|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Improved Snap Shot is REALLY neat but you'll need to take a bunch of feats that are useless to you. Rapid Shot is useless with Flurry, and even Snap Shot isn't that great since you're a Monk and threaten 5' with your bare hands/feet.
You could check out Snake Style which will let you use a Sense Motive check for your AC vs 1 Attack.
Why can't you ride him into battle? When you reach Druid Level 7, a Wolf becomes Large, so assuming you're Medium, ride away.
Personally with my switch hitter ranger I took Leopard, agile maneuvers and make it a tripping pet to help control the battlefield. It works well at lower levels, my Ranger is only 8th and is able to trip mooks pretty well.
I don't have a lot to add to this discussion, and there's really no way I'm going to go through 15 pages, but I do want to say that I've been gone a year, and it's nice that some things never change.
Something everyone needs to remember is that the DPS formula doesn't take is the AC of the monsters. If my to hit bonus is higher than than the monsters AC and I have Power Attack, I will do better than someone who doesn't have Power Attack, even if their to hit bonus is 50 points higher than mine. We'll both hit 95% of the time, and the Power Attacker will do the most damage.
This group likes to throw out anecdotal evidence as it is, by definition, subject to certain situations. It's why 95% of this board says that Monks are grossly underpowered despite the fact that in my 30+ years of gaming, they've all been extremely effective in actual games.
If you're going to post on these boards, and not get frustrated, you just have to get used to those basic tendencies, and shrug them off.
I have to really disagree about the Zen Archer not being versatile. The monk is one of the most versatile classes in the game. People's biggest complaint about the monk is that it doesn't specialize. Add Qinggong and you can fill almost any role. You get more feats than a fighter until I think 10th level when the fighter finally catches up. When it comes to archery, I wouldn't really worry about damage, one class may do 150 points of damage while the Zen Archer only does 100, but when the baddies only have 50 hitpoints, does it really matter if they're dead or REALLY dead?
Those are only combat things. Stop focusing your entire game on combat, and it becomes much more of an issue.
Yes the Wizard is probably the most effective character class out of combat. No issues with that at all. How many times has a player come to you and said he felt useless because the Wizard's Knowledge History skill is so high? Or to bring it back to combat, how many times has a player come up to you as a GM and said he felt useless because the Wizard keeps casting Haste and Enlarge on him?
Component costs aren't an issue for most spells, as a spell component pouch alone is completely trivial and doesn't have a limitation on its uses. There's very little reason not to keep two or three on you at any one time.
Just like ammo costs aren't an issue.
Right, except look above, your wizard memorized Sleep, that's a full round cast, guess who's screwed? Holy Symbols? Maybe, hope that cleric isn't in melee range though.
Very few games tend to actually have more encounters than a wizard has spells, and even at low levels, each one is powerful enough to be encounter ending.
Very few GM's cater their encounters to a Wizard's spell list, and the second part of your statement is ridiculously false. Sleep and Color Spray are both negated by a Will Save, a CR 1/2 Skeleton. That leaves their Arcane Bond, how they stretch 1 spell over 3 encounters would be a trick I'd really like to see.
Once they reach the mid-levels, they have enough to almost certainly run out, and wizards have a multitude of ways to work around the issue of not having the right spells memorised for niche situations in fast study, a bonded object, and memorising special circumstance spells, and using greater spell specialization, preferred spell, or spellbinder to trade them for a more generally useful one.
Again, you're absolutely right, in theory they look ridiculously powerful with a spell for every occasion. In actual play however, you RARELY get complaints about the Wizard overshadowing everyone. The same cannot be said about Gunslingers.
It is viable for an Aasimar, and yes it is tied to hell... You were cursed by Hell, that seems sort of appropriate doing you think?
The other thing I did with my Paladin is I took Corrugun Smash from the Cheliax Companion, which is a free Demoralize when you 2-handed power attack. Then I added Cruel to my Longsword which sickens anyone shaken. This made for a pretty effective debuff causing a -4 to saves, skills and to hit, and a -2 to damage. I sort of had internal struggles with Role-Playing aspect of a Paladin adding Cruel to a longsword, but let myself be talked into it since a Paladin can be cruel to evil. Yeah, I know weak excuse, but I loved the mechanics of it.
I've been thinking about this for awhile, and this is how I see things based on my time on the forums, reading the blogs and Pod Casts. I may be way off, but don't think I am.
The Developers are creative people (I think that's obvious) and they view creating the rules as an art. The rules, like art, don't have to follow strict guidelines. The Devs also always keep in mind that there is a GM to interject some sanity when things get wonky.
The majority of people on these boards see the rules as science. A+B=C that formula must never change A+B must always and forever = C. They go further to say that D is almost A, E is almost B so D + E must also = C.
Finally, the majority of the people on the boards seem to HATE GM intervention. They want a strict set of guidlines that the GM HAS to follow. The GM having any sort of say on their character is a horrible situation that must be avoided at all costs. Don't believe me? Look at all the "The Paladin Falls" threads were people want rules that govern exactly what is considered evil and makes a paladin fall.
How does this apply to the current thread? Well, when the feat was created it was created to give flavor to region of the world. One of the limiting factors of the feat was the fact that it came from that region and was associated with that Goddess.
BLUF: The Devs use Fluff to balance mechanics. Ignore the fluff, and you have the potential to unbalance things
~Is this build viable for PFS Season 5 + ?
~Should I go more offensive? Grab Exotic Weapon Prof (Falcata)?
~Drop those Knowledge skills?
~Take Nature Mystery instead? For Nature's Whispers?
~Go with the Lame Curse instead and wear heavy armor + Nature's Whispers?
~Put favored class into Skill point?
My other advice would be to take Extra Revelation and take the one that lets you use CHA for Knowledge Skills. As an Oracle you can take the 0-level Enhanced Diplomacy
I feel this is absolutely one of the best builds for PFS because you really can fill any niche needed, without overshadowing someone who specializes in that niche. You can do damage, but won't outclass a two handed barbarian, you can heal a bit, but won't out do a cleric, you have tons of skills that are pretty high (if you use CHA for them) but someone who dedicates ranks every level will be better.
The downside to the build is that you are a paladin in an organization that is, shall we say, morally gray at best. There are some scenarios that will present troubles for paladins.
Dervish Dance is one of the most powerful feats in the game. It is a "must have" for a reason. Anytime you can pile that much crap on one stat is a problem. You can rationalize it anyway you want (and believe me the "Reflex only helps with a few spells" rationalization still puts me into fits of laughter. Did anyone really buy that argument?) the facts are the developers agree it's overpowered, what else needs to be said really?
One of my first Pathfinder characters was an Elven Kensai, and I absolutely loved him. It was in a Kingmaker Campaign so I used an Aldori Dueling Sword. My initutive and AC were ridiculously high, although they don't start out that way. Not having Mage Armor on the spell list is rough, but I didn't really miss the reduced spell casting. I would highly recommend wand weilder and a level 5 Shocking Grasp wand.
at this point, targeting touch AC isn't looking nearly as cool as it was before, and is instead approaching the level of "only way we can keep up."
Expect this is completely wrong. Do this: Go to www.d20pfsrd.com go to the monster section and put them in order by CR. Go to CR 5 and look down the first column (or pick a column or even 4 of them). Almost every one of the mosters have a touch AC at least 5 points lower than their regular AC. And that's CR 5. Look at higher levels and the diparity is even worse. I really think this is where the disconnect is. I really want you gunslinger fans to go check out the difference between touch and regular ACs. If you do, I think you'll see what I'm saying.
Even if you only use your double barrel once, you've just done as much as Many Shot. More actually because if you have precision damage you get that twice too.
Shisumo you really can't win this fight. A gunslinger can do everything a fighter can do, except they use touch AC's have a higher damage die (d12) use your primary stat to hit and damage, and have a 4x crit multipier. You think Weapon Specialization balances that?
I think people are confusing several issues. First many players in many cases like to push aspects of the game until it breaks. This can result in dm feeling the encounters are trivialized. For some reason it bothers them when martials dominate but its okay if a wizard kills everything with fireball.
There are limitations built into a Wizard that people love to ignore. Component costs they love to talk about ammunition costs while ignoring this. That's not counting the cost of scribing spells into spell books, buying scrolls etc. Counterspelling completely negates a Wizard's actions. Everyone looks at the Wizard's spell list and acts like the Wizard can cast all those spells at any second all the time. Sure a wizard can cast a fireball once in awhile, a gunslinger does that damage and more every single round. Make fireball unllimited casting like first level spells, I can see a complaint until then, not so much. Oh yeah and a gunslinger can stop a Wizard with a disarm of spell components, or no-save confusion.
That said gunslingers are fairly intuitive to play oncw you understand them and its easy for a novice player to do well. However just about every complaint about gunslingers involves pistolero (often with mysterious stranger) musket master and double barreled guns. The issue really is the double barreled guns in most cases.
No it isn't. I'll explain next paragraph.
People seem to forget by the time we hit the teens and wizards are tossing save or die or save or suck spells like used tissues normal archers without any weird gimicks do amazing damage. In my rise of the runelord game some time ago our archer killed an irom golem in one round.
I've covered wizards, the same still applies, and yes archers do do amazing damage. Now imagine that same archer, but instead of having to attack normal AC, it only needs touch AC. Instead of using STR for damage, it uses DEX and STR is now throw away stat, and instead of a d8 (or 2d6 with gravity bow) imagine its a d12 or 3d6. That's the difference between an archer and a gunslinger with one barrel.
On a final note for skull and shackles I'm currently playing a tiefling mysterious stranger gunslinger using a musket. I'm basically a skill focused character that uses called shot and dead shot. The barbarian in our group with zuul and the 2h falchion using fighter do far more damage than I do.
You're playing low levels. An archer at this level would be outshined too. Wait a few levels this will shift dramatically.
Color Spray - is a 15' illusion. There are litterally in infinate number of encounters that this will do nothing for, ranging from simply fighting enemies with ranged weapons, to fighting Skeletons to facing a trap.
Cold Napalm wrote:
Umm...demi gods of greek legends take on armies and win.
Really? Which ones?Heracles? - Nope. 12 labors not one was fighting an army and winning
Achilles? - Nope. Had a whole army and an elite team at his side... and still ended up dead. I'd call that Not a win.
Theseus? - Nope. Beat up a Minotaur, but needed help from the bull's sister.
Odysseus? - Nope. Had a whole army with him (or his crew), while he did make it out alive it took him 10 years to get home
Perseus? - Nope. Killed Medussa, but had a TON of help.
Jason? - Nope. Had the Argonaughts (and Heracles sometimes). Was sort of a douchebag too.
Bellerophon? - Nope. Would anyone even know his name if not for Tom Cruise? His family did some cool stuff, but still didn't defeat an army.
Cadmus? - Nope. He needed an army to kill a dragon. Okay he did found Thebes but he regrew his army from the dragon's teeth... and they scared him so much that he had half them killed.
Now I'm not sure what all this means or even what my point was anymore, but that was a lot of fun going back through all those heroes... I kinda miss 'em.
Up to this point I was thinking your GM was just setting you up for a recuring villain. While it makes sense for the villian to do this, it is a common staple NOT to. I mean why didn't Sauron just make MORE ruler rings? The whole "Drat foiled again!" motif.
How did your characters find out about the volcano to begin with? Why didn't you find out it was happening again?
Other than that really, the only options you have are the standard: Talk to the GM, or just roll your eyes, sigh and move on. If you want validation: Then yes, I think that was a crappy move on the GM's part.
All I really want to do with the gun rules (not with standing that I still think they're horribly out of place in Pathfinder) is remove the misfire chance and remove the touch AC bit. This would balance everything out IMO. Maybe I'm right, maybe I'm wrong.
There are space ships, aliens and androids in "Pathfinder" I think gun powder certainly has a place. The problem is that there is a reason no one has really been sword fighting for the last 3 and a half centuries.
@Christopher Lee - Please make a first level wizard that can trivialize 3 encounters per day at level 1. I want to see the build and the spells that have this ability.
My first question would be: Did you read the thread? If you did, my next question is: Which part is confusing you? The part that Gunslingers get to add the DEX to damage or the part that notabot is upset by that? I'll cover both, just in case.
At 5th level Gunslingers get to add DEX to damage:
Gun Training (Ex): Starting at 5th level, a gunslinger can select one specific type of firearm (such as an axe musket, blunderbuss, musket, or pistol). She gains a bonus equal to her Dexterity modifier on damage rolls when firing that type of firearm. Furthermore, when she misfires with that type of firearm, the misfire value of that firearm increases by 2 instead of 4.
That seems pretty self-explanatory.
If you make them use regular AC instead of touch, it brings them down to the level of the archer, the misfire chance balancing out the DEX to damage that an archer can never have.
What about the STR to damage that archers who are built right always have? Or the many shot?
So I responded with:
Okay Gunslingers don't get DEX to damage they have STR too if it makes you feel better (not sure why you'd take that away, but I'm cool with it). Can there be double barrel Longbows? No? Then no manyshot.
My point is Gunslingers already add their primary stat to damage, Archers cannot. This makes Gunslingers better than archers. Why notabot thinks an archer adding a secondary stat to damage is better than adding a primary stat to damage is a mystery to me too, but was willing to go with him on it.
notabot's second complaint is about the Manyshot feat that can't be applied to guns. My response is that you can have double barrel guns, which means Gunslingers can "Manyshot" every round without the feat, so we'll leave the Manyshot feat to archers only.
Jamie Charlan wrote:
Things could be given Touch ACs equal to their full standard AC, turning the 'slinger into something equal to or worse than a crossbow user with no weapon-training to attack.
A gunslinger is BETTER than an archer with a bow. They DESTROY crossbow DPS. If you make them use regular AC instead of touch, it brings them down to the level of the archer, the misfire chance balancing out the DEX to damage that an archer can never have.
I skipped a lot of of this thread, but I'll try to answer your questions anyway:
By RAW no you can't do what you want (ancestral weapon as a Free action), so really all you can do is ask your GM (which I think some have suggested)
When I GM if you could do it in a less thematic way, I typically allow it. For example if you took the feat Quickdraw I'd allow you to summon ancestral weapon as a free action. I wouldn't allow you to abuse this however. If, for example, you tried to use the free action summon to try to throw your ancestral weapon dagger 3 times in a round. You would have to have 3 daggers on you.
Read Sean K Reynolds' comments in the thread linked above (and here) and I think you'll see they are intended to be run the way you probably do it anyway.
Jamie Charlan wrote:
You have truly missed the entire point of my post. I honestly have no idea what points you're trying to argue. The point I was trying to make is that just because the Gunslinger can out DPS the entire party combined round for round, that doesn't mean that' the only thing they can do. By that logic Wizards are one trick ponies too since killing the mobs are always a better idea. Just because a Wizard can kill mobs doesn't mean that's all they can do.
Where does it say 4-legs are immune to trip attacks?
As far as Grit points being limited? How does a Gunslinger replenish Grit? Well they need to kill a baddie. What does a Gunslinger do better than anyone else in a party? Kill baddies. How limited are their grit points really? They aren't.
So far as I've seen, for targeting, there are a lot of enemies that can't be tripped. Disarming and confusion are nice, but only for one around and again you trade doing lots of damage for spending a grit to support your party member. There are other classes who can do these things reliably and far more often.
Again, that's my point: If for some REALLY odd reason a Gunslinger can't do damage, they have other options. They are FAR from 1-trick ponies. And no there really aren't any other classes that can trip or disarm as reliably or as often as a Gunslinger (see above for the "limited grit" argument).
Jamie Charlan wrote:
They're called one-trick ponies not because they literally can only do one thing - even a Fighter has 2+INT skill points per level there.
Right and a Gunslinger has 4+INT and since a Gunslinger needs DEX only, as opposed to a fighter that needs DEX and STR, the Gunslinger can raise his INT higher.
Jamie Charlan wrote:
They're called that because killing things with the gun is the only thing they do well. That debuff is a very minor thing, a sorry consolation prize, really. Like a dread necromancer discovering the entire bloody kingdom is under some peaceful-repose holy ground deal, but hey he's still got enfeebling ray.
Ya think so? Having a no save Confusion spell, automatic trip attack at range, and an automatic disarm at range are minor debuffs? That's not counting the automatic Flat-Footed effect. I think we have very different defintions of "minor".
Jamie Charlan wrote:
Which does kind of leave you "one-trick"-y compared to a frickin CLERIC.
Assuming the Gunsligner hasn't disarmed the Cleric's holy symbol from 80' away.
This is SO not true it borders on lying. Past level 3 talking about the cost of ammunition is a joke. Touch AC's are so much lower that a gunslinger can full attack round 1 quick clear his gun round 2 and full attack round 3 and still out DPS an archer that full attacks every round. A gunslinger will always hit with every attack (that's only a SLIGHT exaggeration). They have the same crit chance as an archer, but their damage is x4 and they will always confirm against touch AC, and at 13th level, a musket master/pistolero never misfires with a firearm.
Further range? Yeah that's a minor problem until around level 5 when you get Distance... Oh but that brings down your to hit and damage since a bow will get +1. That might be true if Touch AC's weren't an average of 5 lower the regular AC.
And why is everyone calling a gunslinger a 1 trick pony? Did you read the thread? The GM raised the touch AC so the gunslinger switched to de-buffing. There's two tricks right there. Look at the other grit options and there's crowd control in there too. Gunslingers can even stop bleeding, pick locks, have more skill points than fighters and only needs 1 stat to a fighters 2 (bows don't get the agile enhancement).
So yes, Gunslinger are MUCH better than any archer could ever hope to be. Their "limitation" are extremely minor and quickly overcome, does this make them overpowered? Well that for you to decide, in my opinion HELL YES.
mdt:I would disagree. While mechanically you're correct, in talking about "brain power" from a "fluff" aspect, I would think every digit counts. If you look at strength, ever number is more lifting power. That being the case we have to assume that every stat is the same even if the other are significantly less quantifiable.
I am going to be Judging (not GM'ing) an 11 person PvP combat free-for-all. They will not know what type of terrain I may throw at them, or what type of characters the other players will bring. There will be traps, and may even be random encounters (monsters).
Most of my players are what I would term casual players and probably won't scour every source for the ultimate weapon, so I created this to give them ideas. I don't want to do it myself since I know what the enviornment will be, I don't want to give anything away.
So if you were Level 20 had 1,000,000gp and had to survive a fight against 10 other level 20's what would you buy? Feel free to break it down by class or general class (Arcane Caster, Melee type etc)
Assume the standard:
If you would replace one of these, say that too.
Yes. You are missing the part that it only applies when the two feats are used togther.Read the FAQ read the question. That answer applies to that question only. It does not change any rules at all. It applies only when those two feats are togther. If you try to use that FAQ's answer and apply anywhere except this specific instance it is wrong. Not only that, but it doesn't say as "part of that ranged attack" it says "as part of that ranged attack of opportunity". That's important.
I still don't think a FAQ was necessary, but it exists regardless.
So it is inconcievable to you, that the fact that it exists proves I'm right? The fact that they needed a FAQ lends credit to my arguemnt. If things were the way you were saying, it wouldn't be needed.
So we look at the Crane Wing argument again, and ignore wheather a bow is two handed or not.
Are you using Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes to make your AoO with Crane Wing? No. Then drawing an arrow is a Free action, and you can't take free actions when it's not your turn, even with Snap Shot. Why? Well because there is nothing that allows you to draw an arrow as less than a Free Action with Snap Shot alone. There is no implication that you can, there is no rule that you can, there is no FAQ that says you can, and no erratta that says you can.
The free action "nonsense" you are refering to is a direct quote from the Core Rule Book. Are you saying the all the rules in the Core Rulebook are nonsense or just this particular one that you don't seem to like?
Instead of answering the same questions over and over, I'll just quote myself
I bolded the relevant parts.
The Devs didn't make an exception, they made a clarification. If you normally load a ranged weapon as a free action (such as a bow, or a crossbow with certain feats), you can make multiple AoO. If you can't load a ranged weapon as a free action (such as a crossbow without any feats) then you can't make multiple AoO--you can still make one with the Snap Shot feat.
Please note the bolded text.
No one is saying that drawing an arrow isn't a free action, we're just saying that Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes provides an exception to the rule that free actions may only be accomplished on your turn.
But I'm confused, didn't you just get done telling me it wasn't an exception(see bolded text above)? Hmmm.
More to the point, however, I would recommend you read my posts. When you do, you'll see I'm saying the exact same thing.
Besides, "RAW is RAW" is probably the dumbest argument anyone can make considering "RAW" is nothing more than an interpretation of what is written in the rule book. Someone may have a different interpretation than you and still be able to argue "RAW".
You would think that wouldn't you? Except read this sentence and tell me all the ways you can interpret it:Drawing an arrow is a Free action.
Seems like it needed to be said doesn't it?
I never said drawing an arrow isn't a free action. What I said is I believe the clear implication from Snap Shot is that said free action can be taken outside of one's turn, an exception to the ordinary rule. Despite your apparent protestations, inference is also a part of RAW. Ergo, RAW is RAW. Check the Snap Shot feat. The necessary language is contained therein.
Don't need a FAQ. It might be useful, but don't need one. You can disagree all you want, clear implication of RAW is RAW.
Okay just finished reading Snap Shot. Please point out the words that imply you can draw the arrow as a Free Action not on your turn. All it says is that you can make an AoO, and it doesn't provoke. That's it, that's all that's there. Anything else you're adding all on your own. There is no implication there at all.
So, depending on context, I disagree with your "it is clearly illegal by RAW" statement.
Show me anywhere that says drawing an arrow ISN'T a free action.-Can you use Snap Shot as is if drawing is a Free Action?
-Yes, archer draws arrow as free action after full attack.
- Can you use Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes as is if drawing an arrow is a Free Action?
You can disagree all you want, RAW is RAW.
You all are going back and forth and in circles on this topic. This is because both sides of the argument are totally legit, and it is going to take a judgment call from some higher authority type.
Not true. The side saying it's possible is saying it's possible becuase of a FAQ that has nothing to do with the Crane Style.
Again Incorrect. It comes down to the fact that by RAW drawing an arrow is a Free Action. Certian feats allow you to make AoO's, but the people "For Crowd" are trying to make it seem that since you can do it with feats, you should be able to do it any time.
The Devs may allow it. If they do Yay! But as of right now, it is clearly illegal by RAW.
If Snap Shot doesn't allow you to draw an arrow to make an attack of opportunity outside of your turn, the feat is nigh pointless. Might as well be a teamwork feat because it does pretty much nothing for the person taking it.
You draw the arrow as a free action at the end of your regular attack, which would make sense as a reason the bow requires two hands.
bbangerter - I may have misunderstood you if so I apologize.
I really think people need to stop applying a FAQ that applies to one given circumstance (spelled out in the FAQ) and trying to apply to every situation. Drawing an arrow is a Free action. You can make multiple AoO's dispite this fact if you have those feats. Just like drawing a sword is a move action, but you can draw it as a free action if you have the Quickdraw feat. Or just like a monk can only flurry with certain monk weapons, just because Zen Archer can do it with a bow, doesn't mean that fact changes the rules for all monks in every instance.
Driver I apologize for not being perfect. In the future I shall endeavor to improve my imperfections. Although if you are being fair, instead of just mindlessly attacking anyone who disagrees with you, you'll see my position ALMOST changed to closer to your side, but instead it stayed the same. So the fact that I'm NOT saying it means my position DID stay consistent.
That said, I rarely say this, but you are completely wrong. You don't want to see it fine bury your head. All the rules disagree with you and you haven't presented ANYTHING that could remotely be considered a rational argument for your position. The strongest thing you can say is that a FAQ allows multiple free actions for an AoO, so please allow this too. That's the strongest argument you have, and it's weak. Everything presented in the rules disagrees with you, so don't get upset when the people who read the rules disagree with you also.
So now I guess you are saying the a zen archer walks around with a fist full of arrows. He is not able to draw and shoot.
Drawing an arrow is a free action. That's the rule. That's what I'm saying.
Driver 325 yards wrote:
I was implying that at first (in my previous post, not the one you quoted), but after re-reading the FAQ, no you can't. Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes allow you to make multiple AoO's a round. It does NOT change drawing an arrow from a Free Action to a non-action.
The bolded GIVEN is incorrect. RAW Specifically says that drawing an arrow is a FREE action. Nowhere in RAW is it said that drawing an arrow is a non-action.
The Quickdraw feat allows someone to draw a weapon as a free action, does that mean drawing a weapon is always a free action? No it requires that feat. Combat Reflexes and Snap Shot are the same thing. Just because they allow you to make multiple AoO does not change the fact that drawing an arrow is a Free action.
Driver 325 yards wrote:
Actually an archer with snap/reflexive shot AND combat reflexes can as a free action. Sure it's semantics but so is your argument about how many hands to use a bow.
So by RAW at a minimum you need snap shot, combat reflexes and the crane feats.
My biggest problem is that you are using a FAQ that applies to one specific instance with a specific set of feats and using it to justify it applying everywhere. You aren't looking at why he devs would rule that way in that instance which has to do with game balance. You completely ignore the general rule that unequivocally states drawing an arrow s a free action because of a FAQ on one specific instance. What really kills me is that the fa doesn't mean reloading is a non action it says if you can reload as a free, then you can make multiple AoO. That FAQ DOES NOT prove drawing is a non action..
I don't think they are, even in game terms. Read the PRD quotes again:
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action;
If they were the same, this would be a contradiction. They are two seperate actions.
@Krodjin - You're right. I was using the words nocking and drawing interchangably, and I shouldn't have been. That's why I saw a contradiction.
I think it just hit me PRD does not contradict:
nocking an arrow is not the same as drawing an arrow. Nocking an arrow is putting an arrow on the string. The arrow is already in your hand and you nock the arrow. It still takes a free action to draw the arrow out of the quiver.