Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="elecgraystone" data-source="post: 4861138" data-attributes="member: 74232">Yes. Proficiency only gives you the bonus to hit.&nbsp;Yes.&nbsp;Currently no. Right now the training feat gives you proficiency AND stuff. The base item would only change if you replace the proficiency with the training feat. Then you have only one weapon.&nbsp;But it HAS be a light blade if it's a proficiency feat. If it's an add on feat, then it's a technique. If it's a proficiency, then EVERYONE gets those keywords.&nbsp;It works this way if it's a secondary feat or a feat like the original training feat that gives you something AND the proficiency. Replacing it means that it's nothing special and that that's how the weapon works when you learn how to use it.&nbsp;In message 13, the proposer suggested that we replace the proficiency feats with the training feats. This falls squarely under trying to make the training feats NOT multiclass feats and as such we HAVE been discussing the the proposal and the impact those changes would have.&nbsp;In reply to message 49, That sounds good to me. The only thing I'd add to that is #3, I'd change some of those weapons to martial instead of superior in addition to adding them to classes. I like this better than just changing training feats to their own class of feats. That way if I'm NOT a martial character, I'm not forced to take a multiclass feat THEN the the training feat. I'd rather buy the weapon prof then buy the upgrade.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="elecgraystone, post: 4861138, member: 74232"] Yes. Proficiency only gives you the bonus to hit. Yes. Currently no. Right now the training feat gives you proficiency AND stuff. The base item would only change if you replace the proficiency with the training feat. Then you have only one weapon. But it HAS be a light blade if it's a proficiency feat. If it's an add on feat, then it's a technique. If it's a proficiency, then EVERYONE gets those keywords. It works this way if it's a secondary feat or a feat like the original training feat that gives you something AND the proficiency. Replacing it means that it's nothing special and that that's how the weapon works when you learn how to use it. In message 13, the proposer suggested that we replace the proficiency feats with the training feats. This falls squarely under trying to make the training feats NOT multiclass feats and as such we HAVE been discussing the the proposal and the impact those changes would have. In reply to message 49, That sounds good to me. The only thing I'd add to that is #3, I'd change some of those weapons to martial instead of superior in addition to adding them to classes. I like this better than just changing training feats to their own class of feats. That way if I'm NOT a martial character, I'm not forced to take a multiclass feat THEN the the training feat. I'd rather buy the weapon prof then buy the upgrade. [/QUOTE]

Verification