do, but have as a prerequisite proficiency with the weapon. E.g.:
3. Add weapon proficiencies for some of these weapons to classes where it makes sense.
Rogue: garotte
Ranger: net
Bard: whip
(maybe some others, I don't know...)
So a Tonk, a rogue, could still get his garrote love with just a single feat and also still multiclass. Other classes would either have to start with the separate proficiency feat, or go with the original feat which is still subject to the multiclass restriction.
1. The current weapon mastery feats still exist as written, as multiclass feats, and are the ones you need to open the power swap feat chain.
2. There are new "improved weapon" feats that grant the goodies that the weapon mastery feats do, but have as a prerequisite proficiency with the weapon. E.g.:
3. Add weapon proficiencies for some of these weapons to classes where it makes sense.
Rogue: garotte
Ranger: net
Bard: whip
(maybe some others, I don't know...)
So a Tonk, a rogue, could still get his garrote love with just a single feat and also still multiclass. Other classes would either have to start with the separate proficiency feat, or go with the original feat which is still subject to the multiclass restriction.
TwoHeadsBarking
First Post
Just making sure I understand you, are you saying that if Training replaces Proficiency, then the spiked chain will permanently gain the light blade and double weapon rules? Does this mean that someone who's not proficient with the chain can use it as a light blade, just like someone who's not proficient with a rapier can use that as a light blade?
Out of curiosity, is this an issue that is currently present in the rules, or does this only arise if Weapon Training replaces Weapon Proficiency? I guess what I'm really asking is that whether you think it is currently legal to enchant a spiked chain with a light blade only enchant.
Well, it helps that I don't think it technically becomes a light blade when you take the feat. I see it as you become so skilled with it that you can use both ends at once, or make attacks of a light blade nature with it. The chain always had the potential to be used as a light blade or a double weapon, but it takes someone willing to devote enough practice to it (i.e. someone willing to take the feat) to learn how to use it as more than a flail.
In response to ryryguy, who's actually discussing the proposal (fancy that):
Does that mean that you spend a normal feat to get the Training bonuses, but you can't take the power swap feats later?
