Heirloom Weapon trait fixed!

[0gre]

Ahunting wrote:

Something like that would prevent it from vanishing whole sale from society play but still close an obvious exploit.

It will still get used in PFS.

I want a wizard with a longsword like Gandolf.

I want a halfling rogue with a slingstaff like Taslhoff.

It just won't get used by the DPR/ optimizer crowds as much.

[Ahunting]

0gre wrote:

Ahunting wrote:

Something like that would prevent it from vanishing whole sale from society play but still close an obvious exploit.

It will still get used in PFS.

I want a wizard with a longsword like Gandolf.

I want a halfling rogue with a slingstaff like Taslhoff.

It just won't get used by the DPR/ optimizer crowds as much.

There will always be sticks in the mud. But it has mysteriously gone from being the most popular melee trait to vanishing completely from every character I have run across over the course of the last week or so.

The rules should appeal to all that includes the dpr power gamers. Anything that causes mass change like that is a clear sign of error. Two wrongs do not make a right. Yes hw needed a nerf, no it did not need to become useless.

[Matthew Morris]

To compare to your list, 0gre,

Spoiler:

Anatomist: Always find it situational, but the +1 bonus will apply with any weapon.
Armor Expert: one of my favourites actually. Definately better for a nimble character.
Bullied: Very situational.
Courageous: Useful at low levels for low will save characters.
Deft Dodger: Clearly half a feat.
Dirty Fighter: Situational, but nice for rogues at low levels (Metagame nitpick, it doesn't say HP damage, so if I burn a sneak attack for ability damage, do I get my extra point there?)
Fencer: Situational again, I've not looked at the dueling rules in UC to see if it gives it more use.
Killer: Again, useful at low levels.
Reactionary: Half a feat.
Resiliant: Half a feat.

One difference between the traits above and the heirloom weapon is that those traits never stop working Reactionary will always provide that +2 to initative, Armor expert always reduced the ACP (unless there is none), etc. Even Rich Parents doesn't normally 'go away' since you can sell the gear bought with it. If you want a mithral longsword, or a darkwood quarterstaff, you lose the trait. As is? It's customizable with the options. The loss of the exotic seems to be what's hanging people up, it's the 'attached to one weapon' that bothers me. (one thing I'm not clear on. Is great Granddaddy's Dwarven Waraxe available for a Dwarven Rogue?)

Storywise, what bugs me about the feat, as written, when does the thing *stop* being a heirloom weapon? Changing it to masterwork doesn't (even though the balance changes) making it magical doesn't. Does replacing the blade? What if you modify it to replace those glass 'gems' with real ones? Can I replace Granddaddy's speak haft with darkwood? If I can, then can I keep the original haft and replace the tip with an adamantine one?

[Ahunting]

The great thing about errata is that it can also be errated. Fixing the trait to a balanced solution showes that Paizo takes feed back seriously and that they take balance serously. It's a win win situation. As opposed to blindly nerf bating a popular trait and then simple believing that all is well and moving on, which just leaves everyone worse off.

[InVinoVeritas]

Ahunting wrote:

There will always be sticks in the mud. But it has mysteriously gone from being the most popular melee trait to vanishing completely from every character I have run across over the course of the last week or so.

If by "Vanished completely" you mean "as common now as Bullied, Caretaker, Child of the Temple, Fencer, Magical Talent, Skeptic, Goldsniffer, Animal Friend..." then, yeah, the trait's fine.

[Sean K Reynolds]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Storywise, what bugs me about the feat, as written, when does the thing *stop* being a heirloom weapon? Changing it to masterwork doesn't (even though the balance changes) making it magical doesn't. Does replacing the blade? What if you modify it to replace those glass 'gems' with real ones? Can I replace Granddaddy's speak haft with darkwood? If I can, then can I keep the original haft and replace the tip with an adamantine one?

Welcome to Theseus' Paradox.

[0gre]

I guess what I don't get is the lack of value placed on getting access to a weapon you wouldn't otherwise have. The only other way to get this is by taking a feat or something like Bracers of Archery which don't exist for many weapons. Considering most characters only use one weapon at a time how would you get any more benefit from actually taking the feat?

I can think of a few situations where you benefit a bit more from the feat, if you have dual weapons, or if you want to take a feat that requires proficiency. But if it weren't limited this way then it would [b]be[/b Martial Weapon Proficiency which already exists as a feat. That's exactly the point, it delivers a close approximation to 1/2 of the MWP feat, plus you get a free weapon.

[sunshadow21]

0gre wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

Also I've not seen anyone saying that the trait as originally written was balanced in quite a while. I'm seeing that many people, myself included feel it went too far.

My feeling on traits is that they are simple things that get you a small benefit.

Heirloom weapon gets you access to a weapon you didn't have access to previously. Isn't that pretty valuable in itself?

If you are a martial character instead it gets you a +2 bonus on a specific CMB check. Isn't that comparable to many other traits?

The thing is not every trait is going to be the most powerful trait in the game. Not every trait is going to be useful to all characters. A trait should be appealing enough that some percentage of players will find it appealing. Considering the number of traits out there that percentage should probably be less than 10% but more than 1%. From what I can tell the current version falls pretty squarely in that range.

Take a serious look at other traits and what they do and compare it to the benefits of this version. Some are more powerful but many (most) are less powerful.

** spoiler omitted **...

The difference is that none of those cause that much headache to either the player or the DM. They may not give a lot of benefit in some cases, but even the most corner case trait on that list is easy to implement and play with, for both the player and the DM. Heirloom Weapon in any form is a trait with a certain amount of built in complications, as it is closer to a campaign trait in power, which for most people isn't even worth considering at this point because the challenges it creates are more than the benefits, for both the player and the DM. The player is better off ignoring it, and the DM is better off simply banning it or houseruling some version between the original and revised.

[0gre]

*shrug* personally, if you want a campaign trait put it in a campaign.

Right now it's something generic, a GM *might* take it up and run with it, but I think it's far more likely that it just gets added to the character sheet and it becomes another character ability.

Many players just want to pick up the trait for some small mechanical benefits and a little role playing hook and move on.

I think the idea of having more powerful starter/ campaign traits is great. This just isn't the right book to do it in.

[sunshadow21]

0gre wrote:

I think the idea of having more powerful starter/ campaign traits is great. This just isn't the right book to do it in.

That is actually a very good point, but that is the book they put it in, so that is where we have to deal with it.

[Shuriken Nekogami]

i liked the original version better. i don't beleive it was really that overpowered. and i didn't play with a care bear DM. Weekly William exploits every potential weakness he can and can easily invoke fear in large parties of minmaxed PCs. he made me regret taking an heirloom weapon.

[Matthew Morris]

0gre wrote:

I guess what I don't get is the lack of value placed on getting access to a weapon you wouldn't otherwise have. The only other way to get this is by taking a feat or something like Bracers of Archery which don't exist for many weapons. Considering most characters only use one weapon at a time how would you get any more benefit from actually taking the feat?

I can think of a few situations where you benefit a bit more from the feat, if you have dual weapons, or if you want to take a feat that requires proficiency. But if it weren't limited this way then it would [b]be[/b Martial Weapon Proficiency which already exists as a feat. That's exactly the point, it delivers a close approximation to 1/2 of the MWP feat, plus you get a free weapon.

I'm coming from the opposite direction I guess. Martial Weapon proficiency isn't worth a whole feat. So by using my version, you get a trait that is as good as the weakest feat, or a trait that allows you to get a slightly better feat.

And in the RAW verison, the weapon isn't free.

[Matthew Morris]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

Storywise, what bugs me about the feat, as written, when does the thing *stop* being a heirloom weapon? Changing it to masterwork doesn't (even though the balance changes) making it magical doesn't. Does replacing the blade? What if you modify it to replace those glass 'gems' with real ones? Can I replace Granddaddy's speak haft with darkwood? If I can, then can I keep the original haft and replace the tip with an adamantine one?

Welcome to Theseus' Paradox.

And I am enlightened. Thank you for the link.

(amusing it's also the 'Grandfather's Axe' paradox.)

[0gre]

Matthew Morris wrote:

I'm coming from the opposite direction I guess. Martial Weapon proficiency isn't worth a whole feat. So by using my version, you get a trait that is as good as the weakest feat, or a trait that allows you to get a slightly better feat.

*shrug* The problem is you have to use the existing feats as the basis for comparison. Many people would say Greater Fortitude or Weapon Focus aren't worth a feat and by extension any traits based on it wouldn't be worth it either, yet these traits exist and strangely no-one complains about them.

Quote:

And in the RAW verison, the weapon isn't free.

Yeah, I forgot it didn't give you the weapon. I think that's a bit of a lesser thing regardless.

[sunshadow21]

Personally, I find both martial weapon and exotic weapon proficiency feats annoying. No single martial weapon type is worth a feat, and most exotic weapons aren't even worth a trait without something else included. The rest of the exotic weapons probably need to be broken up like the bastard sword, with proficiency being martial and the special trick being exotic, so that a single feat isn't overpowered. The martial weapon proficiency feat would be a lot better if it gave access to a weapon group rather than a single weapon type; it would be worth the price of the feat, but not particular overpowered as many of the weapons in the weapon group would be ones that the character taking the feat could already access.

[0gre]

sunshadow21 wrote:

Personally, I find both martial weapon and exotic weapon proficiency feats annoying. No single martial weapon type is worth a feat, and most exotic weapons aren't even worth a trait without something else included. The rest of the exotic weapons probably need to be broken up like the bastard sword, with proficiency being martial and the special trick being exotic, so that a single feat isn't overpowered. The martial weapon proficiency feat would be a lot better if it gave access to a weapon group rather than a single weapon type; it would be worth the price of the feat, but not particular overpowered as many of the weapons in the weapon group would be ones that the character taking the feat could already access.

I have a lot of gripes about the way stealth works. I hope no-one ever suggests Paizo fixing it with a trait in the Player Companion line of products to address those concerns. Similarly, I don't think a trait in Adventurers Armory is a good way to fix any perceived weapon proficiency issues.

[sunshadow21]

0gre wrote:

I have a lot of gripes about the way stealth works. I hope no-one ever suggests Paizo fixing it with a trait in the Player Companion line of products to address those concerns. Similarly, I don't think a trait in Adventurers Armory is a good way to fix any perceived weapon proficiency issues.

If the trait was simply intended as a way to fix weapon proficiencies, I would agree whole heartedly. It would be like a band aid on mortal wound. As a campaign style trait that is forced to deal with a thorny subject for part of its concept, I thought the original did as well as could be expected, with the exception of the +1 trait bonus. You can't blame the trait for the weaknesses of the weapon categories anymore than you can expect the trait to fix all of those weaknesses.

[Quandary]

Within the confines of PFS, seems like a great choice for characters starting out with less weapon proficiencies, but planning to multi-class later so they would get them... They can use the same weapon type, and can use the same weapon-specific Feats (e.g. Weapon Focus) from day 1.

Anybody who can add weapon enhancements onto their weapon wouldn´t really care that it´s not MW either.
I think there´s something like brass knuckles that modifies UAS, and the +2 to a maneuver could be very nice, not to mention that Amulet of Mighty Fists would be adding enhancement to UAS itself, bypassing the upgrading problem.

There´s probably alot more weaker Traits out there...

[sunshadow21]

Within the PFS, the trait is going to be a pain no matter what the version. It is designed using rp and DM adjustment to balance the mechanical benefits, which means it will never be a perfect fit for something as tightly regulated as PFS. This isn't a knock on either PFS or the trait, it's just recognizing that some things in the rule set just don't work well in an organized play environment. That doesn't mean we need to nerf them so that they do, that means that those who want to play in such a setting have to recognize they are giving up a certain amount of flexibility and adjust accordingly.

[Ampersandrew]

Shifty wrote:

Trash Loot

Trait

"Setting off for adventure, you took your old Pa's bent sword or half mouldy/'dented and pitted to all heck' armour with you; you look like a joke, and people laugh at your povo welfare line items, but they work well enough"

You begin play with any one mundane weapon or armour, and you only pay half the listed price for that item. Whilst the item is visibly in your possession you take a -1 trait modifier to Diplomacy or Intimidate, your choice.

This is possibly the best trait I have ever seen, I love it to bits. I absolutely could see me taking this one, pity it's not PFS legal.

andrew

[Shifty]

Ampersandrew wrote:

Shifty wrote:

Trash Loot

Trait

"Setting off for adventure, you took your old Pa's bent sword or half mouldy/'dented and pitted to all heck' armour with you; you look like a joke, and people laugh at your povo welfare line items, but they work well enough"

You begin play with any one mundane weapon or armour, and you only pay half the listed price for that item. Whilst the item is visibly in your possession you take a -1 trait modifier to Diplomacy or Intimidate, your choice.

This is possibly the best trait I have ever seen, I love it to bits. I absolutely could see me taking this one, pity it's not PFS legal.

andrew

How do we suggest it then?

I quite liked it - and it has RP opportunity stamped all over it.

[Twin Dragons]

Stasiscell wrote:

o and valeros is weeping i imagine because i can see both his weapons as heirlooms that he had enchanted later on.

Trait only applies to one weapon. Characters are only allowed one trait from different categories, characters can never choose from the same trait category twice.

[BorisAleksandr]

So in a regulated game i would say yeah nerf or ban it but at home just throw a more bad arse moster at the pc's or a rust monster or oze or a fighter with improved sunder and an addy weapon lots of ways to make HW usless so id say give it to who ever wants it and then nerf em in game or try to so that its a rp/luck reason you lost your greatgraddady's weapon.

Edit:There is lots of ways to take away the use of the HW no way your gona go swing your Thousand year old Weapon at a rust monster so it becomes a good item that you use only when you knee every addvantage you can get. (In my group that usaly levels 1-20 lol)

[Gurby]

sunshadow21 wrote:

thenobledrake wrote:

Many of us out here have an heirloom weapon in real life - I, for instance, inherited the rifle issued to my Grandfather during his service with the U.S. Army during World War II.

By no means is it masterwork in quality, and it has only survived the many decades since it was issued to (and then technically stolen by) my Grandpa because he took care of it - his intent to pass it down to another generation keeping the weapon in fine condition until it passed to my Uncle, who likewise took care of it with the intent of passing it down just as it had passed to him.

I take care of it as well, and could haul it out and fire a few rounds at any time I felt the urge because it is still functional.

See, you seem to be looking at the situation with cause and effect reversed - the family doesn't keep the weapon to pass it down through generations because it is valuable; they do so for sentimental reasons and the item eventually becomes valuable.

My Grandfather's M1 Garland is valuable today because it has sentimental value to my family, or value to a collector, not because it is a better functioning weapon than those more available in the modern age.

Anyways, here is where my rant about the fluff of why a weapon becomes an heirloom...

The rifle is still functional, but it really something you would want to routinely have to rely on to kill someone before they could kill you? I, too, have a family heirloom in the form of a rifle from either the civil war or earlier. That doesn't mean that if I were to take up the life of mercenary that I would be interested in relying on it in the field.

I know this is off topic but I have to throw this out there!

A good friend of Mine, recently inherited about a hundred or so knives, swords and a other weapons.Some Military Helmets and other such stuff. His Gran Mother recently passed away, and his Gran father passed away about 15-20years back.

So he received the whole collection of 13-14 boxes he had to go sign for. not a single Item was oiled or maintained since his Gran father passed away. $1000 worth of shipping for Rusted trash.

so yeah, Heirlooms can be surprising!!

[GeneticDrift]

Taking the extra trait feat let's you get heirloom magical weapons assuming you can afford it.

The trait is useless now for my character who took it to balance only having 16str and a d8 bab. It was a huge boon to non full bab classes.

Better to ban it in PFS and break it into 3 different traits. Changing the trait and Making the bonus completely different was a bad idea. Adding a new bonus type was a bad idea anyway (trait).

[Sean K Reynolds]

GeneticDrift wrote:

Taking the extra trait feat let's you get heirloom magical weapons assuming you can afford it.

The trait is useless now for my character who took it to balance only having 16str and a d8 bab. It was a huge boon to non full bab classes.

Better to ban it in PFS and break it into 3 different traits. Changing the trait and Making the bonus completely different was a bad idea. Adding a new bonus type was a bad idea anyway (trait).

It amuses me that you say "only having 16 Str." :)

[Matthew Morris]

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It amuses me that you say "only having 16 Str." :)

You too?

[GeneticDrift]

To be fair that 16 was my highest stat. I needed to keep my saves and ac up, and able to cast lvl 4 spells eventually. I could use more skills and a better personality, but I just live with it and see my character more as an inquisitor from the Mistborn books series (spikes through the eyes must lower your chr score).

I traded my good spell casting by having a low wisdom and choosing party helping spells, so I can have a chance of hitting and surviving in melee.

Losing one +1 is not a big deal. I took extra traits because it was a good feat choice, since it could be tailored to my needs. +1 to hit and my will save is not overpowered for one feat. Now I am not PFS legal until I look up some FAQ and see what my options are.

Edit: since the trait changed i can pick a new one... I got the trait through a feat can I instead change my feat? If I don't keep the trait can I sell my axe at 100% for something I'm prof in? It's not very clear but I think I either lose a ton of money or take a trait I don't like. Advice is welcomed so I can fix up my character and move on.

Edit2: i picked up an exotic weapon, dwarven war axe, the trait can't give me prof with it, so I'm boned? I'm a dwarven inquisitor. Inquisitors are not prof with all martial weapons.

[Pirate]

Yar.

GeneticDrift wrote:

Edit2: i picked up an exotic weapon, dwarven war axe, the trait can't give me prof with it, so I'm boned? I'm a dwarven inquisitor. Inquisitors are not prof with all martial weapons.

If you are a Dwarf, you treat exotic racial (dwarven) weapons as martial weapons. Therefor, even if "Dwarven Waraxe" is not on the Inquisitor's list, it is treated as a martial weapon for you because you are a Dwarf. The new Heirloom's first optional bonus is "proficiency with that specific weapon". So you CAN gain proficiency with your Heirloom Dwarven Waraxe, so long as you take the proficiency option of the trait, and only because you also happen to be a Dwarf.

~P

[Suzaku]

I say it's broken now in the other direction oppose to being fixed. Is it me the more fixes that come out the less I'm inclined to use them.

[GeraintElberion]

Matthew Morris wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Matthew Morris wrote:

Storywise, what bugs me about the feat, as written, when does the thing *stop* being a heirloom weapon? Changing it to masterwork doesn't (even though the balance changes) making it magical doesn't. Does replacing the blade? What if you modify it to replace those glass 'gems' with real ones? Can I replace Granddaddy's speak haft with darkwood? If I can, then can I keep the original haft and replace the tip with an adamantine one?

Welcome to Theseus' Paradox.

And I am enlightened. Thank you for the link.

(amusing it's also the 'Grandfather's Axe' paradox.)

Only here will your enlightenment be complete.

[Keovar]

Chris Kenney wrote:

0gre wrote:

I wonder if I can use this spell with PFS... hmm.

No. The effects of every long-term spell in PFS are reduced to "Until the end of the scenario" even for instantaneous duration spells.

So...

Start your first game with 9 HP. Take 6 damage, get healed to full. Repeat similar events in the next few encounters. Then the scenario ends and you suddenly un-heal for 20+ damage, dying instantly.
...Makes perfect sense.

[Liz Courts]

Removed a post and its reply. No matter how old the thread is, resurrecting it to make insults at posters is not okay.

[LazarX]

Demon Lord of Tribbles wrote:

Brings his popcorn and sits in his lawn chair. Naked

*Dares him to take the Lawn Bucket Challenge, and then switches the contents with iced holy water.*