Sadrik
First Post
The paladin may lose access to a spell or two that was re-leveled for the paladin but they would gain waaaay more access to spells via the cleric spell list.
Rules Mechanics that should be jettisoned
Kerrick
First Post
My point was that they gain it at the same effective caster level, even if the character level is different. This should be around L6, but since paladins are limited to 4 levels of spells, they get it at L4.
On the one hand, there are many spells I couldn't see paladins casting, but on the other, it makes a little sense, especially if you want to make paladins unrestricted in regards to alignment. BUT, simply dumping them into the cleric's spell list inhibits you from giving them unique spells that would help define their role more clearly - things like holy sword, brightblade, light blade, etc. The best solution might be to give them free access to the cleric list (so paladins of non-good gods can choose different spells), but keep a separate list for paladins only with generic "I smite thee" spells that reinforce their holy knight image. You could do the same with rangers; this would save a good deal of space, as you don't have to reprint all those spell descriptions in two places.
Sadrik
First Post
4. Exotic weapons should be jettisoned. Make them all martial weapons and in some cases make them simple weapons.
Simple weapon additions:
Kama= sickle, nunchuku=club, sai=dagger, siangham=pointy stick, whip=sucky farm weapon anyway, net=yeah, hand crossbow=easier than light x-bow, shuriken=smaller dart
Martial weapons
Bastard sword, war axe= are already martial but provide -2 to hit when used in one hand, with monkey grip feat remove penalty to hit.
Double axe, spiked chain, dire flail, hooked hammer, two-bladed sword, urgrosh and all other double weapons=martial, they already require two weapon fighting feats to use anyway, at that point it is just a style choice.
repeting crossbow=should be an adder to all x-bows, similar to composite bows being an adder to bows.
Not sure:
Bolas=really debated on martial or simple, if sling is simple this could be too.
Thoughts?
Simple weapon additions:
Kama= sickle, nunchuku=club, sai=dagger, siangham=pointy stick, whip=sucky farm weapon anyway, net=yeah, hand crossbow=easier than light x-bow, shuriken=smaller dart
Martial weapons
Bastard sword, war axe= are already martial but provide -2 to hit when used in one hand, with monkey grip feat remove penalty to hit.
Double axe, spiked chain, dire flail, hooked hammer, two-bladed sword, urgrosh and all other double weapons=martial, they already require two weapon fighting feats to use anyway, at that point it is just a style choice.
repeting crossbow=should be an adder to all x-bows, similar to composite bows being an adder to bows.
Not sure:
Bolas=really debated on martial or simple, if sling is simple this could be too.
Thoughts?
Kerrick
First Post
I did that, except that some of them are still tagged as "exotic". They're technically martial weapons, but they have additional abilities that have requirements for proper use. For example, nunchaku grant a +2 bonus to disarm checks, but you must have 15 Dex to take advantage of this. You can still use them if you have MWP and < 15 Dex, but you suffer a -2 attack penalty.
After some urging, I went with weapon groups, from UA, with some changes. I didn't want everyone to be automatically proficient with martial weapons (even a limited pool, which they would have with the standard weapon group rules), so I came up with a rule that everyone is proficient with simple weapons. This let me drop the Simple WP (which was a pretty pointless feat anyway). After that, you have to take MWP to get proficiency with the other weapons in your group (without MWP, it's a -2 penalty; if you're using a weapon from a completely different group, it's -4).
So, for example, Frank the wizard has proficiency in any two weapon groups. He decides to pick Spears and Long Blades. Obviously, all the weapons in the Long Blades group (katana, longsword, rapier, scimitar) are martial, so he'll have to take the MWP feat, but that will grant him the ability to use them all - he can be a battle mage, if he so desires, like Gandalf. This allows for a greater variety of weapons and a greater range of customization for all PCs without being overpowered.
Bladesinger_Boy
First Post
Kerrick, again, I think you have the right idea here. Not flat out "exotic" weapons, at least by way of proficency. Simple weapons should be automatic; everyone should be able to use a dagger, staff, or club.
Maybe "Exotic" weapons are martial weapons that have reqs to unlock additional abilities or remove penalties. Like the Dex 15 for removing the -2 attacks for Nunchuks.
I could also see making Exotic Weapon Prof a not a specific per-weapon prof but a group prof just like Simple and Martial weapons. That might remove the need to create these reqs & abilities for different weapons.
I don't think I like the idea of combining the need for both normal Weapon profs and Weapons groups helps things; I see it as an added complication. I think I prefer weapons groups; more flavour and distinction and better in terms of applying bonus to an entire group rather than one specific weapon. Pathfinder (which you've probably figured out I love) uses weapon groups for Fighter class features and I think they do a great job.
Thinking of the above situation in another way, as is bigger Weapon Prof groups create implicitly two categories: the broad prof category of weapons and the single weapons that is "feated" up (as per Weapon Focus, Specialization, Imp Crit, etc). Where as, if using weapon groups, those weapon groups can both represent profs and also "feated" up bonuses as well, so you'd get Weapon Focus: Long Blades, Imp Crit: Long Blades, etc.
How many weapons groups are there and what are they?
14 categories
- Axes, Heavy Blades, Light Blades, Bows, Close, Crossbows, Double, Flails, Hammers, Monk, Natural, Polearms, Spears, Thrown
Pathfinder SRD
Pathfinder Fighter (has the Weapon Groups)
I cannot find an online Unearthed Arcana document right now, so I don't know how those weapon grous differ.
Maybe "Exotic" weapons are martial weapons that have reqs to unlock additional abilities or remove penalties. Like the Dex 15 for removing the -2 attacks for Nunchuks.
I could also see making Exotic Weapon Prof a not a specific per-weapon prof but a group prof just like Simple and Martial weapons. That might remove the need to create these reqs & abilities for different weapons.
I don't think I like the idea of combining the need for both normal Weapon profs and Weapons groups helps things; I see it as an added complication. I think I prefer weapons groups; more flavour and distinction and better in terms of applying bonus to an entire group rather than one specific weapon. Pathfinder (which you've probably figured out I love) uses weapon groups for Fighter class features and I think they do a great job.
Thinking of the above situation in another way, as is bigger Weapon Prof groups create implicitly two categories: the broad prof category of weapons and the single weapons that is "feated" up (as per Weapon Focus, Specialization, Imp Crit, etc). Where as, if using weapon groups, those weapon groups can both represent profs and also "feated" up bonuses as well, so you'd get Weapon Focus: Long Blades, Imp Crit: Long Blades, etc.
How many weapons groups are there and what are they?
14 categories
- Axes, Heavy Blades, Light Blades, Bows, Close, Crossbows, Double, Flails, Hammers, Monk, Natural, Polearms, Spears, Thrown
Pathfinder SRD
Pathfinder Fighter (has the Weapon Groups)
I cannot find an online Unearthed Arcana document right now, so I don't know how those weapon grous differ.
Sadrik
First Post
I used to love weapon groups but now I am moving to just saying you have all proficiency with a feat. Why worry about it?
Bucklers and light shields are simple and heavy and tower shields are martial.
It is simple and to the point.
bard, druid, monk, rogue and wizard all have there own list in the raw.
For bard and rogue give them simple plus rapier, short sword, short bow. (make sap a simple weapon)
For druid and wizard give them club, dagger, dart, staff, sickle, and sling (druids add scimitar and spear or not I never like them getting these anyway)
For monk give them simple and at 1st level they gain improved unarmed strike or martial weapon proficiency
I see weapon proficiency as one of those things that can get glossed over these days. It really does not add that much to the game.
Bucklers and light shields are simple and heavy and tower shields are martial.
It is simple and to the point.
bard, druid, monk, rogue and wizard all have there own list in the raw.
For bard and rogue give them simple plus rapier, short sword, short bow. (make sap a simple weapon)
For druid and wizard give them club, dagger, dart, staff, sickle, and sling (druids add scimitar and spear or not I never like them getting these anyway)
For monk give them simple and at 1st level they gain improved unarmed strike or martial weapon proficiency
I see weapon proficiency as one of those things that can get glossed over these days. It really does not add that much to the game.
Kerrick
First Post
That's what I did. "Exotic" is no longer a class of weapons; it's merely a tag applied to alert the player that the weapon in question has additional abilities. You gain proficiency with exotic weapons with the MWP feat, but unless you fulfill the prereqs, you still suffer a -2 penalty (it's -4 for no MWP feat).
Well... the reasoning behind my decision was that I didn't want classes that didn't have MWP before to get it now. For example, wizards can choose any two groups. This means he could pick Whips and Chains and become a spiked chain specialist right off. That, to me, was a no-go. But, YMMV.
That might be overpowering the feats too much. I let fighters (and fighters only) take Weapon Focus, WS, GWF, and GWS for weapon groups as class abilities - it's a perk they get for being the masters of weaponry.
Here. UA did it as separate feats, without actually changing the weapon system - you can simply take the feat and gain proficiency in a bunch of related weapons.
Sure it does. It makes characters more unique. The weapon groups system is a boon to mages, since they get such a poor selection of weapons; monks, also, can break out of the stereotype (martial arts uses a wide variety of weapons) and customize their weapon selection. Rogues get Short Blades, Thrown Weapons, and Bows or Crossbows (pretty much what they have now), bards have Short Blades, Thrown Weapons, and one of the player's choice.
Sadrik
First Post
I think the question of using a weapon or a different weapon is not that big of a deal. It is style and flavor choice and limiting them to "only" that flavor choice is via groups is a bit heavy handed. At least that is my view these days.
What does proficiency do? It removes the penalty to hit that is inborn with all weapons.
I think what I am going to do is the following:
Break the weapons into four groups groups again but in a different way:
Natural Weapons (Improved unarmed strike gives access here)
Basic weapons (all classes and characters can use basic weapons [club, dagger, dart, staff, sickle, and sling], druid would add a couple of weapons on top)
Simple Weapons (weapons that are on the simple list plus the added exotic weapons, rogue and bard would add a couple of martial weapons on top)
Martial (all the martial weapons plus the exotic weapons I noted)
Natural weapons: Monsters and possibly Monk
Basic weapons: all
Simple weapons: all but Wizard and Druid
Martial weapon: Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, and possibly Monk
So three feats:
Improved unarmed strike (for creatures without monster hit dice)
Simple weapons (for wizards and druids and monsters)
Martial weapons (for everyone but the Barbarian, Fighter, Paladin, Ranger, and possibly Monk)
Again the idea is to remove the penalty to weapons easier. If you have martial weapon proficiency and find a bad ass magical warhammer but in the weapon group system didn't have warhammer the system limited the hammer from game. I don't want to do that. Also, WF and feats like that already add a bonus for specializing in a weapon. I don't want to add a penalty to further distinguish differentiation.
