So here we have two spells that are extremely similar in build (all the same spell types, durations, # of creatures, etc).
Both of the earlier spells at 1st level are only 1 round duration as well.
However, the Greater Forbid Action spell does not have the clause that they may break free every round, which kicks it into 3.5e mode for power.
Just curious if this seems like a typo that needs errata.
Perhaps an extra line at the end saying: "At the start of each affected creature's turn after the first, it gets another Will save to attempt to break free from the spell."
Normally I'm a big advocate of NOT re-inventing the wheel, and folding existing rules into new mechanics.
However, the problem I'm seeing with the a gun jam causing the Broken condition, is that it's not just a simple -2 to attack roll (and reduction of crit range). The Broken condition interacts with a number of other rules mechanics that the gun's misfires doesn't really take into account.
The Issues
1. The Broken condition normally occurs when the object is at less than half hitpoints. This is important, because it denotes when it no longer has the broken condition when being repaired.
For spells or abilities or craft checks that repair normal broken items, how does this interact with misfires?
Do misfires automatically bring the weapon down to half hitpoints - 1? If they don't (and it's not mentioned anywhere), then how do we know the item's repaired when we, say, cast mend or make whole?
2. The misfire is obviously supposed to indicate either a jam in the gun, or a dirty barrel causing poor performance, or some other similar effect. A non-gunslinger, using the craft skill, would need 1 hour of work (and a DC 20 check) per point of damage repaired. First, cleaning a gun out going from 1 hour minimum to "quick clear" speeds breaks my immersion.
Second, taking a week to clean the barrel of a gun from a single misfire if misfires reduce hitpoints to below half sounds like insanity.
3. This ties in a bit with #1, but what if someone wants to Sunder the gun? Perfectly reasonable response.. it's an expensive item and it's scary and dangerous.
If the gun gains the broken condition from being sundered, does it now have a higher misfire chance and risk blowing up?
.
Proposed Solution (Because I like giving constructive criticism.)
All these things really point me towards desiring a new, "middle ground" level of brokenness for a "first stage" misfire.
I'd call it something like "Compromised". This item state can grant the misfire increase to guns, and maybe a -2 to attack for weapons (doubles armor check penalty on armor, -1 penalty on tools, 50% chance of using an extra charge on wands/staves, etc).
More importantly, it doesn't cause hitpoint damage. To fix it, it takes one application of a spell (depending on if it's magical), or one craft check that takes a specific set amount of time (1 round action, or 1 minute if we decide/prefer to make it non-combat allowed).
This feels more appropriate to a simple "gun jam" or "dirty barrel". It also opens the door for applying this kind of condition to other items (0th or 1st level spells that cause it, or conditions to apply in certain environments, etc).
Perhaps it's time for bowstrings to start failing? *snicker*
A gun misfiring while already jammed would have the same effect as before (destroyed in a shrapnel explosion). If some DMs want to be more lenient, instead of destroyed after the explosion, then we can have the gun sit at a broken status with 1 hitpoint (similar to what can be allowed with a sunder), but a special caveat of "unusable" until repaired.
A blown up gun taking a long time to repair still makes sense.
This actually gives me a good idea for another "after Broken, but before Destroyed" middle ground condition. If a broken item is down to 1 hitpoint (especially from a sunder), it gains the "Unusable" status (so an object is Broken and Unusable), which keeps it intact and ready for repair, but not usable until repaired to higher than 1 hitpoint. This would allow sundering an item and depriving the enemy of using it, without completely removing it from your treasure).
Currently, the Gunslinger gets 18 Deeds, spread over 6 levels. This change would grant 16 Deeds that can be chosen, spread over 10 levels (choose Deeds every 2nd level, feels more like a major class feature as it has more "face time" during leveling).
Then you can delineate Deeds into one of two categories: Combat or Trick Deeds. Since you are locked into picking Trick Deeds on the gun training levels, you won't see those "quirky" Deeds never being chosen.
The final step, of course, is to remove the current feats that are Deeds, and simply put them into the Deeds list (except Signature Deed of course).
In it's place, have the feat "Extra Deed":
Extra Deed
Through natural luck, gumption, and talent, you can perform a special deed.
Prerequisite: Deeds class feature, or the Amateur Gunslinger feat.
Benefit: You gain one additional gunslinger deed. You must meet all the prerequisites for this gunslinger deed.
Special: You can gain Extra Deed multiple times.
Note: This is a near word-for-word copy of the Extra Rogue Talent feat. I did this on purpose, as I feel they are very similar in theme.
.
There are a couple reasons why this feels more appropriate for the class.
1. The Gunslinger is feat starved. Ranged combat is already feat intensive (I can think of about 6-7 feats that are fairly important in the core book, not even thinking of the APG yet), and that doesn't include some nice Gunslinger-style feats (Quickdraw, Diehard, possible mounted combat stuff, etc).
The current mechanic of adding new Deeds for the class seems to be by adding feats. Between thematic feats, ranged combat, and stuff like extra grit and signature deed, the Gunslinger is going to be hard pressed keeping up with any new additions, without giving up a lot.
2. Not every Gunslinger should have the same set of abilities. I don't want to hear "You've seen one Gunslinger, you've seen 'em all". People can play a Rogue or a Fighter or a Barbarian over and over, because they can create different builds.
This class is already pretty hard-coded into what weapon they'll be using (ranged gun), the difference between two-handed, pistol and shotgun isn't big enough to really define the playstyle.
If each Gunslinger had a different set of Deeds.. some have stuff for being acrobatic, others were more about trick shots, and yet others are about being a sniper or surprise shots, etc.. then you've got re-playability of the class.
3. This allows you to define Deeds based on era, making the Gunslinger class "gun era proof". You want Deeds that fit the "Emerging Guns" era, that deal with misfires and cheapening ammo? Great! You want Deeds that don't worry about that stuff because it assumes a "Guns Everywhere" era? It's as simple as a small tag in the prerequisites of the Deed.
Tadaa! Now the Gunslinger class can be played in any game, without needing to be tweaked by each individual GM. All it takes is releasing a new set of Deeds for a particular era, and you've got it covered.
4. This allows someone to pick up something like Utility Shot at first level (if you allow it), without making the class feel bloated at 1st level.
Those wishing there was more to the class that was unique or defining right from the get-go can select one of their Deeds that makes the class feel this way.
This is similar to letting the Rogue decide if his Rogue Talent gives him something like Minor Magic, or Trap Spotter, or if he prefers, just Weapon Focus or Weapon Finesse. The Rogue can feel like he gets something neat and unique right away, or he can decide that doesn't matter and build towards necessity. The same would now apply to the Gunslinger.
.
Overall, I think this would make the jump from making the class just "playable", to "robust and awesome". Well that, and having 4 skillpoints per level, since he's going to be giving up even medium armor.
First Glance
I think that the inclusion of the additional gun rules and sidebars drastically helps in alleviating a lot of concerns regarding this class. I'm glad they were included.
Overall, between the minor tweaks in the class, and the additional gun rules, I can see this class falling into the "playable" category now, and hopefully it can be "awesome" too.
.
I'm going to divide my review between the Gunslinger class itself, and the gun rules, since we now have them to look over. I'll start with the gun rules themselves because it's shorter to review, and because it helps put the class into context.
.
FIREARM RULES
Truly, the only way to make everyone happy was to give the option of "firearm era" up to the GM. I think this really keeps the best of both worlds, in that people can decide how much firearm they have in their gaming, like how much salt they want on their food.
I like that "advanced" weapons are made an option, and I especially like seeing the idea of cartridges, even for non-advanced weaponry. The alchemical cartridges make me think of Iron Kingdoms, and I like it a lot.
Metal cartridges makes it so we can play a good ol' fashioned western. I can even envision a pulp, Dresden Files sort of gumshoe game now, with magic and firearms existing in an advanced civilization that uses magic and technology interchangeably.
The Downsides
Okay, I'm not a huge fan of the "touch AC" idea. I far preferred the idea of resolving against Flatfooted AC instead (harder to dodge in shorter ranges, with the caveat of not setting off Sneak Attack unless they'd otherwise be denied dexterity (they can still protect vitals, just not avoid the shot in general as easily).
This is beyond the actual balance reasons (which playtests will confirm or deny as an issue). It's a thematic issue for me, and I'd like to see playtests using flatfooted AC.
Overall though, I like the new weapons and ammo, and the option for making them cheaper (both in the feats and choosing an era).
.
THE GUNSLINGER CLASS
I'm going to go through each section, but I'll have the Deeds and Feats in spoilers, because they'll be quite long.
Class Skills
The addition of Perception, Sleight of Hand, and Survival are really good. They add much needed Wisdom-based skills (since he needs Wisdom for other class abilities), they add much more flavor related to being a Gunslinger: quick hands, quick eyes, and likely the need to do things on his own (between the lone wanderer theme, and the fact that he's carrying explosives on him probably not being a good enticement for friends to stick around).
Saves and Bravery
Glad to see this is back to a normal progression. Bravery being just like the Fighter ability (instead of a flat bonus), and the class just straight up getting two good saves.
Gunsmith
This pretty much alleviates most of the problems I saw with the "starting weapon" issue. He needs a potentially expensive item to start the game with, so instead he has a functional weapon that is otherwise scrap for anyone else.
Getting the gunsmithing feat for free also helps keep costs low for ammo, without being quite as absurd.
Note: I would have liked to see this flow into a "Signature Weapon" style of class ability, where the Gunslinger can get unique bonus and effects with a specific weapon he's "tweaked", but I can easily add that in as a Gunslinger feat later on if I wanted.
Grit
I like that the primary methods of gaining Grit are the more defined versions, while the "GM Adjudication" method is left as a sidebar option.
It's still something that will probably not happen that frequently, so hopefully Grit isn't something that will be quite as "required" anymore.
Deeds
Overall, there's some better mechanics in play. However, there are a few points that still need ironing out.
However, the point still stands that all Gunslingers will end up being quite similar. I liked the idea of having to pick deeds instead of just automatically getting every single one on the list. It would make for more unique characters.
Individual Deeds:
Deadeye: You know my feelings on Touch AC.. well, in this case, I don't mind it. If this is how you got access to Touch AC resolving attacks, then I wouldn't mind so much (it costs a valuable resource). I'd prefer seeing the normal Touch AC factor gone, and moved to being a "Gunslinger thing", using this deed.
Gunslinger's Dodge: As has been mentioned, I think the medium or ligher text was supposed to be here. But as for the ability itself, it's not a bad use of a Grit, although I'd prefer seeing such a limited resource give something more along the lines of the Deflect Arrows feat (completely negate the attack, instead of providing a minimal AC bonus). Doesn't being prone already give you an AC bonus against ranged attacks? Does this bonus stack with that bonus too, or is it meant to be that same bonus (since it's +4 normally)?
Quick Clear: I had hoped that the Gunslinger class would not need this kind of Deed in the first place, but for those running games without Advanced firearms, and who like misfires, it seems to provide the desired function.
Gunslinger Initiative: I'm still not sure what the second part of this feat is supposed to mean. "As part of the Initiative check" is kind of odd because it's sort of a nebulous term that isn't necessarily used at the same points in time from group to group. I'd far prefer that it simply said something like: "Furthermore, if she has the Quick Draw feat, she has a free and unrestrained hand (or two hands for a two handed firearm), and the firearm is not hidden, she can draw a single firearm as a free action even if it's not her turn."
Voila, pretty much what you wanted (draw a single weapon instantly, before anything happens), but without the weird "as part of the initiative check" thing.
Pistol-Whip: Sounds like a trip maneuver using your weapon. Does it have to happen in the surprise round or something? The "make a surprise melee attack" implies more than the rules state.
If that's just flavor text (it's surprising to do this with a normally ranged weapon), then whatever. It's a free use of Improved Trip, sort of. Not bad or thematically jarring in any way, since it uses the maneuver system to defend against.
Utility Shot: I like the utility this brings to the class. Since ammo isn't quite as expensive as before, I can see these being used. I also like that it's fairly early into the levels now.
Some things though:
- Can you purposefully "miss" the Blast Lock to cause a jam? Sometimes you want to do that to screw up others wanting to get through there. It can be seen as a benefit.
- Can stop bleeding be done after shooting the weapon to attack someone, or does it have to be a wasted shot? Can the gunslinger perform this deed on himself if he's bleeding?
Dead Shot: I like seeing the suggestion being added. In this case, it's a lot similar to a "free" (one Grit cost) use of the Vital Strike line. Not quite as powerful as the suggestion on the forums, but with the gun costs going down, and reloading an easier option now, it sounds like this is now just a neat ability.
I'm sure Sniper builds will be liking this Deed a lot.
Startling Shot: This still suffers from the "guns force people to do weird things". It's a nice ability to give others in the group a good benefit, such as giving a fellow rogue the chance for sneak attack (since you are probably not giving a flanking bonus anymore).
But, I'd really like to see this changed to be a fear effect, and have a Will save DC. This would make it less Deus Ex style of an ability, and would mean Gunslingers and Fighters have a bonus that applies against this (fitting).
Targeting: Making this a full round action now makes it a decision between dealing damage or dealing this effect (especially with Dead Shot as an option, even if you don't have multi-fire weapons).
These are nice effects, although I'd prefer if the Arms target did damage still (otherwise it's a rather expensive ranged disarm, which some fighter archetypes can do a lot easier/cheaper).
With the fact that you have to give up damage options, I'd say it might work better as a "if you have 1 Grit" option, similar to the Utility Shot. The trade off becomes an action economy, instead of a per-day usage.
Bleeding Wounds: Overall a nice ability, don't really see any obvious problems with it.
Expert Loading: Seems odd to have this as an 11th level ability. How often is a Gunslinger going to be firing broken guns in the first place? By 11th level, I'd suspect between being able to make his own weapons, the obvious desire for the quickdraw feat, and the known issue with exploding guns, it'd be a rare situation that this would come up.
I'd rather see this Deed being the kind where if you have at least 1 Grit, you reduce the misfire chance by 1 (minimum 1), etc. This would offset those alchemical/metal cartridges at a level where he could afford to use them constantly.
Lightning Reload: I like that this was changed to still give a nice effect, even though reloading is less of an issue. The reloading without provoking pushes this Deed into being an actual boon instead of it's previous classification of "necessary".
Evasive: Late in the game, but a nice effect overall. This question will come up though: does this mean you ONLY get the benefit of not being flanked? Or do you get the Uncanny Dodge "not flatfooted" as well?
Menacing Shot: This ability works well, and is mechanically/thematically sound.
Slinger's Luck: Sounds nifty, and I like that it has the "can't be reduced by Grit reducing effects" clause, because I could see this getting out of hand.
I assume this can be used after knowing the result of the roll, since it doesn't mention anything about that (but you do have to take the next roll, even if lower)?
Cheat Death: Neat effect, and a reason to go to 0 Grit in the day (and lose access to all those nice "if you have 1 Grit" abilities). It also gives reason for Signature Deed and True Grit bringing some down to 0.
Death's Shot: Nice. Limited, in a fashion (although True Grit or Signature Deed on this one could be crazy). As a 19th level ability, it competes against the Rogue and Ranger end cap stuff.
Stunning Shot: Nice, death on a critical, or automatic stun on a normal hit. Some good options at the end levels, especially when you consider they are free for "0 grit" use.
Bonus Feats
This should be fine, especially with more weapons to expand the Gunslinger's repertoire (and some Deeds precluding the need for some feat chains, like Vital Strike).
The only question being, are they still a Fighter alternate class, and can they get Weapon Specialization, etc.
Gun Training
Once again, I'd prefer a "signature weapon" style of effect, or at least reducing the misfire chance.
Then again, I don't know if I'd even use misfiring at all in my own campaigns. So really, as a "thing for those that like misfires" I guess it does it's job.
I don't think I can stress enough the "Signature Weapon" idea here, as it would give some much needed customization for this class as well.
True Grit
As an end cap ability, it doesn't seem like much, until you look at the real end cap stuff at 19th level, and how this affects them. Death attacks and Stunning attack galore? That's worthy of 20th level, I'd say.
Feats
Overall, I like that the feats give the option to use handguns at least somewhat effectively, even if you aren't a Gunslinger.
Gunslingin' Feats:
Amateur Gunslinger, Deft Shootist Deed, Extra Grit, Signature Deed: These all work fine as they are (doesn't really seem like much changed).
Gunsmithing: This feels like the Master Alchemist feat, in that it's a good compromise between keeping the actual guns and ammo in check across the "world", but allows an individual to excel at it so that it's not quite as cost and time prohibitive.
Secret Stash Deed: Nice change here, although as has already been mentioned, the "in combat" thing can be nebulous and odd. I'd say that it might work out better to simply have it be at a time where you need the ammo (ie, you were using it right away). Say, if you wanted to use Blast Lock, etc.
It's quite a bit of metagaming, but I'd treat it similar to the Well-Prepared halfling only feat. It feels very Blood Opera style of a feat... you are simply the "guy who always has ammo" (especially if you have this as a Signature Deed).
Leaping Shot, Ricochet Shot: Nothing wrong with them in particular, but the wording feels convoluted, and I had to read them a couple times to get the full meaning.
No Name: So, it's "not a spell, it's extraordinary", but they get "a Will save to recognize it as an illusion" if they interact with it? Will saves usually don't apply to extraordinary effects...
Since it mentions nothing about what stat and level that applies for this save, do we just rightfully ignore that part of the spell? I assume the caster level implies how long the disguise can last.
As for how this thematically works, I'd read a number of books that involved non-magical forms of doing this, the most recent being Artemis Entreri assuming disguises as he sneaks out of town (looking fatter and shorter at one point, and tall and lanky in another, etc). I have no beef with the theme, just would need clarification on how it works.
.
End Thoughts
Overall, I think this is far more playable as a class, and guns are far more workable as a weapon. The Gunsmithing feat and the alternative game options really opens this up to being a much more easily used system.
There are still some questions and quirks, but I can see running a game with this class now.
I kind of struggled while reading through the Gunslinger class at first, because I approached it with all my preconceptions about how guns should work, etc.
Now that I've taken a step back and discarded my own personal notions to see what you guys are trying to do with the class, I think I can see how this works.
As a preface, I will state that I really, really, REALLY wished guns were handled differently in Golarion, advanced maybe a step or two forward in technological development, but I understand what's going on.
The "era" for the type of firearms system in place is more along the lines of swashbuckler, buccaneer, "loaded pistol in my belt with saber in hand and dagger in teeth" style of setting.
I was looking for Iron Kingdoms style of guns (alchemical cartridge style of loading, so revolvers, etc). This would have quite a dominating effect on the background of the setting though (see Iron Kingdoms!) so I can see why it's been toned back.
This doesn't mean I won't touch on firearms, but I'll try to keep it "in theme".
Anyways... on to the nitty "gritty" (ahahaha! aaahhhh.... ... I'm sorry).
.
First, I'm going to list the main issues I ran into when checking out this class.
1. Guns are designed to NOT be competitive to the bow, for thematic reasons. This means they have a number of things built in to make their use "prohibitive".
Problem:The Gunslinger class is built around using this prohibitive weapon. Resolution:Build into the class the ability to overcome these problems on a consistent basis.
5% chance per attack to self inflict what amounts to being disarmed is death to this class. Yes, you gave him the "quick clear" ability. It uses a limited resource, and still takes a round away from the Gunslinger to "quickly" fix this. For being the only thing this class is really about, this is still too punitive.
Reliable is an okay magical enhancement, for non Gunslingers (reduces to minimum 1). Steadfast is up against things like Brilliant Energy, or Dancing. A weapon of Speed is cheaper than "Steadfast". Honestly... it's too much for a class that needs reliability.
I can understand "everyone else" having a crappy time with guns. The Gunslinger should be allowed to be good with a gun (he's pretty much got nothing else!). Steadfast is a fine price for non-Gunslingers, I guess (no chance of failure on a weapon that can bypass armor in certain situations; for a non-Gunslinger that's good comparison to Brilliant Energy), so I would be okay with it if the Gunslinger didn't need it.
I can't drive this home enough. Misfires for normal gun use = okay. Misfires for a class who's only real point is using them = unacceptable. Use per day patches and halved penalties are insufficient.
Touch Attacks within 20' are not enough to warrant this. A Fighter archer build can hit reliably without touch attacks anyways, and do ridiculous attacks per round, add Strength damage, and have minimal hand-waivable costs involved with ammunition... with NO chance of his bowstring coming undone.
2. Guns are designed to be slow to reload. This is also a thematic choice, it seems.
Problem:The Gunslinger class is built around using a weapon that limits full attacks, reducing damage output. Resolution:Let the Gunslinger have a built in method of a full attack with the weapon, or make a single shot per round be competitive in some way.
I like the latter option, since it keeps with the theme involved with these weapons. Maybe something like automatic access to the Vital Strike feat tree with firearms as he qualifies for them, or some similar effect.
Oh, and honestly... give the Gunslinger the Rapid Reload feat for all firearms. It's ridiculous to assume a Gunslinger is going to NOT want this feat for some reason... and since it's "pick a single type of weapon" style of feat, it's waaay too restrictive for a class that's supposed to be "all about guns".
I mean... I can't think of a single Gunslinger type that would be based around slow loading of the weapon.
.
Next, I'm going to break down the class' individual features.
Name, Role, Alignment, HD/BAB: These are all good. Using the Fighter as a base is a good idea I think, as ultimately he's a straight up combatant. When I think of a "Gunslinger" I think of John Wayne or Clint Eastwood in one of their roles. Hardier than a rogue, and certainly not a guy mixing chemicals to make bangsticks.
I like the Role description, but I'm going to warn you now... I'm going to hold you to it!
Saves (and the Brave and Tough ability): I have to sneak the Brave and Tough ability in out of order because it directly ties to Saves.
First of all, there's a typo: 19th and 20th levels have +12 and +13 for Reflex saves respectively. I really doubt this was intentional, and likely somebody manually typed in the saves column and did what I tend to do too when doing that... start counting up each line, wups!
The other problem is that the "Tough" part of the ability isn't restricted to a "type" of Fortitude save, so it really has no business being there. It simply makes the "true" Fortitude save confusing to track: +0, +1, +2, +2, +2, +4, +4, +4, +5, +6, +6, +7, +7, +8, +9, +9, +9, +11, +11, +11. Honestly, it's almost a "high save" after 5th level anyways, so just give them the high Fortitude save, I guess.
Or, since I don't think Gunslingers need the Fortitude save that bad (or two high saves), perhaps limiting it to a short list like Bravery does to Will Saves. I think something like: Coup de Grace checks, checks for taking non lethal damage (such as from hot or cold environments), and to avoid effects that cause the exhausted and fatigued conditions.
Skills: Fairly good. I do think that not having Perception is a bad idea. Classes with core mechanics based on a stat, should have skills that use that stat. And "seeing" your target just screams Perception, especially if you want to fill the "masters of distant death, picking off enemies from afar with their strange and wondrous weapons" role (your words guys, not mine! I warned you!).
So add Perception, and that should be great!
Proficiencies: The weapons are fine, honestly. He's still a Fighter after all, so just because he's good at guns doesn't mean he shouldn't have a decent backup melee weapon when things go south.
Armor proficiencies are fine, however there's a problem I can see in the fairly near future: the best max Dex medium armor provides is 4. Due to getting a serious advantage for being really close (within a single move mostly), this guy is going to be at risk of melee a lot. A simple ability, let's call it "Light Armor Training" that gives better movement in medium armor, and a scaling higher Dex bonus to light and medium armor would keep the guy competitive (not everything can be based on Grit, seriously).
Firearm: I understand why this is here. I don't like it, as it smacks of being a patch for what is ultimately a problem with the way guns are implemented (too expensive for what you get). Guns can be exotic without being expensive: a GM can limit their existence without needing to have artificially inflated costs.
What I'd like to see here is something more like a "Signature Weapon" type of ability. You get the chosen weapon for free, yes, but also, the Gunslinger can use that particular weapon without risk of misfire, treated as having the Rapid Reload feat with that weapon, and gains a +2 bonus to CMB and CMD checks that involve the specific weapon. If the weapon is destroyed or abandoned, it takes X time to make another gun as a signature weapon (don't get another free one, but you can find a better gun later and make it your signature weapon). Add any caveats or whatever as necessary.
This gives the ability a reason for being there that isn't reeking of "PATCH", and has good Gunslinger flavor in my opinion.
I think ammo should be reduced in cost too, so it shouldn't have to be part of the ability.
Bonus Feats: No qualms here. Sounds fine, although I'd really like the Grit feats to be combat feats as well, since the Amateur Gunslinger feat is Combat and a standard Fighter could take it... that's more an issue towards the feats than the class though. This class entry doesn't need changing.
Gun Training: This is a neat idea, and opens up some damage for the Gunslinger. However, this is a great opportunity to "fix guns from the Gunslinger's side".
I'd start by giving the Gunslinger the Vital Strike feats automatically when he'd qualify for them, but only for the chosen firearms. This would up his damage and keep him "single shot per round" nicely. Sure, they can jump through the air and fire off two weapons if they are holding them in their hands.. or get some "5 barrel" guns and have a single round of furious shooting, and then spend the next minute reloading them. But ultimately, the bread and butter, every-day-use of gunfire should probably be Vital Strike damage.
I'd also eliminate the misfire chance completely for them as well, while we are at it. This gives Signature Weapon for a single weapon from 1st to 4th level that is reliable for the Gunslinger, and then 5th+ he starts getting whole types of guns that he can shoot reliably.
And now the big one:
Grit, and True Grit: My overall impression is that I like the feel it gives the class. This isn't a "Gun Specialist" class... it's a Gunslinger. Grit makes this class feel like you are supposed to be a pirate, or swashbuckler, or wanderer who just wants to be left alone, but keeps getting dragged into bad situations, etc. True Grit, in itself, seems fine... although I can see limiting access to certain Deeds.
Having said that.. there are some problems:
Gaining Grit: First of all, HD is a bad way to track "creature power". Some creatures (often animals, etc) can have very high HD for their CRs. A better mechanic would be to simply use CR directly, as it's a direct indication of how strong a creature is anyways. Examples of my point: A Cyclops is a CR 5 encounter, but at 10HD it's valid for up to 20th level Gunslingers.
The second problem is "Daring Act". The same daring act (say, swinging from a chandelier to grab a banister and vault up) is always an amazing act. Because a Gunslinger happens to put a few too many points into Acrobatics... he now loses the chance to get Grit from it? Did it suddenly become less amazing? No... but now it's not worth anything because he can do it a little too reliably?
I understand why it's being done (the Gunslinger has to risk something to get this), but please understand why this is bad: it rewards limiting your character and "gaming" the system and GM. The player finds a "sweet spot" of skill checks, and then never increases his ability so he can always get Grit back in this way.
The very fact that it's left mostly up to the GM makes it rife for player/GM conflict.
I think a better way to do this would be to make the Gunslinger take an opportunity cost to gain Grit back. Something like:
Flourish: Spend a longer time than necessary to make an attack (1 round action), or when making a Coup de Grace, etc, and you regain 1 grit point if it's a success.
Unflinching and Unhurried: Spend the first round of combat glaring at your enemies in smoldering anger, taking no action and only moving up to half your speed. If you are not hit by the 2nd round of combat, you regain 1 grit point.
... Stuff like this.
Deeds: For the most part, they are pretty good. A few comments:
- I think Quick Clear and Expert Loading should be tossed in favor of better, more reliable forms of eliminating the effects of misfires.
- Covering Shot and Startling Shot should probably be more clearly defined (is it mind affecting? I doubt a bullet is physically entangling the target... should mindless creatures be affected by it, or be startled?).
- Blast Lock seems like it's recreating the wheel, when it could be based on the rules already in place for damaging objects, etc.
.
In the end, I like the feel of the class. It's about "tough luck". I feel every character that takes levels in gunslinger would morph into looking like this. Even the women. ;)
There are some major hurdles to overcome that I simply cannot see being ironed out when put to action... I know this is theorycraft, but I honestly believe the gun rules as they exist in Pathfinder require much more than what the Gunslinger gets to make the class anything other than an exercise in disappointment.
And I really want to be able to enjoy playing this class...
I have not had a chance to playtest the Magus directly (probably won't have a chance before the short window is up), however I have playtested and experienced a lot with the other "not-quite-full" melee classes: the bard, the inquisitor, the rogue and the monk.
There are a number of things that become apparent when you compare the classes.
1. All of the 3/4 combat classes have some method of boosting their attack/damage without relying on spell slots. The bard has inspire courage, the inquisitor has judgments, the rogue deals wicked damage in the right situation all day long, and the monk counts as full BAB when "doing his thing."
The Magus, on the other hand, has a penalty to his attacks until fairly high level. Even then, he gets no bonuses, without going into burning through his spell slots.
2. All the 3/4 combat classes have class features that remain level appropriate throughout the game. The bard and inquisitor, despite having 6 spell levels, have level appropriate spells. The rogue's skills are always level appropriate, and the monk has all combat maneuvers level appropriate along with special abilities with properly scaling DCs (depending on your MAD build).
On the flipside, the Magus has 6 spell levels that remain behind the curve for their level. Between spells being low level for the content they face, and DCs being on the low side (maxing 6th level and INT being MAD), his spellcasting is not level appropriate.
3. While many of the classes can have MAD requirements, they aren't critical secondary stats. The bard and inquisitor can ignore DC-based spells to drop lower on their casting stat, and focus more on physical stats. The rogue does well with a high mental stat (depending on skill choices), but only needs a high stat for very specific builds. The monk may be the only one in the same situation as the Magus, although if he does not intend to go gung ho on the abilities and stunning, he can afford not to have a stellar Wisdom score (or instead he can forgo Dex to be a pure Strength/Wisdom brute).
With the magus, we see primary class features requiring the class to be in melee while spellcasting, and no advanced spell access, so a high Int is almost necessary to pull off one-half of the class' features. But then he's also forced into being good at melee, so we are looking at needing a good Strength score and Con score as well. Lastly, unless you don't play the Magus from 1st level, AC will be an issue (short of burning most of your spell slots on keeping up the defenses), so a decent Dex feels necessary too.
That's too many "necessary" ability scores.
____
I'm not going to just post a list of things to whine about without giving constructive thoughts, so here's how I think things can be addressed:
1. The best idea I've seen so far for bringing up the attack ability is to have Spell Combat similar to the Monk mechanic for flurry of blows. This gives iteratives faster, and has only a minor penalty (-2) that starts to go away (at least compared to his 3/4 BAB).
This means his attacks are still medium for most combat things (AoO, charge, move + attack, etc), but when he's in his element (interweaving attacking and spellcasting) he starts to excel.
2. Something else to consider is that this class is very likely going to be self-buffing to remain competent in combat. Unlike the bard and inquisitor, his buffing is through spells, so he's stuck acting like a fullcaster trying to buff up.
To counteract this, how about a mechanic for picking a spell (and possibly at later levels, a suite of spells), that have a range of personal or creature touched, that can be brought up as a move action and maintained as a free action per round, for a limited number of rounds per day (similar to bardic music). Spells with duration only, of course (no True Strke).
This is over and above the spell slots, and you prepare the spell to bring up this way when you prepare spells normally (along with arcane weapon).
Or, simply bring back the "hour/level" durations, letting the Magus be buffed well ahead of combat, instead of spending the first couple rounds feeling like a melee-cleric.
3. Give early access to some spells that are the point of the class (probably blasting and self buffing).
While on this subject, don't require spell slots to fuel abilities. The class already is missing 3 spell levels (15+ spell slots, not counting high casting stat). Burning spell slots is something full spellcasters do because they have more spell slots than they need, and some of those spells are so far behind in level appropriateness, burning the slot for a level appropriate effect is better. The magus has abilities that are all about casting spells while doing things, meaning he needs all the slots he can get.
This is, of course, unless you intend to change him to a 3/4 BAB + 9 spell level class, which I'm getting the feeling won't happen.
4. On the idea of spells, you can possibly give a bonus to DCs and attack rolls on specific spells, such as touch spells and rays, or all evocation spells, etc.
This would shore up the issue of relying on lower level spells and a MAD stat for boosting DCs. Having a +5 to touch spell DCs (for example) would make even low level spells feel like 9th level spells when facing higher level content.
5. Unless the Magus is going to get some kind of limited free buffing ability to his combat, Spell Strike should be changed to grant bonus damage whenever you channel a touch spell through it.
It really should allow the weapon attack at the time you cast the spell (essentially, you cast the spell through the weapon to start, instead of waiting a round to get the attack in), regardless of what you do.
However, if you are burning spell slots to get this effect, and you are getting no bonus to attacking (like the bard, inquisitor and monk can), then he should be getting +1d6/2 levels extra damage on such an attack, similar to the rogue.
No bonus to attack = higher damage in a limited situation... it's worked for quite a while now.
This would likely be the easiest fix. Do this one, plus fix the chances to pull off Spell Completion and throw in a few early access spells and we'll have a comparably good 3/4 melee fighter.
____
I feel the above ideas would help keep the class in line with other medium combat classes, without needing to go into full BAB or full Spellcasting (in other words, keeping with the theme and intent behind the class).
Overall, I love the mechanical ideas presented in the class, but I feel that unless something is given to boost the class.. he's going to feel like second-fiddle to other 3/4 melee classes, and will feel like playing a gimped full caster when it comes to magic (self buffing for rounds before combat, etc).
I hate doing this, but time to bump this back up for more visibility.
Now that more people are getting their hands on the APG, and seeing the Monk of the Empty Hand...
Personally, I like the Legolas scene, and feel it should be something that can be replicated in the game.
Nice thing is that it seems like you'd be able to do all this without the feats, just with penalties (and lower damage). Then again, being high level and fighting CR 1 stock Orcs is when you can get off the wall, because your stats let you afford it.
Legolas had favored enemy orc, and a +1 Orc bane arrow. Even with the -4 penalty, that could be a one-shot melee stab.
If you have something on hand.. would you ever be considered without a weapon to threaten in combat, as long as you are willing to take the non-proficiency penalty?
In case anyone is interested, or looking for Sphinx conversions...
Here's what I created:
I picked option 2, and kept things within the original CR instead of trying to carry over the relative differences in stats from 3e to Pathfinder.
CRIOSPHINX N Large magical beast; CR 7
Init +4; Senses darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision; Perception +16
AC 20, touch 9, flat-footed 20 (+11 natural, -1 size)
hp 85 (9d10+36)
Fort +11, Ref +7, Will +6
Speed 30 ft. (6 squares), fly 60 ft. (poor, 12 squares)
Melee gore +14 (1d8+6) and 2 claws +14 (1d8+6, 19-20)
Atk Options pounce, rake (2 claws, +14, 1d8+6, 19-20)
Base Atk +9; CMB +19; CMD 29 (33 vs trip)
Str 22, Dex 11, Con 18, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 11
Feats Hover, Improved Critical (claw), Improved Initiative, Iron Will, Skill Focus (Perception)
SkillsFly -6, Perception +16, Stealth +12
.
HIERACOSPHINX CE Large magical beast; CR 5
Init +6; Senses darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision; Perception +11
AC 20, touch 11, flat-footed 18 (+2 Dex, +9 natural, -1 size)
hp 57 (6d10+24)
Fort +9, Ref +7, Will +4
Speed 30 ft. (6 squares), fly 90 ft. (poor, 18 squares)
Melee bite +9 (1d8+4) and 2 claws +10 (1d6+4)
Atk Options pounce, rake (2 claws, +10, 1d6+4)
Base Atk +6; CMB +11; CMD 23 (27 vs trip)
Str 18, Dex 15, Con 18, Int 6, Wis 15, Cha 11
Feats Hover, Improved Initiative, Weapon Focus (claws)
SkillsFly -4, Perception +11
.
The damage might be slightly on the high side, however they have no other special abilities (no magic, etc), and their major advantage (flying = keep out of reach) means losing that extra damage... sort of a non-synergistic effect. I feel that makes it fit okay for the CR.
They make good sudden strikers though. They lack the ambush tactics of the dire lion (stealth and perception through the roof for the CR), but the dive/strike option can mean almost double the average damage expected for the CR for that first round of combat.
Please respond if you like it, see anything that doesn't fit right, or have any better ideas for this kind of conversion!
I didn't run into any real hitches with the class while running the encounter.
When setting up the encounter though, there were a couple wrinkles that I ran into.
- I decided against using Cackle (although I did have them cackling throughout combat, heh). The only reason I did so though was because I had no idea how it applied to the Ward Hex... it just didn't really make sense.
So instead of making a DM call that might have been off the mark, I avoided the ability.
This could use some clarification.
- How the Evil Eye Hex would interact with the undead cohort threw me off a little. It didn't seem like it should, but I couldn't find anything saying either way.
- The witch that had spent feats on being focused on enchantments felt weird having her Slumber Hex not being boosted by that. So if she cast sleep spells, they were GREAT DCs... but the class ability sleep effect was kind of weak.
I understand strict rules wording and balance/intention, etc. It felt strange is all...
- The lack of detect animals or plants seemed a little odd. I bent the rules a bit and swapped it out instead of charm animal on the Lizard familiar list for this one encounter.
Not a big deal, and it was more about fitting the encounter (and it ultimately wasn't needed due to the use of clairvoyance).
- When thinking about Coven spells... I ended up using two spells that weren't on the Green Hag Coven spell entry. Now, granted, it says the DM can add whatever spells he finds would be fitting.
When thinking about it from a player perspective, this might need to be addressed so that the player knows what limitations she has with her Coven ability.
As a DM, if I had a set of three players wanting to use Coven, I'd probably come up with a list of spells, or play it on a case by case basis (players ask, I say yes or no).
It just seems like putting a bit of a balancing act in the hands of the DM. Can't think of another class that might do this to this extent.
.
Not a big list of problems, and only the two Hexes were kind of glaring. I think the class otherwise runs very well.
My player has chosen this mystery, and has been using it similar to how a Summon Monster spell might be used (lasts a couple rounds, gives a chance for flanking, a little bonus damage, etc).
The problem is, it's a lot of work statting up a full creature from scratch each level, that's going to be used once a day for 3-4 rounds.
See, a Summon Monster spell points to a fully stated creature entry, and at most requires slapping a celestial or fiendish template (adds a couple things you can remember off the top of your head).
You know it's appropriate for the level you are casting the spell at, because it's based on creatures of a certain CR.
The problem we run into with the wording of the "Raise the Dead" mystery, is that it just says "skeleton" or "zombie". If you really take a good look at those creatures.. they are really just templates. They are supposed to be applied towards another creature, and slap a CR+1 onto it.
I've so far ruled that it's the standard humanoid from the starter stat block (basically a 15 Str and 12 Dex base with modifiers), and then just added HD as per the oracle's level.
The problem is that there are no size increases, no stat increases, no natural armor or weapon increases... no added abilities or special attacks, etc.
I used an excel sheet to quickly stat out 20 levels of a normal skeleton or zombie, and with the advanced and/or bloody/fast templates.
What we end up seeing is that after a few levels, even with the added templates, the damage and AC are ridiculously pathetic (the other stats are mediocre to pathetic, but they at least scale with the HD somewhat).
I mean.. is the 20th level Oracle's skeleton supposed to still be doing Melee: 2 claws (1d4+4)? With an AC of 20?
Or the zombie with Melee: 2 slams (1d6+7) and an AC of 16?
Yes, those are with both templates being added to each.
With saves in the 8-12 range, and an attack roll (not BAB, the total attack roll modifier) of 17-20... what exactly is the role of this thing?
Fast Healing 10 or 40' movement simply do not cover the useless stats these creatures have.
If it's not meant to be used like a summon monster.. then it's kind of misleading. It starts off as being "decent" for that purpose for the first few levels, but then around 5th and up it's practically a wasted action. It's almost guaranteed to get hit by attacks or spells/abilities, and nothing will care about it's attacks anyways (won't even do enough damage to get over some DRs!), so it's what... a few rounds of flanking bonus?
I can't believe that's the only intended usage.
.
Now, I'm not one to complain or criticize without giving some kind of constructive thoughts...
I've thought about simply applying the skeleton or zombie template to the animals in the Summon Monster list... however it results in a fairly large chunk of math reworking.
Perhaps a short list (similar to, but shorter than the Summon Monster list), of creatures you are okay with seeing as appropriate per level of Oracle.
Basically, a list of things that you can apply the skeleton, zombie or bloody/fast/advanced templates to. Starting with Humans and Wolves at the low levels, and dire crocodiles or tyranosaurs at the higher levels.
Alternatively, you could simply write up a stat block from 1 to 20. Give it natural armor, str/dex scores, and natural attack damage that is appropriate for the level.
It would look kind of like the Eidolon stat chart, except that it's even easier since it doesn't have skills, feats or special abilities (other than fast healing or increased speed/slams).
The second one would keep it the most like it is now, and keep it a bit more viable (attack, ac, damage and saves being more in line with what it'll be used for).
Some creature types should be weighted differently when balancing the skills. Nature has a ton of locations and creatures, but they are all fairly repetitive, and the creatures tend to lack any strange or weird-but-deadly abilities that you'd want to run checks for.
On the other hand, while Common has only Humanoid and Goblinoid, in my change with creature types, that covers about anything that has a head, two arms and two legs. Quite the list actually.
I've recently been looking at creating a new Cleric character, and noticed these two oddities.
1. Obscuring Mist shows up no less than 4 times as the 2nd level ability. Nevermind the fact that no other spell repeats itself, it's also on at least three Domains that have roleplaying potential to be chosen together (Air, Water, Weather... Darkness being the 4th one).
I can see the reason why this was likely done: 3.5e's 1st level Domain spell was Obscuring Mist for all four.
However, since we are taking the opportunity to alter the game, it would be nice to prevent overlapping spells, and maybe give Druids more options if they choose to take a Domain over their Companion.
Here's my suggestions for replacement spells:
Air: Featherfall.
Not much else, other than Obscuring Mist, at 1st level that are thematically Air related. While some might say it's too powerful, I'd say not any more than True Strike. And by the time you have enough Feather Falls to save your entire group once per day, Pit Traps shouldn't be a problem.
Darkness: Obscuring Mist.
This is the only Core spell at 1st level that can fit a "prevent seeing" theme. If a 1st level version of Darkness is created out of the fix for the Darkness/Light spells issue, then I'd put it here instead of Obscuring Mist.
See my recent suggestion in the Darkness - What's the point thread.
Water: Bless/Curse Water -or- Grease.
This could be neat. Make your own Holy Hand Grenades. Since it costs 25gp to make one though, having a number of free castings per day might end up being useless (don't have the money, useless spell).
Grease would be a more useable option, and still be quite thematic.
Weather: Enduring Elements.
Yeah, so it lasts for 24 hours already, so by 8th level you'd cover a standard 4 person party. But what about mounts, or hirelings, or cohorts, or animal companions, etc. It's kind of nice for a high level Cleric of Weather to basically allow his whole caravan to ignore the effects of the elements.
Then again... Obscuring Mist would fit better here, and could be put back if Darkness gets it's own 1st level Darkness equivalent.
__________________________________
2. The Magic Domain's 2nd level ability is Detect Magic at will. This would have been a nice addition... back when orisions and cantrips weren't already At Will castings.
This means that the 2nd level ability of the Magic domain, is one extra slot for your orisions. This is supposed to be comparitive to an extra 1 to 10 1st level spells per day? This doesn't sound right.
This doesn't even conform to the original 3.5e 1st level domain spell, Magic Aura. I can see why the change (not entirely useful, having a bunch of castings of Magic Aura... except perhaps the most paranoid of characters), however there are better options available:
Unseen Servant This is a nice utility, universal, "I'm magic" spell. Nothing says magic like a bunch of invisible forces doing all your manual labour for you.
Magic Missile This is so quintessentially "magic", it even has it in the name! If others can have True Strike and Burning Hands, then the Magic Domain isn't going to be overpowered having Magic Missile.
Besides, a 20th level Cleric has better things to do with his actions than cast Magic Missile for 10 rounds straight, so it's hardly an issue of being overpowered.
Cantrip Suite(Detect Magic, Read Magic, Ghost Sound, and Prestidigitation) This would actually be quite neat. It would go a long way to making the cleric seem focused on "magic", maybe even let him pass as a wizard apprentice or some such (at least as a convincing disguise).
The only issue I could see is that it might make the Cleric seem like a better "mage" than a wizard... it's double the cantrips memorized.
Then again.. they have a GOD in their corner, giving it to them. =P
Balance-wise, it's an extra 4 different cantrips instead of up to 10 extra 1st level castings a single spell per day. I'd say it's possibly still underpowered, but that might be more a "utility vs damage" issue, and one I could live with.
If feats are to be designed as things that players can pick up alongside their class abilities to get a bit more differentiating features, and thus are designed to be weaker than class abilities for this very reason (non-scaling, weaker, or simply an expansion of a class feature), then the Fighter needs something extra.
Having your class features based on something inherently capped in power so that they don't outclass other classes class abilities makes it so you basically have a class that's effectively capped to not outclass other classes abilities.
Since the Fighter isn't going to be rewritten to have something different in place of his Bonus Feats, we'll have to fix this from the Feats end of it.
Which means adding more, and beefing up, the Fighter Only Feats.
.
Here are some Fighter Only suggestions:
Expert Combat Training
You have trained in attacking with all combat maneuvers.
Prerequisites: Defensive combat training, fighter level 2nd
Benefit: You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when performing any combat maneuver. In addition, you receive a +4 bonus to checks when performing any combat maneuver.
Improved feats are still important for the fighter as they give an additional +2 atk/def for that maneuver, and allow access to the Greater feat.
This feat is simply here to make it so Fighters may overcome the Defensive training feat, and not need to spend a dozen feats to be good at multiple maneuvers.
Opportunistic Maneuvers
You can create an opening to allow you to perform a combat maneuver.
Prerequisite: Defensive combat training, expert combat training, fighter level 6th
Benefit: Once per round, upon damaging your opponent with a melee attack, you may attempt a combat maneuver as a swift action at a -2 penalty.
Upon reaching 11th fighter level, the penalty is removed and you may make the attempt as an immediate action.
This will make it so that the Fighter will end up using these maneuver more often. Basically, this allows him to make a combat maneuver without having to give up precious damage per round.
Mechanically/thematically, it's obtainable at the same level that you'd start making iterative attacks. The scalability makes this more like a class ability, instead of having to blow a second feat.
Weapon Expertise
Your weapon training expands to a greater list of weapon.
Prerequisites: Weapon training class ability, fighter level 6th
Benefit: Choose a weapon training group that you have already selected as part of your weapon training class feature. Any feat that requires a chosen weapon, can instead apply towards this weapon group.
This applies to previously gained feats, as long as the chosen weapon is found in that weapon group.
Special: You can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects do not stack. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new weapon group.
This makes the Fighter uniquely capable of applying all these other feats towards a larger spectrum of weapons. It's one step towards making the Fighter more about his abilities, than just what weapon he's using.
Before Jason had made his announcement, I had come up with a class ability rule for the Fighter to gain the Craft Arms & Armor feat and using his class levels as caster levels, and ways of bypassing the spell requirements, etc.
Then Jason reveals the following feat:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Master Craftsman
Your superior crafting skills allow you to create simple magic items. Choose one Craft or Profession skill in which you possess at least 5 ranks.
Prerequisites: 5 ranks in any Craft or Profession skill.
Benefit: Ranks in your chosen skill count as your caster level for the purposes of qualifying for the Craft Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats. You can create magic items using these feats, substituting your ranks in the chosen skill for your total caster level. You must use the chosen skill for the check to create the item. The DC to create the item still increases for any necessary spell requirements (see the magic item creation rules in Chapter 15). You cannot use this feat to create any spell-trigger or spell-activation item.
Normal: Only spellcasters can qualify for the Craft Arms and Armor and Craft Wondrous Item feats.
This simultaneously does exactly what I was going to try and do, AND reveals a general mechanic overhaul for crafting magic items (yay!).
So the only thing missing was the following Fighter class ability:
Focused Craftsman
At 1st level, a fighter selects one Craft skill. He gains 1 bonus skill point to place in that Craft skill and an additional skill point every time he gains a level. In addition, a fighter adds 1/2 his level (minimum 1) to all Craft skill checks.
This bypasses the need for giving higher base skillpoints for the Fighter, while maintaining the class as a good choice for non-magical crafting. Besides, it makes sense that the Fighter would be the one making or repairing weapons and armor (as opposed to the Barbarian, Paladin or Ranger, who already have fairly specific themes).
.
My other idea was to give him some bonuses related to the "Engineering" side.
Yeah, basically I took the iconic "Dwarven Fighter" to get ideas on what to give him outside combat.
Engineering Tactics
At 1st level, a fighter adds 1/2 his level (minimum 1) to Knowledge (engineering) and Profession (siege engineer) skills. In addition, he may make Knowledge (engineering) checks untrained.
Upon reaching 3rd level, the fighter may roll a Knowledge (engineering) check against the Break DC to break through walls and doors.
This means a Fighter who puts points into this skill can, at 3rd level, rolls a +7 (plus any Int bonus) towards break DCs.
To put this in perspective: A Fighter with a 13 Int would roll an average of 19 (11+7+1). This is enough to blast through a Locked Good Wooden door more than 50% of the time.
By 9th level, he'll likely have (with a 14 int), a bonus an average roll of 29 (11+16+2). This gives a better than average chance to break through a wizard's Wall of Stone or Ice at those levels, and can attempt to break through a Wall of Iron two level later.
It also means that by 20th level, he's challenging all but the magically reinforced Masonry walls, which is fitting for a nigh-epic Fighter.
At the very least, even a Fighter that doesn't dedicate many (or any) points in the skill, can still roll a check in response to a Collapse or Cave-In situation.
I've been reading some of the Comparison threads that Turin the Mad has been posting, and have become quite interested in the math.
Something Turin said caught my attention:
Turin the Mad wrote:
Now, to be realistic, one should probably factor in chances of missing, criticalling, yadda yadda ... but I'm not a statistician.
Now, I'm not specifically a "statistician", however I became adept at creating damage modals back in my Everquest days when trying to compare weapons in that game (before they had handy numbers all figured out).
So, here's how I'd figure out damage against a given AC, taking into account all factors possible.
(I'm making this in a way so that you can fill in the blanks and then pop numbers into a calculator... maybe I'll make an XML file to do all this.)
Step 1: Average damages
Regular 34 (2d6+27)
Critical 68 (4d6+54)
Step 2: Determine Critical Chances
17-20 = 4 point range = 20%
Step 3: Factor critical odds with average damage
80% of 34 = 27.2
20% of 68 = 13.6
Step 4: Determine chances to hit
35 - 41 = -6 (only miss on a 1), so 95% chance
35 - 36 = -1 (only miss on a 1), so 95% chance
35 - 31 = 4 (miss on 3 or lower), so 85% chance
Iteratives are at 5 point intervals, so 25% lower chance on each iterative once you get a real number below 100%.
26 = 60% chance
Step 5: Determine Critical Confirmation chances
Since you roll a second time at the same bonus, simply multiply the chance to hit, with a second chance to hit (the confirmation).
This is where having confirmation bonuses or automatic confirmations change the odds.
+41 has 95% hit, (.95 x .95), 90.25%
+36 has 95% hit, 90.25%
+31 has 85% hit, (.85 x .85), 72.25%
+26 has 60% hit, (.6 x .6), 36%
Step 6: Apply average damage to the odds
+41 = (95% of 27.2) and (90.25% of 13.6) = 38.114
+36 = same as +41, 38.114
+31 = (85% of 27.2) and (72.25% of 13.6) = 32.946
+26 = (60% of 27.2) and (36% of 13.6) = 21.216
Step 7: Total the damage for one full round
38.114 x 3
32.946
21.216
--------
168.504
or
~168.5 avg dmg
......................
This gets more complicated when adding in damage dice effects (flaming weapon) and even more complicated when you add things that affect criticals (flaming burst weapon + critical confirmation bonuses), however it is all much more manageable once the base rules have been set down.
My Office Excel is on my other computer, but I think I might actually sit down and make a "punch in the numbers and get your final results" xml sheet for this.
I'm interested enough to write it out for myself.
If anyone finds fault in my statistical rundown, let me know and I'll update this accordingly.
Hope this helps folks do some "run the averages" comparisons.
Here's an idea that may streamline spellcasting AND fix multiclass casters.
I noticed that all three of Clerics, Druids and Wizards had the exact same spell progression chart. I'm not sure if this was done intentionally for future Alpha changes or what, but it gave me the following idea:
Make all full spellcasters use the same chart for spell slots per day.
So when you gain a level of any of the caster classes, you gain one "caster level" for spells per day. Think of it as your magical limitations expanding. It doesn't matter if it's from a divine or arcane source, your magical capabilities are increased by one level.
The spells you are capable of knowing or memorizing are then based on your class levels. So a Wizard 5, Cleric 5 will have 10th level caster slots, but know only 3rd level spells in each class. You know more lower level spells, giving up higher level spells in functionality, but keep higher level slots.
Then, give all spellcasters the Heighten Spell feat automatically (or rather, make it a normal function of casting spells). This means a multiclass caster can always use those higher level spells at the higher level power, just with lower level spell options.
Essentially, the strength of the spell is based on the slot being used, not necessarily the spell itself. This is pretty much like changing the spell slot system to work similar to the way Psionics handle Power Points and Manifester levels.
To do this properly though, the Sorcerer would need to have his spell slots changed. This will cause two things to happen.
- Less spells per day
- Faster progression than before
Also, if you multiclass sorcerer with a memorization class, you'd have to decide to leave slots free for Sorcerer spellcasts or not. Spontaneous casting of cures or summonings would work similar (only cleric or druid spells, etc).
To offset the reduction to the base Sorcerer, adding additional spells per day tied specifically to the Bloodlines (similar to spell like abilities granted from Domains and Schools) would be good. This further reinforces Bloodlines as a major feature of the Sorcerer base class, and becomes something they'll lose if they multiclass or prestige out of it.
Backward compatibility would be as retained as the skill system for Alpha 2. We are still using slots, spells still function the same way as before. The only change being a more unified system that makes multiclassing spellcasting as transparent between casters as BAB is for physical classes.
It seems like the main focus for the fighter is that he has a lot of feats for combat options. The thing is, everyone is getting more feats faster. 10 character feats, plus 11 fighter feats ends up being 21 feats total for the Fighter aswell.
Any Fighter focused in a combat style will have extra feats laying around, even with the additional feats in splatbooks and the alpha 2 pdf.
For a different mechanic that uses the excess feats, the Fighter could automatically gain an ability, function, or bonus based on a series of feats he has. This mechanic is in a lot of non-D&D d20 stuff (like a fighting styles type of thing).
Basically you'd set up "Combat Styles" similar to Domains or Magic Schools, where you gain bonuses at set levels, only instead of picking these at first level, as long as you keep getting the prerequisite feats you gain further abilities.
This can also open up valid combat options for normally weak feat combinations (unarmed combat feats, twohanded + twoweapon or ranged, etc).
Since they will be feat intensive, the Fighter would likely be only capable of qualifying for the bonuses from one or two styles.
So something like the following:
All Out Brawl Your continued training in varied combat expertise allows you to use all weapons at your disposal, and to greater effect.
2nd - Two feats - After a successful unarmed strike, you gain a +2 to any combat maneuver you attempt against that target. This bonus only applies to your next attack as long as it's made before the end of your next turn.
6th - Four feats - When making a full attack action with a weapon or shield, make an additional unarmed strike attack at your highest attack bonus. Apply only 1/2 strength damage to this attack.
11th - Six feats - Once per round, if you successfully land two consecutive attacks with two different attack modes (unarmed, shield or weapon), you can make a free combat maneuver against that target. This attack is made at your base attack bonus -3 and does not provoke an Attack of Opportunity (as if you had the Improved feat with an iterative attack).
16th - All feats - As long as you make at least one attack with each attack mode (shield, unarmed and weapon), and strike at least two different targets, you may make a full attack action during the movement of your spring attack. All other restrictions to Spring Attack still apply.
This would be an example of making an assorted set of feats that might not necessarily fit together work for you. Other styles could simply expand upon a certain focus (like the TWF chain, granting additional damage or attack options or bonuses).
There will always be some overlap in feat requirements between these styles, so it's quite possible to build a Fighter than can take advantage of more than one style. Also, you could build your focused Fighter asap, but when you run out of feats you "need" to get, and dabble in a few outside the field, you can open up new avenues of combat styles.
If this is too strong to have all at once, you could go the ToB Stance route, and simply say that you have to be "in that combat stance" to get those benefits, change as a swift action (so once per round, etc) to switch to a different stance.
Overall, I it would add combat functionality to the feat choices made, gives your build more flavor beyond a "focused build" or a random bunch of feats, keeps the versatility concept of the class, and gives something unique for Fighters.
Oh, and I'd add this mechanic to the current alpha 2 fighter's abilities. He needs something on top of the training and masteries to compete.
