|
It is my sincere hope that pistol training was meant to replace gun training. But really, if they were cool with creating the absolute bull that is up close and deadly + signature deed (damage even on a miss upsets me in ways I cannot begin to express without ranting, and that would go for any character, not just gunslingers), I do not feel confident in assuming any intentions on behalf of the designers.
I personally run all of my tables strictly RAW for fairness of interpretation of word and not having to try to question intent. In my experience with a well-built gunslinger, the double dex to damage doesn't even matter. In my home group, my gunslinger player runs without use of double dex and he still completely destroys scenarios and modules all by himself.
That being said, I think a GM would be perfectly justified in saying pistol training replaces gun training at their table due to issues of game balance. I would guess the crux of that view is to negate double dex cheese, which just makes a pistolero/mysterious stranger an unfortunate casualty of that conflict.
|
|
Gun training is replaced by the mysterious stranger´s stranger´s fortune ability. So only gunslinger pistolero´s would get double DEX to damage. Not the combination mentioned in the title.
Since both archetypes get something at level 5, there could be speculation if it simply was forgotten that both level 5 abilities replace gun training.
But there is no hint on this and as long as it´s not stated somewhere else that it is not society legal, it is society legal.
There should not be "some tables" blablabla because that is houseruling then.
|
All I'm saying is expect table variation. When you are relying on a misprint, you are going to run into people who read it differently.
Which is fair. I am certainly not going to stomp and gnash my teeth if a table GM tells me (s)he's not comfortable with the combination. I only started double checking after re-familiarizing myself with the class features of the archetypes since I was possibly going to play the character at a Con. I've only used the character once and mainly concerned myself with checking for the replacement lines (to make sure there are no swaps of the same thing) and the 1st level abilities. Upon closer reading and can see that it might have been the intention to swap Gun Training for Pistol training, but it didn't occur to me since i only checked the last line for the swap outs in both archetypes. The fact that it wasn't in the previous errata (which had a fair amount in it) cause some doubt in my mind as to intention. As for some of the other combinations of feats, deeds and what have you, while I'd like to think the devs are on top of things as far as broken combos, the fact is as more material is released there will be unexpected interactions. This should not be happening in this case since it is all material for that class, but it could be that someone messed up. I know there are people out there who will make the most broken ridiculous thing they can. That is fun to them. That is not fun to me. I sincerely just like the flavor of the combination. I haven't even considered things like signature deed for the archetype combo. I know that other people will abuse the hell out of it if there is some kind of exploit and because I know that the abusers will be ruining other people fun I won't be calling foul if it gets errataed. Hell if I could get pistolaro without the pistol training, I would be ok with that. I just thought the deeds were cool. Pistol guy, yeah!
|
|
It is my sincere hope that pistol training was meant to replace gun training. But really, if they were cool with creating the absolute bull that is up close and deadly + signature deed (damage even on a miss upsets me in ways I cannot begin to express without ranting, and that would go for any character, not just gunslingers), I do not feel confident in assuming any intentions on behalf of the designers.
I personally run all of my tables strictly RAW for fairness of interpretation of word and not having to try to question intent. In my experience with a well-built gunslinger, the double dex to damage doesn't even matter. In my home group, my gunslinger player runs without use of double dex and he still completely destroys scenarios and modules all by himself.
That being said, I think a GM would be perfectly justified in saying pistol training replaces gun training at their table due to issues of game balance. I would guess the crux of that view is to negate double dex cheese, which just makes a pistolero/mysterious stranger an unfortunate casualty of that conflict.
I can see where you are coming from, but I guess I don't see how half damage on a miss is different form half damage on a successful save. I guess in theory a gunslinger can keep doing that all day while a caster has only so many spell slots, but then again Wands. I will look closer at the ability and the likely average damage involved to get a better understanding.
|
All I'm saying is expect table variation. When you are relying on a misprint, you are going to run into people who read it differently.
How can anyone think it's a misprint if we've asked for clarification and gotten no reply required as a response? That suggests there is no misprint and RAW applies - as you say - until an errata comes out.
Suggesting otherwise is houseruling.
|
|
All I'm saying is expect table variation. When you are relying on a misprint, you are going to run into people who read it differently.How can anyone think it's a misprint if we've asked for clarification and gotten no reply required as a response? That suggests there is no misprint and RAW applies - as you say - until an errata comes out.
Suggesting otherwise is houseruling.
Because you get an ability that is almost identical to a non-archetype ability for absolutely nothing, how many archetypes give you anything without losing something in return? Plus, the corresponding Musket Archetype has an ability that is nearly identical which says that it replaces Firearm Training, an ability that does not exist, why would the two handed firearm gunslinger archetype be weaker then the pistolero?
No archetype should ever give you something for free, and no other archetype that I am aware of does, so obviously the one that is wrong is the one that does.
|
But really, if they were cool with creating the absolute bull that is up close and deadly + signature deed (damage even on a miss upsets me in ways I cannot begin to express without ranting, and that would go for any character, not just gunslingers), I do not feel confident in assuming any intentions on behalf of the designers.
Damage even on a miss:
Anything that does splash damage, even (or especially) alchemist's fire, and alchemist's bombs.
Should the Pistolero wording replace Gun Training? Probably yes.
However, "should" is not the same as "is" or "does".
No errata has been issued, no FAQ has been written, no official commentary indicating which way is 'correct', in months and months, despite the fact that the devs KNOW this issue is ongoing.
It is one thing to issue a unilateral GM ruling at a table if a rule is ambigous or the situation is not effectively covered by the books.
It is an entirely different thing to wholesale change the rules just because you don't like what they say. That is houseruling. That is outside of the purview of PFS judges.
To players: If you show up at a PFS table with some cheese build that relys on loopholes to work, you should be able to play. Do however have the good grace not to whine if and when the build gets nerfed all to hell, though.
-j
|
|
I can see where you are coming from, but I guess I don't see how half damage on a miss is different form half damage on a successful save. I guess in theory a gunslinger can keep doing that all day while a caster has only so many spell slots, but then again Wands. I will look closer at the ability and the likely average damage involved to get a better understanding.
That is a fair opinion, and I by no means intend to say anyone who's opinion differs is wrong. In the spirit of fairness, half of my view is simple and unrelenting personal bias as one who enjoys making defensive characters.
Spells and similiar abilities doing half damage on a "miss" (i.e, successful save, ect.) I find necessary for two reasons:
1). Action economy in the game makes it more difficult to launch a series of spells on a single turn under most circumstances.
2). Because of that, it is wise game balance to see that those actions typically have atleast some effect even if resisted or they "miss".
With gunslingers specifically, allow me to offer you an example from one of my PFS players, who is presently 14th level. Each round, he makes 10 attacks using a double-pistol: 6 for base attack bonus, 2 rapid shot, 2 from his haste addiction (boots of speed, pots, ect.). Because he has up close and deadly + signature deed, reducing cost of that ability to nothing, even if he misses with all 10 attacks, he will still inflict 1/2 of 30d6 damage.
What particularly grates me about that is he is already making touch attacks because of the firearm - did gunslinger's really need more help landing damage? He isn't hurting for defense either with an AC in the low 40's and a CMD in the high 40's.
He also could have been even more cheesed if he had used the weapon cord/glove of storing trick and two-weapon fought with a 2nd double-pistol. Add in 6 extra attacks from that and we are up to 1/2 of 48d6 even if by some miracle all 16 attacks missed.
Just some food for thought, and no one take my personal prejudice personally ;). All gunslingers are warmly welcome at my tables even if I hate your class :p.
|
|
Damage even on a miss:
Anything that does splash damage, even (or especially) alchemist's fire, and alchemist's bombs.
Indeed sir, too true! These I have slightly less issue with, as a standard splash weapon is very minor splash damage, and the alchemist bombs atleast allow reflex for 1/2.
When you pick up fast bombs it gets pretty borderline with the up close and deadly/signature deed nonsense though, but atleast the alchemist will eventually run out of bombs in the course of reigning such destruction. A simple wand of abundant ammo and the gunslinger is in it all day, every day.
|
|
All I'm saying is expect table variation. When you are relying on a misprint, you are going to run into people who read it differently.How can anyone think it's a misprint if we've asked for clarification and gotten no reply required as a response? That suggests there is no misprint and RAW applies - as you say - until an errata comes out.
Suggesting otherwise is houseruling.
Because you get an ability that is almost identical to a non-archetype ability for absolutely nothing, how many archetypes give you anything without losing something in return? Plus, the corresponding Musket Archetype has an ability that is nearly identical which says that it replaces Firearm Training, an ability that does not exist, why would the two handed firearm gunslinger archetype be weaker then the pistolero?
No archetype should ever give you something for free, and no other archetype that I am aware of does, so obviously the one that is wrong is the one that does.
Whether or not I agree with you on any of that, it doesn't cancel out what I've said. Asking for clarification said no reply required - it's as written, and to suggest otherwise is houseruling if you play it that way.
|
|
Whether or not I agree with you on any of that, it doesn't cancel out what I've said. Asking for clarification said no reply required - it's as written, and to suggest otherwise is houseruling if you play it that way.
I could be wrong, but the "no reply required" is probably PFS-specific. As in, the PFS coordinators do not need to address this because it is a rules issue.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Whether or not I agree with you on any of that, it doesn't cancel out what I've said. Asking for clarification said no reply required - it's as written, and to suggest otherwise is houseruling if you play it that way.I could be wrong, but the "no reply required" is probably PFS-specific. As in, the PFS coordinators do not need to address this because it is a rules issue.
No reply required could mean any number of things, and to assume it means any specific thing is just that, an assumption, without an actual reply there's nothing to go on as to what exactly no reply needed means.
|
|
For the record, Musket Master has almost the exact same text for Musket Training with the following line at the end: "This replaces firearm training 1, 2, 3, and 4." Note that there's actually no ability called firearm training, so shouldn't it be compatible with mysterious stranger to? Obviously they meant Gun training, but they said firearm training, so by RAW...
Ultimate combat is riddled with errors, but it's obvious that the Musket version replaces Gun Training, so the Pistol version should as well.
This. Precedent is huge when looking at how to adjudicate something like this. What do all similar situations do? How are all similar circumstances handled? How is all similar language written?
Based on Precedent, Pistol Training replaces Gun Training.
The "Common Sense" you want us to rely on would say that one obviously wrong word in a sentence probably means another. "Common Sense" does not stretch far enough to add a sentence where it doesn't otherwise exist, even if you "know" in your heart it should be there.
Would I ever combine the archetypes? Not likely. Why? I don't play them. I think the whole class is Gouda.
|
|
I can see where you are coming from, but I guess I don't see how half damage on a miss is different form half damage on a successful save. I guess in theory a gunslinger can keep doing that all day while a caster has only so many spell slots, but then again Wands. I will look closer at the ability and the likely average damage involved to get a better understanding.That is a fair opinion, and I by no means intend to say anyone who's opinion differs is wrong. In the spirit of fairness, half of my view is simple and unrelenting personal bias as one who enjoys making defensive characters.
Spells and similiar abilities doing half damage on a "miss" (i.e, successful save, ect.) I find necessary for two reasons:
1). Action economy in the game makes it more difficult to launch a series of spells on a single turn under most circumstances.
2). Because of that, it is wise game balance to see that those actions typically have atleast some effect even if resisted or they "miss".
With gunslingers specifically, allow me to offer you an example from one of my PFS players, who is presently 14th level. Each round, he makes 10 attacks using a double-pistol: 6 for base attack bonus, 2 rapid shot, 2 from his haste addiction (boots of speed, pots, ect.). Because he has up close and deadly + signature deed, reducing cost of that ability to nothing, even if he misses with all 10 attacks, he will still inflict 1/2 of 30d6 damage.
What particularly grates me about that is he is already making touch attacks because of the firearm - did gunslinger's really need more help landing damage? He isn't hurting for defense either with an AC in the low 40's and a CMD in the high 40's.
He also could have been even more cheesed if he had used the weapon cord/glove of storing trick and two-weapon fought with a 2nd double-pistol. Add in 6 extra attacks from that and we are up to 1/2 of 48d6 even if by some miracle all 16 attacks missed.
Just some food for thought, and no one take my personal...
Thank you for the detail response. I can see why a character taking it to that level. I honestly have little experience with characters above 11lth for PFS or otherwise so I don't always consider how certain things can stack up. (example, I was completely unaware that hasting effects could ever get you more than one extra attack. I would have thought it would be one of those non stackable things). Thats a pretty large number of d6 per round even if the target creature(s) has some kind of DR the ammo won't bypass. Its something for me to think on anyway.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you for the detail response. I can see why a character taking it to that level. I honestly have little experience with characters above 11lth for PFS or otherwise so I don't always consider how certain things can stack up. (example, I was completely unaware that hasting effects could ever get you more than one extra attack. I would have thought it would be one of those non stackable things). Thats a pretty large number of d6 per round even if the target creature(s) has some kind of DR the ammo won't bypass. Its something for me to think on anyway.
Oh, the haste certainly does not stack. The issue is that the double-barreled pistol can be fired twice for every single attack made. The "trade-off" for this is that all attacks fired suffer a penalty to hit, but that penalty is pretty much irrelevant as gunslingers make touch attacks anyhow.
Because of clustered shots, enemy DR is also basically irrelevant, as he tallies all of his damage up first then subtracts the DR just once.
To be fair, this is a pretty extreme, maximally powergamed example, so not all pistolero gunslingers will be that silly. I've also taken the thread a bit off track, which I apologize for.
For those who want to make a Mysterious Stranger/Pistolero, I think you just have to realize you're taking a gamble. With RAW players/GMs like myself, you won't have issues running that character, and would probably do well to seek those sorts out. At many tables though, you will probably find players/GMs who think it's abuse of a loophole and refuse it. Rather than get into a "but there's no errata, you have to allow it" vs. "no I don't, this is my table" argument, both parties will just be better served finding peers to play with who are on the same page of thought as your stranger/pisolero.
|
|
Hmmm, this doesn't seem more powerful than the core wizard, so what is the issue?
Are martials not allowed good things or what
For overall game balance consideration? No, compared to a full blooded wizard, cleric, druid, ect., it's not much of an issue.
When you compare it against other melee and ranged based classes it really has no equal comparison, however. It's only partially the gunslinger class, though. Most of the cheese comes from the firearm rules themselves, and the double-barrel firearms.
Flat out eliminating double-barrel firearms would go a long way towards evening things out. I'm not a big fan of the touch attack issue for guns either, but that issue pales in comparison to doubled attacks and dozens of d6's in free damage even on a miss for me personally.
|
I think you're missing the point. If I can spend 50 gp and flat-out kill an opponent at level 8, that's fine, I'll do that! Please deduct 200 gp from my account, and I'll kill four important enemies. Deduct 1000 gp from the group collectively, and we'll just collect our prizes.
Double-barrelled pistols are broken, and double Dex just exacerbates the issue.
|
two things:
1) Dex cannot stack with Dex. We've had this argument with those feats that affect combat maneuvers, and that two feats that allow you to use your Dex instead of Str, and those that allow you to add your Dex as well as your Str to CMB, can't stack. Because an ability modifier is a bonus. And because it is called an ability bonus, it is typed. Typed bonuses do not stack. Therefore you cannot add Dex to damage twice with the Pistolero archetype.
2) Exploiting a loophole, especially when you know its a loophole, is kinda a jerk thing to do. Its a jerk thing to do to the other players at your table. Its a jerk thing to do to the GM. Its a jerk thing to do to the campaign as a whole. And most importantly, its a jerk thing to the entire institution of gaming. While technically it isn't cheating to exploit a loophole, my personal opinion is that its worse. Why? Because you are putting lipstick on the pig, and I really dislike disingenuity.
So basically what I'm saying is (and I can't take credit for this comment, because I heard someone else say it), "if you can't interpret the rules like a sane person, go play another game."
|
|
Hmmm, this doesn't seem more powerful than the core wizard, so what is the issue?
Are martials not allowed good things or what
For overall game balance consideration? No, compared to a full blooded wizard, cleric, druid, ect., it's not much of an issue.
I dunno. Yesterday, a 10th level witch in our group dropped two of the most dangerous enemies in the scenario through expending a large number of resources on debuffing followed by a save or suck (Evil Eye Hex for -4 saves on one turn, then Quickened Ill Omen followed by the debuff of choice). This caused the player to exclaim, "I can't believe it--I beat a boss!" Up until this point, high-damage martials (plus a bomb alchemist, which plays more like a gunslinger than a caster with respect to make lots of ranged touch attacks on a full attack) had taken care of all the big scary bosses throughout this witch's career.
At least in my experience with PFS, the best casters are usually those guys that do good utility stuff to make sure the optimized martials (particularly the ranged ones) are easily able to annihilate everything with their overblown damage. When I've seen the same groups missing out on the heavy martial damage, the casters prep different spells to cover for it, but they're never nearly as safe and easy of runs as with the martials and their damage, whereas minus any one caster for another martial and it's usually even more of a blow-out (obviously, losing all the casters would mean trouble unless the martials brought expendable countermeasures for enemy tricks). The only caster I've ever seen who has a martial's ability to end fights is a kitsune fey sorceress against solo monsters that can be targeted by mind-affecting.
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
| 11 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
What I will advise is it is a loophole that allows a very cheesy build. A large majority of people know it is a loophole. Do not be surprised when the loophole is closed through errata and we do not allow any type of rebuild. If you are abusing the combo now due to the loophole currently in place, do not complain when you do not get any form of rebuild what so ever in the future.
|
|
I think you're missing the point. If I can spend 50 gp and flat-out kill an opponent at level 8, that's fine, I'll do that! Please deduct 200 gp from my account, and I'll kill four important enemies. Deduct 1000 gp from the group collectively, and we'll just collect our prizes.
Double-barrelled pistols are broken, and double Dex just exacerbates the issue.
Yeah because level eight wizards don't devastate encounters with one spell that is free.
@umd guy I guess you take dangerously curious? Dc20 is pretty hard IMO, especially if you fail you lose a charge. At level eight you only have a plus nine, making that a 45% chance to use that wand. Seems pretty bad? After that your first action can only be one shot as well
Wow, archers must be much better than gunslingers at using magic then. I had +17 at level 8 with 8 Charisma, and now I have +22 at level 10. Yay!
|
Venture-Captain, Massachusetts—Central & West
|
Dc20 is pretty hard IMO, especially if you fail you lose a charge. At level eight you only have a plus nine, making that a 45% chance to use that wand. Seems pretty bad? After that your first action can only be one shot as well
You do not lose a charge from a wand if you fail the check.
Use a Wand, Staff, or Other Spell Trigger Item: Normally, to use a wand, you must have the wand's spell on your class spell list. This use of the skill allows you to use a wand as if you had a particular spell on your class spell list. Failing the roll does not expend a charge.
|
|
I dunno. Yesterday, a 10th level witch in our group dropped two of the most dangerous enemies in the scenario through expending a large number of resources on debuffing followed by a save or suck (Evil Eye Hex for -4 saves on one turn, then Quickened Ill Omen followed by the debuff of choice). This caused the player to exclaim, "I can't believe it--I beat a boss!" Up until this point, high-damage martials (plus a bomb alchemist, which plays more like a gunslinger than a caster with respect to make lots of ranged touch attacks on a full attack) had taken care of all the big scary bosses throughout this witch's career.
At least in my experience with PFS, the best casters are usually those guys that do good utility stuff to make sure the optimized martials (particularly the ranged ones) are easily able to annihilate everything with their overblown damage. When I've seen the same groups missing out on the heavy martial damage, the casters prep different spells to cover for it, but they're never nearly as safe and easy of runs as with the martials and their damage, whereas minus any one caster for another martial and it's usually even more of a blow-out (obviously, losing all the casters would mean trouble unless the martials brought expendable countermeasures for enemy tricks). The only caster I've ever seen who has a martial's ability to end fights is a kitsune fey sorceress against solo monsters that can be targeted by mind-affecting.
That is a perfectly valid experience and view. What we experience and measure our views by will vary greatly by individual. My circle of friends are extreme end, highly knowledgeable players - so seeing the things we do and pull off color my views towards that way of thinking.
Short of a failed save or suck spell, I feel nothing has a well-built gunslinger's ability to say "I choose you...now you die." But for me personally, while that is amazing, it simply does not match the awesome reality altering versatility of high level spell casters.
If you ever find yourself near Columbus Ohio, come join us for a session. We'll put you up for the night and feed you, and you can play a game through with us and watch the wizard launch a 24 hour duration time stop, layer the battlefield with delayed spell effects, rest in a rope trick, layer it again, rest again, and end the time time with full spells preped at an initiative mod over +20.
Granted, casters achille's heel of antimagic field is far more difficult for them to overcome than for most foils a martial will face, past a poor reach melee against antilife shell.
|
|
I think you're missing the point. If I can spend 50 gp and flat-out kill an opponent at level 8, that's fine, I'll do that! Please deduct 200 gp from my account, and I'll kill four important enemies. Deduct 1000 gp from the group collectively, and we'll just collect our prizes.
Double-barrelled pistols are broken, and double Dex just exacerbates the issue.
Yeah because level eight wizards don't devastate encounters with one spell that is free.
@umd guy I guess you take dangerously curious? Dc20 is pretty hard IMO, especially if you fail you lose a charge. At level eight you only have a plus nine, making that a 45% chance to use that wand. Seems pretty bad? After that your first action can only be one shot as well
Why are wizards always the excuse for everything. Spellcasters are not anymore powerful than most classes at the levels we play in PFS. In fact, they spend most of their career as a Pathfinder in the lower rung and only start to become a threat at later lvls (8-12). Even then, their abilities are balanced by the rules. I have spent many scenarios feeling useless as a caster.
If you fail a UMD check you don't loose a charge, you just fail to activate the wand. All you have to do is try again. Only on a roll of a 1 do you get punished (wand stops working for 24 hrs). My barbarian with an 8 Charisma uses UMD all the time. He only has a +15 at lvl 12 but it works most of the time and is great for non-combat actions.
Lastly - If you have this build as a character, I would take Mike's warning to heart. You may end up with a character you just can't play.
|
|
@umd guy I guess you take dangerously curious? Dc20 is pretty hard IMO, especially if you fail you lose a charge. At level eight you only have a plus nine, making that a 45% chance to use that wand. Seems pretty bad? After that your first action can only be one shot as well
I suppose that would certainly help, but he didn't even need it. We'll use your example of level 8, and I won't even cheese it out. Observe:
8 ranks
-2 cha
Total modifier +6.
1). Purchase a cracked vibrant purple ioun stone for 2k. (this stores 1 level of spell).
2). Outside of combat, wand whip until you cast the spell and store it. As has been pointed out, failure does not drain charges - but if this example character rolled a 4 or less he would take some minor damage.
3). Cast your abundant ammo, no fail, when you need it from the ioun stone.
That is a very cheap and simple example too. As RE said, hitting mid teens by level 8 is not hard if you want to spring the cash for it.
|
|
Lastly - If you have this build as a character, I would take Mike's warning to heart. You may end up with a character you just can't play.
Indeed. You would have a character stacking two archetypes illegally for its entire career, with no options for rebuild. I would call that a retired character.
Mike, any chance you would allow rebuilds at this time?
|
|
I dunno. Yesterday, a 10th level witch in our group dropped two of the most dangerous enemies in the scenario through expending a large number of resources on debuffing followed by a save or suck (Evil Eye Hex for -4 saves on one turn, then Quickened Ill Omen followed by the debuff of choice). This caused the player to exclaim, "I can't believe it--I beat a boss!" Up until this point, high-damage martials (plus a bomb alchemist, which plays more like a gunslinger than a caster with respect to make lots of ranged touch attacks on a full attack) had taken care of all the big scary bosses throughout this witch's career.
At least in my experience with PFS, the best casters are usually those guys that do good utility stuff to make sure the optimized martials (particularly the ranged ones) are easily able to annihilate everything with their overblown damage. When I've seen the same groups missing out on the heavy martial damage, the casters prep different spells to cover for it, but they're never nearly as safe and easy of runs as with the martials and their damage, whereas minus any one caster for another martial and it's usually even more of a blow-out (obviously, losing all the casters would mean trouble unless the martials brought expendable countermeasures for enemy tricks). The only caster I've ever seen who has a martial's ability to end fights is a kitsune fey sorceress against solo monsters that can be targeted by mind-affecting.
That is a perfectly valid experience and view. What we experience and measure our views by will vary greatly by individual. My circle of friends are extreme end, highly knowledgeable players - so seeing the things we do and pull off color my views towards that way of thinking.
Short of a failed save or suck spell, I feel nothing has a well-built gunslinger's ability to say "I choose you...now you die." But for me personally, while that is amazing, it simply does not match the awesome reality altering versatility of high level spell...
Your examples sound somewhat like my level 15 Runelords home group (except the 24 hour time stop, which is only achievable if you're allowing 3.5 stuff or mythic beta playtest, whereas, unfortunately in my opinion, that gunslinger build you describe is completely legal in PFS play), except even in that group, the most dangerous character is the spell sundering rage-pounce superstitious barbarian (but the spellcasters are completely necessary for their spell effects). There's no doubt spellcasters can do insane things at the highest end, as you described. But I said in my post, "At least in my experience with PFS", the martial thing is true, and my PFS experience is level 1-12(PFS also tends to reward the ability to kill the BBEG compared to home games where you might do random side things).
Trust me, it's not that we don't like optimizing in our group sometimes (though other times we focus more on roleplaying, and sometimes on both--we're versatile). I mean people on the forums probably know me for my optimization guides, and that kitsune I was talking about reliably has spells with a DC of at least 20 + her character level. Different groups have different styles though, I agree. You can make an amazingly cool group with all casters or with lots of martials if you build it right. But in PFS, what I've seen is that presence of the major heavy-damage martials (especially ranged) is the best indicator of a cakewalk scenario (with the exception of the kitsune).
|
|
Yes but Mike saying something like this is still different from someone else´s perspective in a lot of things. Now it´s official.
The only question is if you can or cannot take both archetypes together.
For my reasoning, i would not stack DEX with DEX and i would never expect something like that to work. The rest of the archetypes would be nice together though and for me the reason to consider it.
But i don´t really like the gunslinger anyway :)
|
|
(except the 24 hour time stop, which is only achievable if you're allowing 3.5 stuff or mythic beta playtest, whereas, unfortunately in my opinion, that gunslinger build you describe is completely legal in PFS play)
Heh, it is actually perfectly legal - and not even that complicated. Time Stop spell + 1 other thing from one of the ultimate guides, that's it. It's no loophole either, just a dirty, dirty combination.
Our home group is powergamer plus plus, but we all role-play too. The game isn't as much fun without the role-play, we just all enjoy building to be as effecient as possible. It's a fun side challenge we all enjoy.
|
|
(except the 24 hour time stop, which is only achievable if you're allowing 3.5 stuff or mythic beta playtest, whereas, unfortunately in my opinion, that gunslinger build you describe is completely legal in PFS play)Heh, it is actually perfectly legal - and not even that complicated. Time Stop spell + 1 other thing from one of the ultimate guides, that's it. It's no loophole either, just a dirty, dirty combination.
Our home group is powergamer plus plus, but we all role-play too. The game isn't as much fun without the role-play, we just all enjoy building to be as effecient as possible. It's a fun side challenge we all enjoy.
If you mean ring of continuation, keep in mind that it doesn't work.
|
|
Yes but Mike saying something like this is still different from someone else´s perspective in a lot of things. Now it´s official.
The only question is if you can or cannot take both archetypes together.
For my reasoning, i would not stack DEX with DEX and i would never expect something like that to work. The rest of the archetypes would be nice together though and for me the reason to consider it.
But i don´t really like the gunslinger anyway :)
According to Mike, you can until you cannot. At the point when errata comes out, if you have a mysterious stranger/pistolero, you now have an illegal character. Since Mike has said no rebuilds when that time comes, the character in question will be illegal and unplayable.
|
|
If you mean ring of continuation, keep in mind that it doesn't work.
Finally fixed that did they? We searched high and low for any (much needed) errata for it but found zip back in august or whenever the book came out.
That is only one of a million stupid wizard win combo's though, so missing it is hardly felt, and much needed for balance.
|
|
The ring of continuation is not that good anymore.
Ah ha! Thanks for the link. Is there is a good comprehensive FAQ/errata compilation about? Alot of it is tough to keep track of because the devs post it - which is awesome though, we do appreciate that effort. Just makes it hard to track.
That does pretty well kill the value of that ring, but I'm fine with that. It was stupid broken. Now maybe just hit some of the other stupid broken stuff to even things out...
Most such clarifications can be found here. Note that that points to the website's FAQ, but you can find the FAQs for the other books there as well.
|
|
Yes but Mike saying something like this is still different from someone else´s perspective in a lot of things. Now it´s official.
The only question is if you can or cannot take both archetypes together.
For my reasoning, i would not stack DEX with DEX and i would never expect something like that to work. The rest of the archetypes would be nice together though and for me the reason to consider it.
But i don´t really like the gunslinger anyway :)
No, you can't.
You can't stack the archetypes because they modify or replace the same ability.
|
|
IF I see that build, I'll warn the player about it. I have said that I don't like doubling up on archetypes within the same class BUT as has been pointed out to me, it's not implicitly banned.
So till I see otherwise I'll follow the RAW rules. I have to be honest though.. I haven't see any gunslinger abuse even close to what I've read about in other areas.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The ring of continuation is not that good anymore.Ah ha! Thanks for the link. Is there is a good comprehensive FAQ/errata compilation about? Alot of it is tough to keep track of because the devs post it - which is awesome though, we do appreciate that effort. Just makes it hard to track.
That does pretty well kill the value of that ring, but I'm fine with that. It was stupid broken. Now maybe just hit some of the other stupid broken stuff to even things out...
Yep. They nerfed that ring almost immediately after it came out. It's kind of sad though, as the FAQ drastically reduces it's usage. They took a lot of great spells out just to prevent the time-stop cheese (and probably others that they saw).
|
Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator
|
Lastly - If you have this build as a character, I would take Mike's warning to heart. You may end up with a character you just can't play.Indeed. You would have a character stacking two archetypes illegally for its entire career, with no options for rebuild. I would call that a retired character.
Mike, any chance you would allow rebuilds at this time?
Sure. Everyone with this specific build who wants to rebuild it to make sure they stay away from being nerfed in the future have until March 31 to do so.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 32
|
Sure. Everyone with this specific build who wants to rebuild it to make sure they stay away from being nerfed in the future have until March 31 to do so.Lastly - If you have this build as a character, I would take Mike's warning to heart. You may end up with a character you just can't play.Indeed. You would have a character stacking two archetypes illegally for its entire career, with no options for rebuild. I would call that a retired character.
Mike, any chance you would allow rebuilds at this time?
Will this errata affect other archetype combos, like Urban Ranger/Guide? Rebuilding to remove the Guide would be easy, I just need to know whether I actually need to rebuild or not.