I'm ok with table variation.. GM's are not robots who run each game the same.. some GM's are more cinematic then others, some encourage more RP and get more into character, while others are more tactical...

3.X conditioned people to think of GMs as automatons.... the GM is the story teller as well as the judge... and a judge they are expected to make rulings.

for example, Henry will input more logic into games then I would.. I'm very "big cinematic" and hand out tactical edge when players do anything cool..

I think its ok for some table variation, but for things that are pretty fundamental on how a character is played, they don't make for good variations. I have scrapped entire character concepts because of "table variation" on basic character fundamentals like how their talents work or if they are even allowed to take X path, or use Herbs from the books.

Table variation should exist for "one off" once in a blue moon situations. But there should not be variation in how the rules as written are played. It is reasonable to expect that they be played as written - Until changed. Right now Sweeping Strike and Whirlwind expressly allow "Any Melee Weapon or Unarmed". I propose changing that to be "Any Melee weapon or unarmed except for Longspear/Pike or other weapons whose reach exceed 10'."

If there is not time to put that in this edition of the Errata, then put it into the Campaign Rulings thread.

The alternative of table variation discourages players from playing outside their local group, and tends to push players away from the game. This is the flip side of the problem with allowing loose interpretations at local tables, and then disallowing grey area rules at convention. Either way you are just inviting argument, heartache, and displeasure from the player and GM base.

Any Errata should adjust the Reach Weapon Trait and not specific weapons.

Suggested wording:


Quick and easy and allows the creation of new Martial Techniques for weapons with the trait.

And you just made it unusable with every technique in the game...

In which case the cumulative -2 penalty per 5' should keep the weapons under control.

I think the intent was, you can't use a Martial Technique with a weapon if you are attacking at a range that imposes a "reach penalty". So as long as you're attacking at 'optimum range' there's no restriction.

John

Personally, I disagree with restricting maneuvers to optimum range for reach weapons. Does it make realistic sense? Maybe. Does it make for a fun game? No (long spear already seems to be under-represented/utilized - this would only make it worse). Does it make the game more balanced? No. Reach weapons already have a -2 (iirc) per 5' under optimal range which seems like all the balance that is needed. Sweeping Strikes is still restricted to 2-3 targets. If there are higher tier maneuvers (I haven't looked at them much) that break with reach weapons, maybe errata those specific maneuvers.

Yeah, what he's on about.
I'm seeing smoke but not feeling any heat off this thing, y'know?

There is Whirlwind Attack: Attack all creatures within range. That's where it truly breaks.

Flowing Sand can be another one where it breaks.

John