Purple Dragon Knight's page

just give this to gunslingers and errata out Touch AC from Inner Sea World Guide:

1pt of shield/armor/natural bypass per gunslinger level for all creatures except undead and constructs, in which case it's 1pt of shield/armor per gunslinger level; I would also extend this against objects for 1pt of hardness per gunslinger level. This is reduced by 2 pts for each increment above the 1st, same amount as attack roll penalties.

My suggestion of granting a static +1/2 BAB bonus on Gun attacks in the first range increment solves all the problems by increasing the chance to hit about the same average amount as targeting touch AC.

on another thread I suggested this, adapted from Brilliant Energy:

1pt of shield/armor/natural bypass per gunslinger level for all creatures except undead and constructs, in which case it's 1pt of shield/armor per gunslinger level; I would also extend this against objects for 1pt of hardness per gunslinger level. This is reduced by 2 pts for each increment above the 1st, same amount as attack roll penalties.

You better do this on the feather part of an arrow, which will stick out of a target.... casting light on a bullet only for it to embed itself in the target's belly fat isn't all that useful. It would light the way for inexperienced clerics though... "Heal the hole that's shining light..."

:)

PS: oh yeah, do we have ruling on post gunshot infections yet? a new disease entry perhaps? :) :) :) I'll take disease-inducing bullets anytime above a Touch AC bullet! :P

(basically, this is leading a lot of DMs to just wave their hands and say "no guns in my game" -- if the gun mechanics would work the same as a regular weapon, there would be less resistance from what I heard so far; sadly, I have come to a decision, last night, that I personally won't allow guns in my game either; to do so with Touch AC is going to lead to too many problems as part of my DM prep work - AC 8 iron golems anyone? - and I don't wanna deal with that; to do so without Touch AC may require too many fixes, and consensus from players, etc., and not all my players care about rules balance or have the patience for complicated rules).

Touch AC is already in print via the Inner Sea World Guide... the only hope at this point is that it gets revised in an Errata or during the next printing. Sadly, however, I believe Paizo staff have confirmed that gun Touch AC is here to stay... :(

who knows....

But why be aquaman when you can be chuck norris?

Because of this.

The kind of info he wants is already being published in the Companion each month. For instance, the Inner Sea companion has three fighter archetypes: Aldori Swordlord, Taldoran Duelist, and Qadiran Dervish.

Agreed. There's little benefit to extend gun training to other types of gun. It's like a fighter wasting three weapon specialization feats to three different weapons. Switch hitters may want to specialize in both a melee and ranged weapon, but specializing in three different ranged weapons??? (it's a redundant ability - people will have to make feats decision if they go musket vs. pistol, so the chances that they will actually start shooting pistols if they're built for muskets is slim to none)

Stephen, Dirlaise has a few good points... couldn't UC include guidelines on "Craft: Gunsmithing" (with Craft DCs for regular and MW firearms, and craft mechanics similar to existing ones, i.e. 1/3 of the price not half?)

Gunsmithing feat could be turned into a feat similar to a *combined* "master craftsman" and "craft arms and armor" feat (i.e. allows the feat user to craft magic guns even if he does not have spellcaster levels, using his ranks in Craft: Gunsmithing instead of caster levels. You can even). You can even have a short blurb under the magic item section that magical firearms can be created by non-spellcasters that both have "master craftsman" and "craft arms and armor" feats OR non-spellcasters that have the Gunsmithing feat. Of course, spellcasters with "craft magic arms and armor" can just craft magic guns as they do any other kind of weapons.

Then, finally, the Gunsmith gunslinger ability could, for example, read like this: (the added text follows the format of the rogue's trapfinding ability)

Gunsmith: At 1st level, a gunslinger gains one of the
following firearms of her choice: blunderbuss, musket,
or pistol. Her starting weapon is battered, and only she
knows how to use it properly. All other creatures treat her
gun as if it had the broken condition. If it already has
the broken condition, it does not work at all for others.
This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth
4d10 gold pieces when sold).
In addition, a gunslinger adds 1/2 her level to Craft: Gunsmithing
skill checks (minimum +1). The gunslinger also gains
Gunsmithing as a bonus feat.
Finally, a gunslinger gains the following benefits when using
Craft gunsmithing:
If you have access to a gunsmith kit, you can
create and restore firearms, craft bullets, and mix black
powder for all types of firearms.
Crafting Firearms: You can craft any early firearm for a
cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm
at an accelerated rate instead of the usual one third price
described in the PRPG Craft rules. Crafting a firearm in
this way takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of the firearm’s
price (minimum 1 day).
Crafting Ammunition: You can craft bullets, pellets, and
black powder for a cost in raw materials equal to 10% of
the price. If you have at least 1 rank in Craft (alchemy), you
can craft alchemical cartridges at an accelerated rate instead
of the usual one third price described in the PRPG Craft rules
for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the
cartridge. At your GM’s
discretion, you can craft metal cartridges for a cost in raw
materials equal to half the cost of the cartridge. Crafting
bullets, black powder, or cartridges takes 1 day of work for
every 1,000 gp of ammunition (minimum 1 day).
Restoring a Broken Firearm: Each day, with an hour’s worth
of work, you can use Craft gunsmithing to repair a single firearm
with the broken condition. You can take time during a rest
to restore a broken firearm with this feat.

Advanced Firearms are not available in Golarion.

Thank you!

Andrew R wrote:

I just find it funny that with all of the really bad stuff that can happen in most games a stable traditional family get so many offended and crying........

Eh, some of us have had bad encounters with people who hold extremely abusive/offensive views towards women, religions, nationalities, etc etc, and even though I personally find Erastil frustrating, but not overtly offensive, unfortunately the two ladies I play with find him teeth-grindingly irritating to the point their characters are actively anti-Erastil.

and that's fine... they can play CG feminist worshippers of Desna if they want. That would make for fine roleplay.

I wonder if this will be Natalie Portman's "Pricess leia slave bikini costume" that will haunt her for the rest of career like Carrie Fisher?

It will not. Didn't you see the movie Closer, where she plays a stripper? if not, you should... yes.... you SHOULD.

And here's the reason why Paizo made Erastil the way he is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMhg1cbvfD4&NR=1

Erastil is an old, slow god:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=da0eaiZ0CKw&NR=1

More Erastilian logic on women here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y0rhuKmC0Cw&NR=1

Freehold DM wrote:

Xuttah wrote:

I don't picture Old Deadeye as being intentionally chauvanistic. He's just a grumpy old farmer who thinks thinks should be done a certain way in order for simple people to live simple lives. He's Archie Bunker with a longbow. Got it, Meathead?

Great. Now I'm not going to be able to get this out of my head. Thanks man, you just gave me a GREAT idea for my next Kingmaker game!!!!

I live to serve.

Erastil **IS** Archie Bunker, as proven here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CLjNJI54GMM

Why else do you think Erastil wants every farmer to own a longbow? If every farmer owns a longbow, the bandits won't dare attack them! :)

It's a CONSPIRACY-CY!!

My stance as a GM, when I read emerging guns, is that Golarion is a pepperbox, pistol and musket setting. "Rare and wondrous" to me means a showcase in a museum OR very experimental (i.e. misfire if you roll a natural 19 or less), and thus not accessible to PCs.

PS: could someone please confirm that the emerging guns sidebar reference to Craft Firearms feat is in fact the Gunsmithing feat? Cheers!

light shield or buckler if you want to cast spells as a cleric, yeah: (switch weapon from main hand to shield hand, cast spell with main hand, switch back weapon to main hand - switching a weapon from one hand to another is a free action, and I've played under DMs that allowed people to hold a dagger in their teeth, and switch that to a hand or back to their teeth as a free action! LOL!)

heavy shield and cast is a no-no, unless you allow the popular lanyard weapon cord house rule... :)

I posted this on another thread but no one is commenting... let me know what you guys think.

1. As per PRPG Table 7-12 (p. 175), a projectile weapon has hardness 5 and 5 hit points (they probably made that rule thinking about a longbow); the final version of UC should specify how many hit points a one handed firearm has (pistol) and a two-handed firearm (musket). My thoughts are that since the main working part of the gun is metal, pistols should be hardness 10 and 10 hit points, as per a light metal hafted weapon, and muskets should be hardness 10 and 20 hit points, as per a one-handed metal hafted weapon.

2. Now, about your proposed rule on misfire weapon damage (i.e. "If a weapon gains the broken condition from an effect, it takes damage equal to half its hit points +1.") Instead of half its hit points +1, I recommend you use a fixed number equal to the weapon's base hit points +1. For instance, using my two proposed hit point values above, a misfire would then cause 6 points of damage to a pistol and 11 damage to a musket. Why a fixed number you say? Answer: to provide a tangible advantage to those carrying a +5 musket instead of a +1 holy axiomatic musket... They have the same gp value, but the former has 70 hit points and the latter has 30 hit points. Thus, it makes no sense that the guy who invests in the super hard +5 musket deals 36 points of damage to his weapon on a misfire while the other guy only deals 16 points. By making it a fixed amount, say 11 points for a musket, the guy with a +5 musket can thus misfire 3 times without gaining the broken condition (11 x 3 = 33 points, not enough to reduce it under 35; on the fourth misfire, his weapon has taken 44 hp (70 - 44 = 26 hp) and now gains the broken condition).

3. In light of my suggestions in paragraph 2, above, I also propose that Quick Clear restores a non-fixed amount of Quick Clear damage equal to all the misfire damage taken thus far (i.e. you're basically cleaning/clearing any residue preventing the gun to operate properly, and that takes about the same time all the time regardless of the amount of crap in the barrel...) Thus, a guy with a +5 musket is rewarded in the sense that he can misfire 6 times (11 x 6 = 66) before he can worry about using Quick Clear. This improves Grit economy and provides incentive to invest in a +5 weapon instead of the usual +1 something something something type of weapon... it also gives you a weapon that has 70 hp, so if someone wants to sunder your gun it's a bit harder (i.e. the same reason that a swordsman would like a +5 sword over a +1 s something something something sword...)

(for the record, I didn't eat a pickle for this one but I just came back from the Chinese buffet... he he he... Chinese buffet then a discussion on misfires / gunpowder... coincidence?? O_O )

Absolutely! I get your question, and the gun becomes the best option for any non-warrior classes at high levels (wizards, sorcerers, bards, rogues, clerics, and anything else without a full bab progression should have a gun at levels 12+)

e.g. Wizard or cleric and you're facing an iron golem AC 28 and your allies are already fully buffed; since the golem is mostly immune to most of your spells, just shoot him against his Touch AC of 8... at least you're doing 1d12 per round as you can't possibly miss Touch AC 8....

:)

Abraham spalding wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

But say my firearm is sundered (but not destroyed) for 5 damage and then I misfire (putting it to half -5 hp). I then use quick clear. Is it not at full hp, or full hp -5?

It says your firearm is repaired of the broken condition and stephen said that means it receives its hit points back -- common sense would tell me it should be full hp -5 -- however the rules as they currently stand do not support that position well.

There are two ways for an item to gain the broken condition. One is for the weapon to take damage from an attack or attacks, and that damage is in excess of half the weapon's hit points. The other is for the weapon to gain that condition from some effect. Both firearms and the fragile weapons (currently found in the dogslicer, and more weapons with this condition make their appearance in Ultimate Combat) include effects that grant the broken condition.

If a weapon gains the broken condition from an effect, it takes damage equal to half its hit points +1. This damage is repaired either by something that addresses the effect that granted the weapon the broken condition (like quick clear in the case of firearm misfires) or by the normal method for recovering item hit points (detailed in the broken condition description). When an effect that grants the broken condition is removed, the weapon regains the hit points it lost when the broken condition was applied.

Damage done by an attack against the weapon cannot be repaired by an effect that removes the broken condition.

So, let’s say (for the sake of argument) that a gun has 6 hit points. It misfires, gaining the broken condition. It’s sundered taking 1 point of damage. The gun now has 1 hit point, with 4 damage gained from the broken condition, and 1 gained from the sunder. It can use quick clear to regain 4 damage, but it must use another method to repair the other hit point.

The next round, that same gun is sundered again, this time taking 3 hit...

Stephen, there's a few problems with this:

1. As per PRPG Table 7-12 (p. 175), a projectile weapon has hardness 5 and 5 hit points (they probably made that rule thinking about a longbow); the final version of UC should specify how many hit points a one handed firearm has (pistol) and a two-handed firearm (musket). My thoughts are that since the main working part of the gun is metal, pistols should be hardness 10 and 10 hit points, as per a light metal hafted weapon, and muskets should be hardness 10 and 20 hit points, as per a one-handed metal hafted weapon.

2. Now, about your proposed rule on misfire weapon damage (i.e. "If a weapon gains the broken condition from an effect, it takes damage equal to half its hit points +1.") Instead of half its hit points +1, I recommend you use a fixed number equal to the weapon's base hit points +1. For instance, using my two proposed hit point values above, a misfire would then cause 6 points of damage to a pistol and 11 damage to a musket. Why a fixed number you say? Answer: to provide a tangible advantage to those carrying a +5 musket instead of a +1 holy axiomatic musket... They have the same gp value, but the former has 70 hit points and the latter has 30 hit points. Thus, it makes no sense that the guy who invests in the super hard +5 musket deals 36 points of damage to his weapon on a misfire while the other guy only deals 16 points. By making it a fixed amount, say 11 points for a musket, the guy with a +5 musket can thus misfire 3 times without gaining the broken condition (11 x 3 = 33 points, not enough to reduce it under 35; on the fourth misfire, his weapon has taken 44 hp (70 - 44 = 26 hp) and now gains the broken condition).

3. In light of my suggestions in paragraph 2, above, I also propose that Quick Clear restores a non-fixed amount of Quick Clear damage equal to all the misfire damage taken thus far (i.e. you're basically cleaning/clearing any residue preventing the gun to operate properly, and that takes about the same time all the time regardless of the amount of crap in the barrel...) Thus, a guy with a +5 musket is rewarded in the sense that he can misfire 6 times (11 x 6 = 66) before he can worry about using Quick Clear. This improves Grit economy and provides incentive to invest in a +5 weapon instead of the usual +1 something something something type of weapon... it also gives you a weapon that has 70 hp, so if someone wants to sunder your gun it's a bit harder (i.e. the same reason that a swordsman would like a +5 sword over a +1 s something something something sword...)

(for the record, I didn't eat a pickle for this one but I just came back from the Chinese buffet... he he he... Chinese buffet then a discussion on misfires / gunpowder... coincidence?? O_O )

at least your library accept book donations... I went to give a bunch of (brand new) books to my local library and they said "we don't take donations"

I don't get it...

You can no more deliberately target mirror images with an attack (or attacks) than you can deliberately target mage armor with an attack.

exacto-mundo

Thanks for the free book Paizo. That was a really nice touch.

it's hilarious to think that an invisible creature gets a 50% chance to avoid damage against a 15-foot cone shotgun blast...

The scatter attacks everything in the cone. It's more powerful than anything ever written in a non-spellcaster oriented book. -4 to hit? are you kidding? vs Touch AC as well? lol

At 11th level a gunslinger is at about +22 to hit with a good Dex and a +3 weapon... minus 4... still at +18... vs. Touch AC... which is 8 for an iron golem... so a room filled with iron golems or dragons will be decimated by a scatter shooter in no time.

Let's quote the wording for reference:

Scatter Special Quality: A weapon
with the scatter special quality
can shoot two different types of
ammunition. It can f ire normal
bullets that target one creature, or it
can make a scattering shot, attacking
all creatures within a cone. When it
attacks all creatures within a cone, it
makes one attack per creature within
in the cone, and each attack takes a –2
penalty. If any of the attacks threaten
a critical, confirm the critical for that
creature alone. If a scatter weapon
explodes on a misfire, it deals triple its
damage to all creatures within the misfire radius.

So yes, the wizards can't count on their mirror images against this guy anymore. That's the only thing that prevented my 17th level paladin to make wizard chow in 2 rounds, in the last Chapter of SD... it's a pain for non-spellcaster to depend on True Seeing and not all parties have casters that carry that spell, so mirror image was still a big pain in my paladin's behind.

Now, a gunslinger can not only touch AC, but touch AC EVERYONE in a 15 foot cone.

Even if there's a ruling that "one attack per creature" means "not on mirror images", it's still crazy broken on large groups of creatures.

So, what about swarms now? is this the swarm buster, or are swarms with fine creatures immune to shotgun blasts now?

i've had my psp 3000 since December and it's awesome. I have 5 RPGs purchased; I just finished Crisis Core and that lasted me two months at 15 hours a week (yeah, I have a 3 hour a day train commute...)

sigh.... another problem.....

Anyways, between my various moanings I have proposed a workaround in this thread, summarized here:

1pt of shield/armor/natural bypass per gunslinger level for all creatures except undead and constructs, in which case it's 1pt of shield/armor per gunslinger level; I would also extend this against objects for 1pt of hardness per gunslinger level. This is reduced by 2 pts for each increment above the 1st, same amount as attack roll penalties.

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:

Alorha wrote:

Wands of magic missile, anyone? This is an awful strategy.

Shield spell, anyone? SR anyone? Invisibility, anyone? Standard action or quicken spell feat, anyone? Avg 18 damage at level 9, anyone?

Anytime you use something as basic as a magic missile in an argument against the incredibly groundbreaking Touch AC gun, you demonstrate that a deep misunderstanding of the issues at hand.

I might reply that anyone bringing SR and quickened spells into a discussion of why 1st level NPCs with guns are so "game-breakingly dangerous" is also demonstrating a deep misunderstanding of what things are available to 1st level NPCs.

The discussion of low level NPCs stem from the access of such a horde by high level leadership PCs, notwithstanding your comment... :)

This is definitely an ability that if added, would be considered COOL immediately! I would even be comfortable with added damage inside a creature's belly... :)

It's logical that a gun should have nontouch armor class penetration like 20 or so (varying with the types of the guns and situations like double for two handed, half for light and +4 per +1 magical bonus and -2 per range increment above first)but if it flat out ignores the nontouch armor class a creature with 100 NA shouldn't get hit as easily as the same with 10 NA.

Layer after layer after layer of plating should stop a speeding bullet eventually or at least they should slow it down.Also there is no reason the bullet bullet shouldn't penetrate after the first range increment,it should just less.

It is relatively easy to implement this logic to firearms (it can be done in basically three lines)and the ammount of simulation it adds makes it worthwhile.

Can it be made official?Even as an optional rule.I think that after a time most of the people who implement guns will be using it.

I agree. 1pt of shield/armor penetration per Gunslinger level would sound about right, IMO. Basically, it scales up as you go higher in level, as the AC of monsters scale up.

Natural armor is complicated: if the monster is made of metal, like an iron golem, they should retain it, otherwise it's ok.

Ok, I didn't have a pickle but I had a raw lemon, so let's do this..........

Let's say:

1pt of shield/armor/natural per gunslinger level for all creatures except undead and constructs, in which case it's 1pt of shield/armor per gunslinger level; I would also extend this against objects for 1pt of hardness per gunslinger level. This is reduced by 2 pts for each increment above the 1st, same amount as attack roll penalties.

This way you don't end up with hordes of 1st level commoners/peasants slaying Great Wyrm Gold Dragons... :P

Wands of magic missile, anyone? This is an awful strategy.

Shield spell, anyone? SR anyone? Invisibility, anyone? Standard action or quicken spell feat, anyone? Avg 18 damage at level 9, anyone?

Anytime you use something as basic as a magic missile in an argument against the incredibly groundbreaking Touch AC gun, you demonstrate that a deep misunderstanding of the issues at hand.

Third option: The DM incorporates it into the campaign, and everyone has guns. Suddenly you have epic battles between orc guerillas fighting against their human oppressors. Even high level characters are brought low in volleys of rifle fire. Dragons go into hiding, becoming an endangered species. The wildlands begin to become tamed, making way for an Industrial Revolution. Magic and machinery giving rise to a new order and new conflicts.

That's fine if it's in your own homebrew, but I definitely do *not* want to see Golarion go this way. I think Paizo should right now clarify that no Advance guns will be in Golarion, and that the official setting is pretty much limited to pistols and muskets (i.e. emerging guns right?) I'm worried about Touch AC guns as a DM. I want gunslingers to be a popular, workable class, and since the playtest is open, I'm going to do all I can to try to better the class. This is the time to talk, right now. I really want the class to work, and I'd like to see it remembered as something innovative and cool instead of a joke and sigh on every DMs' lips.

Inner Sea has been published saying guns are Touch AC. So WHAT?!?! I'm perfectly fine with PDF updates and Erratas. I've always been. Even moreso now that PDFs get updated automatically at each printing.

I love Paizo as they are flexible and do not display the arrogance that certain other companies have shown in the past. I love the fact that James came out after CoT and said, 'meh, forget about that whole Asmodeus paladin thing... that was a mistake' They don't limit the creativity of an author who wanted to showcase a story or a situation where Asmodeus had paladins, and allow them artistic licence: that's great! But they do, at times, come out and say "hey guys, for the sake of preserving our nice Golarion, forget this or that part..."

Still cool for homecampaigns, sure! but as Golarion is a shared world, someone has to sit in the Director's chair at times and make course alterations.

So, in conclusion: "Paizo, please don't be afraid to make mistakes. Keep being creative. But when something is not going to be cool in the long run, don't be scared and stay honest with us: tell us if you made a mistake and you'll see (as you already know) that we are one of the most forgiving bunch in the RPG community"

overdark wrote:

(...)the fact that a simple 1st level commoner can shoot right through a suit of +5 adamantine armor AND the +5 adamantine shield his target has with his non-magical gun is just not balanced.

Anyone wearing a +5 adamantine protective set has enough hit points to never even notice a 1st level commoner shooting him with a musket, and can kill 1st level commoners in scores.

For the price you've paid to equip one commoner with a musket, I can outfit ~40 commoners with light crossbows. Statistically, if they fire at the same guy, two of them per round should roll a natural 20 and hit the guy anyway, for comparable (read: equally negligible) damage. But, since my guys are hoping for a lucky shot anyway, they will gladly eat the otherwise crippling penalty for firing at maximum range and start spraying the guy with bolts while he's 800 ft away from them, whereas your commoner can only start shooting at 200 ft and only gets his dreaded accuracy at 40 ft, when he's within the charge range of any melee character (which, for a 1st level commoner, generally means being one action away from death). And don't forget, for the price your commoner pays for a single shot, I get to buy 110 crossbow bolts - that's 2 shots for each of my forty crossbowmen and a considerable amount of spare. For each extra shot you plan your musketeer to take, each of my forty guys gets 2,75 more shots.

Taking this into account, if you had to fight a guy in a +5 adamantine protective gear with commoners, would you rather use one commoner with a musket or 40 commoners with crossbows and the advantage of distance?

you forget the fact that 90% of all D&D/PRPG fights start in the first increment.

IRL, soldiers and police wear armor that is bullet-resistant. Obviously, this armor provides a mystic force effect that increases their Touch AC versus bullets only (and, strangely, incorporeal creatures). It makes perfect sense. What? Why are...

:)

Thank you for the much needed illustration! :)

Touch AC for guns is problematic, I agree.

The Mighty Grognard wrote:

Sure, Overdark is a bit passionate about his dislike of the addition of guns to the game, but the responses to him have not exactly been level-headed either.

There is a sizable contingent of people that say that the Gunslinger is so underpowered (for a number of reasons, none of which are worth listing here) that they're almost unplayable on THAT spectrum. Personally, I know that I would never play one, and I am a huge fan of the extant literature pertaining to gunslingers in general. They're just not really contributing enough for me, and the fact that their weapon blows up in their hands is the icing on the cake. Any argument I would posit would come so far from the other side of the aisle as overdark that he would clearly react in a negative manner.

He is concerned about a full BAB class attacking touch AC. (He says he's just worried about the guns themselves attacking touch AC, but several times he's deviated into why a full-BAB class shouldn't attack touch AC, whether or not he wants to admit it or revisit those posts.) Meanwhile, I'm busy worrying about why a Full BAB class that (let's face it) is a damage-dealer only is doing DPR that's significantly lower than the high-water mark for Full BAB classes that "just" do damage, that being the 2H Strength-Based Fighter. Such an argument would be (and has been!) lost within the "guns shouldn't attack touch AC" thread.

Add that to the multiple people that are ignoring the fact that guns attacking touch AC is not going to change - errata or no, sorry ciretose - and it's very difficult to want to politely bring an informed opinion to this particular party.

Asking for a bit of (complete - show your work!) mathematical support for a blanket generalization is a completely level-headed response, also, and that's been the majority of the feedback. Which has been ignored, until the very well presented T-Rex anecdote above.

I'm in both camps:

CAMP 1: worried about Touch AC guns (i.e. which are accessible by ALL classes, and even without proficiency, yield a high chance of hitting for low BAB classes); AND

CAMP 2: worried that the gunslinger is underpowered and a bit "meh" as a class so far...

Overall, I believe the two biggest problems for the game as a whole:
- Touch AC guns;
- Gunslinger misfires.

(i.e. reloading was on my list but I think they have addressed it)

No other exotic weapon allows fighters to make ranged touch attacks.

I can see a lot of wizards actually choosing a gun for their bonded item... (screw the staff! you can't cock it and make it go boom! LOL! )

When you can spend less for the bow and use it faster and easier without it blowing up on you and you can get it magicked up just as easily?

You really underestimate the effect of Touch AC and how it can literally save 50K+ gp to a high level PC. With touch AC, you don't really need a huge expensive weapon anymore as you essentially drop down from the weapon + vs. AC arms race. From a PC perspective I agree with you that weapon reliability is a must. However, Touch AC will lead to a lot of different and unexpected abuse, the extent of which we cannot fully comprehend yet. I suspect that a few months after the publication of UC, we'll see some reactions to this, and/or some necessary changes.

I didn't say 15 gunslingers i said 15 warriors. Guys with BAB +1 and no special abilities, like most of the guys in Alkenstar. And the point of the example was to illustrate that 15 crappy 1st level warriors with bows have little chance to even hit the dino. The guys with guns do, simply because they have guns.

And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.

I for one don't think you are trolling: I "get" what you are trying to say and I fully understand your concerns, having DMed since 1988.

This will break or significantly change how the game is played for many people. Touch AC should have been instead, at the very least, "as per brilliant energy" (i.e. only goes through armor and shield, NOT natural).

And as you said, there are a lot of in-game ways to bring an army of low level guys with you. Sure, many times they will get wiped out by a high level baddie: but more importantly, many, many more times the PCs will organize/prepare and bring this gun-toting gaggle to the lair of a biggie such as a dragon and annihilate it. The DM can only make excuses for this Touch AC flaw for so long before he will sigh and just houserule this back to regular AC (i.e. once or twice, the DM can prepare or provide explanations as to how he was prepared against this small army, but in the long run, if he does it every time, it is dishonest of him, as he should have instead told the players that he does not want guns in his game. Period.)

You have to be trolling.

1. No coherent party would ever consist of 15 separate characters, let alone 15 separate Gunslingers.

2. What the hell is the Rex doing as the gunslingers shoot him to death? One attack from him is a guaranteed kill on whoever he bites, and considering that they have to be within their gun's range increment to his Touch AC, they'd have to stay outside of his massive reach to avoid an AoO.

3. Your scenario completely ignores action economy. Of course stacking 15 different characters against one creature is gonna kill him. This is the same reason you don't throw a lone BBEG against a party of 4 people, even.

I don't think he's trolling. I'm telling you now: with guns, no longer would a PC with half a brain leave his 25+ leadership feat 1st level followers at home while adventuring... a company of low level musketeers will be the death of any campaign (all DMs will errata the gun after one or two sessions, at best; at worst the DM will react like many bad DMs and Deus Ex kill all the low level in their sleep or with some pre-arranged raid/ambush, which will piss of the player)

So far guns and Touch AC are turning out to be a real problem for DMs, and the gunslinger as is is turning out to be a real downer for a lot of (potentially interested) players...

If I was you I wouldn't build anything outside the Inner Sea book firearms: peppperbox, pistol or musket. I think this double barrel thing will change by the end of the playtest: multiplying attacks by 2 is so broken it's not funny.

Ksorkrax wrote:

The next step of evolution a Pickle Knight should undertake is to become an Onion Knight

True, but PF doesn't have epic level (yet) so the required level 90 can't be reached. But someday....

Hopefully PF epic level rule won't see a character level every time they kill a monster... LOL!

New trailer.

New feature on House Stark.

Bizarre Taiwanese CGI news report featuring George R.R. Martin killing a panda with one of his books.

:)

do you have non-youtube linkies for these?

Stringburka for Thread-Mayor! :)

xXxTheBeastxXx wrote:

As it stands, the classic (and iconic) dual-pistol-slinging gunslinger is ridiculous. Not only do you have to pay outlandish prices (something easily houseruled) for your guns by RAW, but with their new "categorization" of guns as "1-handed" or "2-handed" ranged weapons, no gun is considered "light," and therefore all guns that can be used with TWF automatically take the full -4 penalty.

That brings them exactly in line with the penalty for firing two light crossbows at the same time which with TWF is also -4 to each attack.

If they make the final wording into "you may shoot a pistol one handed at no penalty, and a musket one handed at -2 penalty", then via TWF you'll be at -2/-2 for twin pistol build and -4/-4 for twin musket build. Sounds ok to me: a musket should be about as hard to shoot one handed as a light crossbow.

The "Bonus Feats" could address something like that by making the following changes.

** spoiler omitted **

Thoughts? Allows access but penalizes?

I don't like penalizing someone for a feat he paid for. Either you allow access or don't. If you don't, I'd recommend working in some feat-like abilities that are activated as part of an Attack action by taking penalties to the attack roll. Remember this guy *will always, always hit except when he rolls a 1*

This thread sucks.

i.e. you've run this already and you're running it again due to the state of things in Japan? is this in order to gain a different play experience under a different personal/real-world perspective or just due to some weird unexplained urge to do so?

Edit: there is a lot of talk about people who had "strangely coincidental" predictions lately... (go to link below --- scary stuff even for a fact-based engineering dude... :( )

http://www.torontosun.com/news/columnists/mike_strobel/2011/03/12/17593401. html