Dealing with a disgruntled player


Advice


Ok so in my campaign I feel I have been pretty leinent, letting the players play slightly more powerful races, most SRD content allowed and such, but one of my players feels I have slighted him becuase after he made his gunslinger with the pistelero archtype I ruled that he doesnt add his dex to damage twice at fifth level. Now keep in mind that it doesnt say that Pistol Training replaces Firearm training but it is THE EXACT SAME THING except it is more specific to pistols. I have read several forums and though there is no errata for it, it seems as though the general consensus is that it was in fact ment to replace it, not stack thus add DOUBLE DEX DAMAGE TO PISTOLS. I just wanted to see what people here think I should do with this player as even if it was meant to stack I am still ruling that it doesnt.


I do not believe it was meant to stack, it seems to me to be just a focusing of the larger ability of the gunslinger (like the fact that with gunsmith they have to choose a pistol at first level). I agree with your ruling. And in regards to the player I would simply tell him if he was unhappy with my ruling he is welcome to change his character to a different class or to make changes if he thinks he might have not chosen that archetype for instance if he wasnt going to get the interpreted x2dex, or to play a new character, but the ruling stands.


The damage bonus is so small that you should let it stack. You can also use that to your advantage if the player ever gets b%&@@y a second time. "Hey, you already have this...I ain't gonna favour one player over all others" - kind of thing.


Given that (almost?) every archetype doesn't add features but only replaces one from the original class, I'd assume that is a typo.

Shadow Lodge

Explain your position, cite your sources, and allow the player to re-do the decision that led them to this point. Even if it means letting them 'trade in' their character, XP-for-XP/gold-for-gold.

Don't cave, though. Particularly after you've taken a stance already. It could become the whole inch-mile scenario, and that's really hard to fix.

In the future, take your time deciding. Test it both ways in game and pick what feels right only after trying it out first. THEN take a stand and stick by it, as above.


There are a lot of editing mistakes in Ultimate Combat. If you look at the Fighter's Weapon Training ability, all archetypes that focus on a specific kind of weapon replace that ability with something equally as specific. Polearm Fighters get Weapon Training exclusively with polearms. I know Pistol Training doesn't say that it is replacing Gun Training, but common sense says that it does, since 1) it is an archetype and archetypes replace regular class abilities, and 2) they are both weapon training abilities and no other class or archetype gets this kind ability twice.

Personally, I think they cut out the "This replaces Gun Training." line so that it wouldn't bleed over into the next page and have a single line of text messing up the aesthetics for beginning of the Inquisitor section.


I don't think you can add Dex bonus twice to damage as it's the same type of bonus and bonuses of the same type don't stack. If it said add Int bonus to damage instead then you could add both if the rule was written that way.

By missing the replace part of the test at best this means you can select any one specific type of firearm with gun training and you get pistol training. Selecting pistols for you gun training would be redundant have no effect. This as things are written. I do believe that is supposed to replace gun training though but if you go exactly how it's written that's how I'd see it.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Dealing with a disgruntled player All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.