Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="nonsi256" data-source="post: 5789020" data-attributes="member: 86164">First of all, thanks for sharing your experience.Ok, given there's nothing mandatory or committing in UA and given I don't believe in gestalt, ATM let's ignore this issue.1. I wouldn't bother with the 2nd level. Trading a Warblade level for +1 Int-score (half a modifier) and a placebo seems like a terrible waste.2. I believe Proficiency with any exotic weapon is not a factor that would make a non-broken Warblade character into a broken one. Would it be better if I was to say that you can use the selected weapon as if you were proficient with it but you don't actually count as proficient with it, so that Weapon Aptitude cannot be applied ?3. As for the [Int to almost every check], do you think that limiting the bonus to [no higher than Mahadi class level] will mitigate this problem ?Do you have any suggestion for a real, serious, escalating penalty ?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="nonsi256, post: 5789020, member: 86164"] First of all, thanks for sharing your experience. Ok, given there's nothing mandatory or committing in UA and given I don't believe in gestalt, ATM let's ignore this issue. 1. I wouldn't bother with the 2nd level. Trading a Warblade level for +1 Int-score (half a modifier) and a placebo seems like a terrible waste. 2. I believe Proficiency with any exotic weapon is not a factor that would make a non-broken Warblade character into a broken one. Would it be better if I was to say that you can use the selected weapon [B]as if[/B] you were proficient with it but you don't [B]actually count[/B] as proficient with it, so that Weapon Aptitude cannot be applied ? 3. As for the [Int to almost every check], do you think that limiting the bonus to [no higher than Mahadi class level] will mitigate this problem ? Do you have any suggestion for a real, serious, escalating penalty ? [/QUOTE]

Verification