I believe ur starting gun no matter what ya do to it, can only be sold for scrap. The sentence only says "this starting weapon can only be sold for scrap". Doesn't say that its because its battered or anything like that. I believe its that way because basically guns are freaking expensive and u just handed one for free. So THAT free gun, to make things "balanced" can obly be sold for scrap no matter what ya do to it to offset u got a weapon that was usually 1000+ gold for free.
Edit-I take it back. The gun itself u would only get scrap for but u would get ur usual selling money back on what ya did to it.
The price limitation is because for anyone except the Gunslinger, the weapon is considered broken; upgrading to masterwork doesn't change that as far as I'm aware. Thus I believe it would still only sell for the original scrap price.
4d10 plus masterwork price. divided by two.
No, it sells for whatever a MW firearm is, because that is what it now is.
Which is no big deal, because the gunfighter needs a gun for his class abilities, so either he's found another gun (which he could sell for a lot), or he's retraining as a non-gunfighter, in which case he's doing equipment shuffles and he's not going to come out ahead anyway.
4d10 plus masterwork price. divided by two.No, it sells for whatever a MW firearm is, because that is what it now is.
Except that for everyone but the Gunslinger, it's a permanently-broken weapon. The basic battered gun granted by the class has the Broken condition for everyone but the Gunslinger, and adding masterwork to it doesn't have any text that it changes that.
At best I'd agree that it would sell for 50% of the scrap cost plus masterwork; why would anyone buy a gun that will never work right save but for the original owner?
4d10 plus masterwork price. divided by two.No, it sells for whatever a MW firearm is, because that is what it now is.Except that for everyone but the Gunslinger, it's a permanently-broken weapon. The basic battered gun granted by the class has the Broken condition for everyone but the Gunslinger, and adding masterwork to it doesn't have any text that it changes that.
At best I'd agree that it would sell for 50% of the scrap cost plus masterwork; why would anyone buy a gun that will never work right save but for the original owner?
The Rules would like to disagree with you.
Special: If you are a gunslinger, this feat grants the following additional benefit. You can use this feat to repair and restore your initial, battered weapon. It costs 300 gp and 1 day of work to upgrade it to a masterwork firearm of its type.
A 'repaired and restored' weapon is no longer a broken weapon, because it has been, well, repaired and restored. It is now repaired, restored, and upgraded to a masterwork firearm of it's type.
4d10 plus masterwork price. divided by two.No, it sells for whatever a MW firearm is, because that is what it now is.Except that for everyone but the Gunslinger, it's a permanently-broken weapon. The basic battered gun granted by the class has the Broken condition for everyone but the Gunslinger, and adding masterwork to it doesn't have any text that it changes that.
At best I'd agree that it would sell for 50% of the scrap cost plus masterwork; why would anyone buy a gun that will never work right save but for the original owner?
The Rules would like to disagree with you.
A 'repaired and restored' weapon is no longer a broken weapon, because it has been, well, repaired and restored. It is now repaired, restored, and upgraded to a masterwork firearm of it's type.
Special: If you are a gunslinger, this feat grants the following additional benefit. You can use this feat to repair and restore your initial, battered weapon. It costs 300 gp and 1 day of work to upgrade it to a masterwork firearm of its type.
Yes - you can use it to repair the Broken condition if the gun is actually Broken. The fact is that the description of the base item states that even if it's not Broken it is treated as such by anyone but the Gunslinger. It does not say that it removes that restriction.
So no, the rules don't disagree with me; they state that if the gun's actually Broken for the Gunslinger, he can fix it - not that fixing it removes the fact that the non-broken gun is still considered Broken for anyone but him. In order for it to do what you're claiming it does, it would need to include a line like, "After upgrading the weapon, the weapon is treated as a normal gun when used by others."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That is the most tortured logic I've seen in awhile. Ok, ignore the very plain text if you want in your own games.
It's responses like this that make SKR and other devs get on and rant about people being too pedantic and asking for FAQs on everything under the sun.
|
"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 the weapon already has the broken condition, it does not work at all for anyone else trying to use it. This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth 4d10 gp when sold)."
I have to agree with Xaratherus, it's not that the gun is broken, it's that it is treated as if it were broken/had the broken condition. It even goes as far as saying that if the gun were actually broken, it would not work at all for anyone else.
People in this thread don't seem to like it when others play the gunslinger.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"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 the weapon already has the broken condition, it does not work at all for anyone else trying to use it. This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth 4d10 gp when sold)."
I have to agree with Xaratherus, it's not that the gun is broken, it's that it is treated as if it were broken/had the broken condition. It even goes as far as saying that if the gun were actually broken, it would not work at all for anyone else.
Right, and if the gun is not actually broken (just treated as), then how is the feat repairing it? Note that the feat says explicitly it repairs and restores the gun and makes it masterwork. Treated as broken is not the same as broken. I'm surprised at people. Has nobody read the 'treated as one handed' verses 'wielded one handed' FAQs? Only the Lance still get's two handed damage becuase it is a 'two-handed weapon' that has explicit 'may wield in one hand' instead of being 'treated as one handed'.
In this case, the firearm is 'treated as broken by others', but isn't actually broken. The gunfighter does not use it as a broken weapon. Ergo, by your logic, there is nothing for the feat to repair (it's not broken, it's treated as broken by non-gunslingers).
The only reason for the special clause is to repair the battered condition of the gun and make it masterwork. However, feel free to FAQ the OP. I did, I expect the devs to respond 'no response required' though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree with mdt.
"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 the weapon already has the broken condition, it does not work at all for anyone else trying to use it. This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth 4d10 gp when sold)."
Special: If you are a gunslinger, this feat grants the following additional benefit. You can use this feat to repair and restore your initial, battered weapon. It costs 300 gp and 1 day of work to upgrade it to a masterwork firearm of its type.
While you can only "repair" it if the gun is actually broken, "restoring" it only makes sense if you are actually removing the "battered" condition from the weapon.
@mdt: Because the gun actually can become Broken - in which case the Gunslinger treats it as Broken until he repairs it, and everyone else treats it as completely non-functional.
Using Gunsmithing, the Gunslinger can then repair it - removing the actual Broken condition, at which point he treats it like its' perfectly functional and it begins working for others as well, but as if it were Broken.
@Samasboy1: Except there is no Battered condition for a weapon.
The Gunslinger's gun functions similarly to a Bladebound Magus's Black Blade - it has a bunch of extra 'oomph' when in the hands of its owner, but for everyone else it functions differently. I don't see anything in what's been quoted to indicate that that status is ever changed or removed.
@mdt: Because the gun actually can become Broken - in which case the Gunslinger treats it as Broken until he repairs it, and everyone else treats it as completely non-functional. Using Gunsmithing, the Gunslinger can then repair it.
That makes no sense, the Feat allows ANYONE to remove the ACTUAL broken condition if the gun is actually broken.
Crafting Firearms: You can craft any early firearm for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. At your GM's discretion, you can craft advanced firearms for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. Crafting a firearm in this way takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of the firearm's price (minimum 1 day).
Non-magical items can be repaired in a similar fashion, or through the Craft skill used to create it. Generally speaking, this requires a DC 20 Craft check and 1 hour of work per point of damage to be repaired. Most craftsmen charge one-tenth the item's total cost to repair such damage (more if the item is badly damaged or ruined).
Anyone with the gunsmithing feet can repair an actually broken gun.
Therefore, the special entry is meaningless under your interpretation.
Occums Razor says that the simplest explanation is correct.
Yours says the Devs wasted space in the feat putting in a special section to allow the gunslinger to do something he can already do with the feat.
Mine says the Devs added the special to do something, well, special that had no other way of being done.
Razor says?
People in this thread don't seem to like it when others play the gunslinger.If you're taking one level of the class just to get the gun and sell it for profit, (and that was really of the first version of the 100+ copies of this thread was about) then you're not really playing the gunslinger, are you?
You seriously think someone is going to take a single level of a class to get a couple of thousand gold?
Especially since they need 300 gp to make it MW? They'd have that much money by third anyway (what they'd get for the gun).
Sheesh...
@mdt: Because the gun actually can become Broken - in which case the Gunslinger treats it as Broken until he repairs it, and everyone else treats it as completely non-functional. Using Gunsmithing, the Gunslinger can then repair it.That makes no sense, the Feat allows ANYONE to remove the ACTUAL broken condition if the gun is actually broken.
Crafting Firearms: You can craft any early firearm for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. At your GM's discretion, you can craft advanced firearms for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. Crafting a firearm in this way takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of the firearm's price (minimum 1 day).
Non-magical items can be repaired in a similar fashion, or through the Craft skill used to create it. Generally speaking, this requires a DC 20 Craft check and 1 hour of work per point of damage to be repaired. Most craftsmen charge one-tenth the item's total cost to repair such damage (more if the item is badly damaged or ruined).Anyone with the gunsmithing feet can repair an actually broken gun.
Therefore, the special entry is meaningless under your interpretation.
Occums Razor says that the simplest explanation is correct.
Yours says the Devs wasted space in the feat putting in a special section to allow the gunslinger to do something he can already do with the feat.
Mine says the Devs added the special to do something, well, special that had no other way of being done.
Razor says?
Incorrect. Under my interpretation, the special entry is not meaningless. It states that unlike non-Gunslingers with Gunsmithing, a Gunslinger can use the feat to upgrade his gun to a masterwork weapon; a normal Gunsmith cannot do that.
However, nowhere in the text description of a masterwork weapon does it say that it somehow alters the base quality of the initial gun.
I would argue that Occam's Razor states that the text does exactly what it says it does and nothing more; your interpretation is reading into "upgrade to masterwork" an effect that is not actually stated anywhere in the text.
You are inserting out of nearly nothing that upgrading the gun to masterwork removes a section of text from the base class description of the weapon.
That actually WAS the question the very first time a thread like this has come up. (it's come up a lot of times.) Then again, I think it was Raving Dork who OPed that one.People in this thread don't seem to like it when others play the gunslinger.If you're taking one level of the class just to get the gun and sell it for profit, (and that was really of the first version of the 100+ copies of this thread was about) then you're not really playing the gunslinger, are you?You seriously think someone is going to take a single level of a class to get a couple of thousand gold?
Well there's your problem right there. :)
Incorrect. Under my interpretation, the special entry is not meaningless. It states that unlike non-Gunslingers with Gunsmithing, a Gunslinger can use the feat to upgrade his gun to a masterwork weapon; a normal Gunsmith cannot do that.
Wrong, you are still deleting the entire first sentence. If the devs intended that the only effect was that it could be upgraded to MW, then that's all they would have put in.
You can't take half a paragraph and say 'This is crunch' and the other half and say 'this is fluff'.
@Samasboy1: Except there is no Battered condition for a weapon.
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
Generally no, but this definitely seems to define what "battered" is.
But, hey, I am willing to FAQ it for official clarification.
Incorrect. Under my interpretation, the special entry is not meaningless. It states that unlike non-Gunslingers with Gunsmithing, a Gunslinger can use the feat to upgrade his gun to a masterwork weapon; a normal Gunsmith cannot do that.Wrong, you are still deleting the entire first sentence. If the devs intended that the only effect was that it could be upgraded to MW, then that's all they would have put in.
You can't take half a paragraph and say 'This is crunch' and the other half and say 'this is fluff'.
Which is why there's no fluff anywhere in the book, right? It's all legalese and letter of the law.
Sorry, no - the devs put in lots of stuff that's descriptive but serves no mechanical purpose in the game, even in feat descriptions. Roughly 30-50% of the book is fluff; nearly every single class feature in the game starts out with a few lines of fluff before getting into the actual mechanics.
You can't take half a paragraph and say 'This is crunch' and the other half and say 'this is fluff'.
I'm not, no matter how much you imply that I am.
Let's break the sentence down:
"Repair" is a term that we can define in regards to weapons because it's used consistently to refer to a method of removing the Broken condition from a weapon.
"Restore" is not used as a mechanical term in regards to weapons anywhere, at least as far as I'm aware. I'm more than willing to admit if I'm wrong in that regard.
Since we know what 'repair' means, your argument hinges on the idea that "restore" is somewhere defined in the rules to indicate that it removes the condition of 'treated as Broken by everyone but the Gunslinger'. Please quote that rules passage.
Otherwise, you're doing the opposite of what you're accusing me of - you're attributing "crunch" to a word that is not actually defined anywhere in the ruleset.
|
I had a similar question (relating to PFS) as to what happens when you retrain all your gunslinger levels, what happens to the gun?
I have to agree with mdt.
"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 the weapon already has the broken condition, it does not work at all for anyone else trying to use it. This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth 4d10 gp when sold)."Special: If you are a gunslinger, this feat grants the following additional benefit. You can use this feat to repair and restore your initial, battered weapon. It costs 300 gp and 1 day of work to upgrade it to a masterwork firearm of its type.While you can only "repair" it if the gun is actually broken, "restoring" it only makes sense if you are actually removing the "battered" condition from the weapon.
+1
| 6 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm more than willing to be proven wrong; I don't believe I will be in this case, but if I am I'll admit it. I'll state the question:
If a Gunslinger's 'battered' initial gun (which is treated as Broken by everyone but the 'slinger) is upgraded to masterwork, does it function as a normal masterwork weapon for others, or is it treated as masterwork gun with the Broken condition?
Feel free to FAQ.
Since we know what 'repair' means, your argument hinges on the idea that "restore" is somewhere defined in the rules to indicate that it removes the condition of 'treated as Broken by everyone but the Gunslinger'. Please quote that rules passage.
Someone else already pointed it out to you. The gunslinger defines what battered is, the gunsmithing feat has a special on how to restore the battered condition.
I'm more than willing to be proven wrong; I don't believe I will be in this case, but if I am I'll admit it. I'll state the question:
If a Gunslinger's 'battered' initial gun (which is treated as Broken by everyone but the 'slinger) is upgraded to masterwork, does it function as a normal masterwork weapon for others, or is it treated as masterwork gun with the Broken condition?
Feel free to FAQ.
Please don't FAQ Xaretherus's question, please FAQ the OP's post, to avoid confusion. The Devs have already stated they prefer the OP to be flagged, and the OPs question still covers this.
So, this supposed completely irremovable "battered" condition remains, even if it is made into a magic weapon?
I guess the magic doesn't work, since a broken item loses it's magic.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
With that said I'm almost certain the "battered" condition is removed.
I'm almost certain it isn't removed, as it is kinda like Schrödinger's cat. It is both broken (and not magical) and whole and magical. For the Gunslinger who started with it, it is a perfectly functional +1 weapon. For everyone else it is a broken non-magical scrap heap.
With that said I'm almost certain the "battered" condition is removed.I'm almost certain it isn't removed, as it is kinda like Schrödinger's cat. It is both broken (and not magical) and whole and magical. For the Gunslinger who started with it, it is a perfectly functional +1 weapon. For everyone else it is a broken non-magical scrap heap.
My own stance is, if you have to invoke Quantum Mechanics to get an interpretation to work correctly, in any table top RPG, then you are using the wrong interpretation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Per RAW, does the Gunslinger's weapon function for everyone but the Gunslinger as 'Broken', even without the damage that normally imparts that condition? Yes.
Per RAW, does the masterwork quality state anything about removing other characteristics of a weapon (such as item 1)? No.
Per RAW, can a masterwork weapon be Broken? Yes.
Per RAW, does the game define the term 'repair' in regards to weapons? Yes - as removing the Broken condition. However, the base battered weapon makes it clear that the gun does not have the Broken condition, but is treated as such as item 1.
Per RAW, does the game define the term 'restore' in regards to weapons at all? No.
Therefore, by RAW if a Gunslinger's initial weapon is upgraded to masterwork, then for anyone but the Gunslinger, it would be treated as a Broken masterwork weapon; if the weapon is enhanced using magic, the magic would not function for anyone else because they treat the weapon as Broken.
If there's disagreement, then the only point where it can lie is with a definition of the term 'restore' in the rules in regards to weapons. It may be that the text in the Gunsmithing feat was INTENDED to remove the penalty on the weapon for others, but that is not what is stated anywhere.
My own stance is, if you have to invoke Quantum Mechanics to get an interpretation to work correctly, in any table top RPG, then you are using the wrong interpretation.
My own stance is, if you have to pretend that the person with which you're disagreeing is twisting logic, when they are not in any way shape or form, and have in fact laid out their argument for you repeatedly in very clear language, then you're welcome to do it how you want at your own table.
Someone else already pointed it out to you. The gunslinger defines what battered is, the gunsmithing feat has a special on how to restore the battered condition.
Since we know what 'repair' means, your argument hinges on the idea that "restore" is somewhere defined in the rules to indicate that it removes the condition of 'treated as Broken by everyone but the Gunslinger'. Please quote that rules passage.
No, someone said that the text uses the word "restore". You are reading that word to mean something that is not defined anywhere.
Bunch of stuff
Can a magic item have the broken condition? Yes.
What is the effect of a magic item having the broken condition? The magic ceases to work.
If something is said to be 'treated as broken', does that mean it is treated as broken for all effects of broken? Yes, unless otherwise stated.
Does the statement about the gunslinger's starting gun have any specifications in it about how to treat it if it's magical? No.
Does the gunslinger starting gun then follow all the normal rules for magical weapons if it is enchanted after being made Masterwork? Yes.
Then what is the result of enchanting a gunslinger's starting gun? Is it a magical weapon that isn't magical except in Gunslinger's hands? So that if we pass it back and forth as free actions, we get a way to send magical morse code as it flickers from functional magical to non-functional magical?
Again, if you have two possibilities, and one doesn't require quantum mechanics, and one does... it's probably the Devs intent to use the rule that doesn't require Quantum Mechanics.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
it's probably the Devs intent to use the rule that doesn't require Quantum Mechanics.
The Dev's intent is to make completely absolutely certain that someone can't take a level in Gunslinger and gain a 1500 gp item they could sell for 750 gp.
Enchanting it to a magic weapon to get around this loophole is going against RAW.
it's probably the Devs intent to use the rule that doesn't require Quantum Mechanics.The Dev's intent is to make completely absolutely certain that someone can't take a level in Gunslinger and gain a 1500 gp item they could sell for 750 gp.
Enchanting it to a magic weapon to get around this loophole is going against RAW.
No, it's not.
This is a silly argument.
The only time it's an issue is when the gunslinger is the first level they take, but then they do not have the 300 gp to make it masterwork.
Nobody is going to level dip into Gunslinger from their own class just to buy a gun and sell it.
Sheesh.
EDIT : And your argument means the feat gunsmithing's special note is useless, since you apparently think the gun can't be enchanted? Why not? It's masterwork. Please show the rule that says the gun can't be enchanted when its' masterwork.
First, I have to correct that statement, as I dropped the 50% into the wrong place: You would be able to sell it for the scrap cost plus 50% of the masterwork costs.
And that is actually in the rules:
In general, a character can sell something for half its listed price, including weapons, armor, gear, and magic items. This also includes character-created items.
By RAW, a normal item would sell for 50% of the total value of the item (base equipment cost plus masterwork cost plus any magical enhancements). The description of the base Gunslinger weapon specifically states that the gun can be sold for 4d10 gp, so that overrides the normal sale cost of the base item price. And then you'd still possibly get 50% of the masterwork price back on top of that.
That's assuming that you'll find someone who will buy a gun that won't ever work right - unless the intention was that upgrading it to masterwork removed that condition, which I don't believe to be the case.
it's probably the Devs intent to use the rule that doesn't require Quantum Mechanics.The Dev's intent is to make completely absolutely certain that someone can't take a level in Gunslinger and gain a 1500 gp item they could sell for 750 gp.
But the Devs created a trait anyone can take that gives you 900 gp. Hmm. I don't think the gold is really a balance factor here.
By RAW, a normal item would sell for 50% of the total value of the item (base equipment cost plus masterwork cost plus any magical enhancements). The description of the base Gunslinger weapon specifically states that the gun can be sold for 4d10 gp, so that overrides the normal sale cost of the base item price. And then you'd still possibly get 50% of the masterwork price back on top of that.
But that isn't consistent with your position on the RAW. It shouldn't matter if it is made masterwork or enchanted since the ability is specific.
This starting weapon can only be sold for scrap (it’s worth 4d10 gp when sold).
Nothing there states the sale price ever increases, despite being made masterwork or enchanted. "Scrap" means you aren't selling a weapon (masterwork, enchanted or otherwise) since you are only selling metal and wood bits, not a functional weapon. So your position that the "battered" condition is not removed when it is "repaired and restored" should naturally result in the sale value never increasing.
But that isn't consistent with your position on the RAW. It shouldn't matter if it is made masterwork or enchanted since the ability is specific.
Note the part where I state that you'd still possibly get 50%?
Even in my original post, I didn't imply that I thought that was what RAW said. What I said was, "At best I'd agree that it would sell for 50% of the scrap cost plus masterwork; why would anyone buy a gun that will never work right save but for the original owner?"
As a GM, if I want to throw a bone to the player and offer them more gold than I think RAW allows, I will. I'm sorry if you felt I was being inconsistent.
I hope that clarifies my position: I never said I thought that was the price RAW would offer, only that I might go with that at my table (if I wasn't going to allow that as a house rule, I would probably warn the player beforehand so that he could make a better gun and make it masterwork, so he didn't invest resources into something that he couldn't later sell if he wanted).
But that isn't consistent with your position on the RAW. It shouldn't matter if it is made masterwork or enchanted since the ability is specific.Note the part where I state that you'd still possibly get 50%?
Even in my original post, I didn't imply that I thought that was what RAW said. What I said was, "At best I'd agree that it would sell for 50% of the scrap cost plus masterwork; why would anyone buy a gun that will never work right save but for the original owner?"
As a GM, if I want to throw a bone to the player and offer them more gold than I think RAW allows, I will. I'm sorry if you felt I was being inconsistent.
I hope that clarifies my position: I never said I thought that was the price RAW would offer, only that I might go with that at my table (if I wasn't going to allow that as a house rule, I would probably warn the player beforehand so that he could make a better gun and make it masterwork, so he didn't invest resources into something that he couldn't later sell if he wanted).
And I never misrepresented your position, I am merely pointing out that to be consistent, you would have to rule the sale price never increased, which is what your original point said, but then you said it "could" or "possibly" increase. Those comments aren't consistent.
Obviously, I disagree with you since I think up grading to masterwork by "repairing and restoring" it would not make it battered anymore. So it would work like any other item (50% total market price).