But I was referring to the character having to invest a feat to use an exotic weapon to be able to two weapon fight with ranged weapons.
Particularly ones with high crit against touch AC.
Having to invest a Feat to allow you to reload as a Free action in the first place doesn't count?
In the case of crossbows, giving up any opportunity to add Str to your damage (like a bow can) doesn't count as a sacrifice in your book?
It's not like you've got any damage over the bow with these.
Bow, level 10: 2 attacks from BaB, 1 from Rapid Shot, 1 (technically) from Manyshot.
Total 4 shots, total attack penalties of -2 all, -7 iterative.
Crossbow/Gun: 2 attacks from BaB, 2 from TWFING. Total attack penalties of -2 all, -7 iterative.
You can combine Rapid Shot with that, but I think the extra -2 balances that out. For guns, that's kinda iffy, but considering only one class and an archetype can use the things effectively, and don't get any particular goodies BESIDES that, I think we can cut them a little slack.
As I understand the RAW you may fire any Bow (not Crossbows without Rapid reload but including Repeating ones) as often as you have attacks in the action you choose i.e. Standard action Attack = once
Full attack = to number of attacks you have i.e. if you have a BAB of +16 you get 4 attacks. (+16/11/6/1)
The Feat Rapid shot one one to the total for a -2 penalty
Manyshot adds 2
I've removed some posts. Links to videos about ultimatums, especially those making fun of another poster, are inappropriate. Please remember the most important rule of the Paizo.com message boards.
Warren Burgess, the problem is that drawing arrows is a free action so if this FAQ were to be applied to archery (rightly or wrongly) it would limit a shooter to 3 shots per round.
Sean has already stated that the FAQ is not meant to apply to archery. However, there is nothing in the FAQ that states this so anyone who actually uses this FAQ as a guideline will limit archery to 3 shots per round.
- Gauss
Sean has already stated that the FAQ is not meant to apply to archery. However, there is nothing in the FAQ that states this so anyone who actually uses this FAQ as a guideline will limit archery to 3 shots per round.- Gauss
I intend to use this FAQ as a guideline (including the part about it depending on circumstances and the other qualifications). I won't be limiting archery in that way.
Fwiw, I won't be limiting guns either unless some build or combination i haven't seen gets out of hand. Then I'll cite this FAQ and will limit reloading a gun to three per round.
This is a FAQ about how and when one should exercise DM discretion. It's never going to be black and white.
I don't see why people say a Gunslinger getting full attacks with their gun is "cheesy" or an "exploit." Looking through the rules, it would seem to be intentional by design.
A published class has:
a)full BAB
b)focus on ranged attacks, specifically firearms
c)free quicker reloads (Rapid Reload as a bonus, or deed)
d)even quicker reloads (Musket Master treats two handed as one handed)
e)Alchemical ammo specifically stacks to further reduce load times (at a higher misfire chance)
Even without TWF (and its attendant penalties to attack), you easily have 6 attacks from BAB, Rapid Shot, and Haste.
It seems like the ability to full attack with your gun is entirely intentional in the rules.
If this wasn't the intention, why didn't:
a)Gunslinger have 3/4 BAB
b)things that reduce reloading time specify they don't stack
|
It isn't full attack that is the issue.
It is full attack while dual wielding with a weapon with reload limitations included in the design, likely to offset the fact that it does X4 crit vs touch AC.
Not to mention how absurd the whole weapon cord logic is.
Not to mention this is only one of the issues that has come up with free action abuse in the threads.
But most importantly.
"Again, these are guidelines, and the GM can allow more or fewer free actions as appropriate to the circumstances."
It is full attack while dual wielding with a weapon with reload limitations included in the design, likely to offset the fact that it does X4 crit vs touch AC.
Well, that's why you do things to reduce the reload times. You use rapid reload and an alchemical cartridge instead of one of those cool cartridges. So you get feat taxed and your options are reduced. Then I have to ask why I can reduce it to a free action, was I only supposed to fire twice per round, maybe not while moving or was it only balanced for advanced firearms which hold more than one bullet at a time?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sean has already stated that the FAQ is not meant to apply to archery. However, there is nothing in the FAQ that states this so anyone who actually uses this FAQ as a guideline will limit archery to 3 shots per round.- Gauss
I intend to use this FAQ as a guideline (including the part about it depending on circumstances and the other qualifications). I won't be limiting archery in that way.
Fwiw, I won't be limiting guns either unless some build or combination i haven't seen gets out of hand. Then I'll cite this FAQ and will limit reloading a gun to three per round.
This is a FAQ about how and when one should exercise DM discretion. It's never going to be black and white.
It's the 3/round I don't like. If someone's going crazy with 2 double-barreled pistols, firing 10+ shots a round, by all means crack down on it.
But if someone in the same game is using a single gun and has gotten up to 4 shots a round, why do they need to get nerfed too?Especially since the rules abuser will probably just switch to 2WF pepperboxes and keep a good chunk of his attacks. Especially if he keeps a couple loaded spares.
The way I read the FAQ is that it is precisely this level of discretion that is being advocated. A qualified example, labelled as a guideline and explicitly not a rule, isn't something I feel bound to follow.
If I ever have a gunslinger with four attacks at my table, I'll have no problem (whether he talks while shooting or not). If he comes back the following week with a "rebuild he found on the forums" and suddenly has ten attacks a round, then ill adjust it down with this FAQ's authority (if he claims I'm going against raw).
I think FAQs about dm judgement are inherently less precise and more subjective than pure clarifications of what some rule meant.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Fwiw, I won't be limiting guns either unless some build or combination i haven't seen gets out of hand. Then I'll cite this FAQ and will limit reloading a gun to three per round.
This is a FAQ about how and when one should exercise DM discretion. It's never going to be black and white.
I'd just cite the core rules where it says it instead. The position is stronger, and unlike the FAQ doesn't conflict with stated rules.
-James
The FAQ doesn't conflict with stated rules unless you only read some of it.
It isn't full attack that is the issue.
It is full attack while dual wielding with a weapon with reload limitations included in the design, likely to offset the fact that it does X4 crit vs touch AC.
Not to mention how absurd the whole weapon cord logic is.
Not to mention this is only one of the issues that has come up with free action abuse in the threads.
But most importantly.
"Again, these are guidelines, and the GM can allow more or fewer free actions as appropriate to the circumstances."
Reload limitations that, to some degree, seem to be intended to circumvented at some level in play. Otherwise there shouldn't be so many things to reduce load times that explicitly stack.
Weapon Cords don't trouble me in concept since you could effectively do the same thing with Quick Draw. But at least then you expended a feat.
|
|
If only there were a firearm that didn't need to be reloaded that could be used in high level play when you have that many attacks....Honestly, I'd love to that as a common magical option. Rather than only available on a single high-level item. Preferably something that just magically loaded ammo you carried. Either as a weapon enchantment or as an ammo bag item. Same for crossbows.
It's a 2nd level spell, so I won't be surprised if it pops up soon.
|
Of only there were a firearm that didn't need to be reloaded that could be used in high level play when you have that many attacks....
..and it wasn't a specific weapon that cost 73,300gp and required you to be lucky enough to find it in whatever town you are in.
|
|
Of only there were a firearm that didn't need to be reloaded that could be used in high level play when you have that many attacks......and it wasn't a specific weapon that cost 73,300gp and required you to be lucky enough to find it in whatever town you are in.
What level are you?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, it is not the reloading that's the issue.
It's the juggling with weapon cords.
A very simple, easy fix that leaves everything the way it was is to errata the cords to say that when a weapon is dangling by the cord, the attached hand is not considered to be free for use with any actions other than regaining the weapon attached as a swift action.
Boom, done.
|
|
Apparently a low enough level that you still think it's cheesy to get four attacks in a round. And a low enough level that the PC can't perform one of their most basic functions that they have feats to specialize in while talking.
So obviously low enough that "you an buy this obscure 73,300 gp item if you're lucky enough to find it" isn't a good way to do something that everyone else can do for free.
yeah, like level 6 with rapid shot and haste.
I said at some level of play. Not only at high level, if your DM gives you one and only if you use a pistol.
|
|
What level are you?Of only there were a firearm that didn't need to be reloaded that could be used in high level play when you have that many attacks......and it wasn't a specific weapon that cost 73,300gp and required you to be lucky enough to find it in whatever town you are in.Apparently a low enough level that you still think it's cheesy to get four attacks in a round. And a low enough level that the PC can't perform one of their most basic functions that they have feats to specialize in while talking.
So obviously low enough that "you an buy this obscure 73,300 gp item if you're lucky enough to find it" isn't a good way to do something that everyone else can do for free.
Four attacks while dual wielding with each weapon, with none of the weapons having multiple cartridges.
Devil is in the details...
|
|
yeah, like level 6 with rapid shot and haste.Apparently a low enough level that you still think it's cheesy to get four attacks in a round. And a low enough level that the PC can't perform one of their most basic functions that they have feats to specialize in while talking.
So obviously low enough that "you an buy this obscure 73,300 gp item if you're lucky enough to find it" isn't a good way to do something that everyone else can do for free.
Do you have a pepper box?
Four attacks while dual wielding with each weapon, with none of the weapons having multiple cartridges.Devil is in the details...
Four attacks is four attacks. What's the issue?
|
|
Four attacks while dual wielding with each weapon, with none of the weapons having multiple cartridges.Devil is in the details...
Four attacks is four attacks. What's the issue?
The issue isn't the attacks, it is the reloading following the attacks for the next round.
If you have a double barrel pistol in each hand, that is four shots.
If you have a pepperbox and a GM who isn't an idiot, that is 6 shots.
The issue comes in on two things. Before 11th level, it is that with rapid reload you can reduce the move action to reload to a free action. But you still need to have a hand free to do so, meaning people have been dropping the gun with a weapon cord to have a hand "free" to reload then whipping that gun back up, dropping the other one to have a hand "free" to reload...etc...etc...
So by any reading, you can have 4 attacks either with the double barrel gun or with the pepperbox.
But not with the single pistol in each hand.
You can have 4 attacks with a pistol in one hand, as even if the strict reload reading is correct that allows you to fire once and reload 3 times (the strictest reading).
But you don't get the dual wield extra attack...well...unless you have quick draw for the last attack, taking you to 5 attacks.
Or 6 if you have a double barrel pistol.
At 11th you have lightning reload for another reload (which would be a separate free action...) so now we are up to 7 by my count.
And of course, there is a pistol that reloads itself and a spell that does the same.
(Sidebar: My suggestion for the Gunslinger class was to simply make the primary class feature that they were able to load firearms very quickly, increasing with attack bonus. This would have made all of this a moot point and made the class much simpler IMHO...but I digress).
Does all of this make a gun more difficult to use than a Bow?
Yes.
Does a bow hit against touch AC and crit X4?
No.
Now what got people rolling their eyes was when people used weapon cords to juggle firearms while they reloaded, as if that was exactly what the person who made weapon cords envisioned.
Is this similar to what you can do with gloves of storing? Yes. But gloves of storing cost 10k, and take up your hand slot and can only carry one extra weapon (which would take you to 6 shots right there if you have double barrel pistols)
And again all of this is just one example of free action abuse. There were long threads about letting go of a weapon to change grips/swap out/etc...all of which were clearly trying to use a technicality in the rule to get around something.
Which, you know, is getting around something.
The whole point of the FAQ was and is to remind GMs that they are allowed, and have always been allowed, to cap the number of free actions that can be done in a round.
If it turns out that the devs only want you to be able to reload a single gun 3 times, and a total of two guns no more than 5 times, I have zero issue with that.
If it turns out they want you to be able to reload guns up to your attack bonus, but only if you actually have a hand free and not when you are dangling a gun by a weapon cord, I'm fine with that.
Neither option pees in anyones kool aide who wasn't trying to get over or around the rules, IMHO. And neither "breaks high level play" as one person put it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So what purpose does the FAQ serve in this case?
A gentle reminder to GMs that they are entitled to limit the number of free actions a player may take if they feel that a player is abusing them or being cheesy. There are a lot of post by SKR on it atm.
So what purpose does the FAQ serve in this case?A gentle reminder to GMs that they are entitled to limit the number of free actions a player may take if they feel that a player is abusing them or being cheesy. There are a lot of post by SKR on it atm.Great.. and that's wonderful.. in fact [i]that's what the core rules actually do[\i]. And the FAQ starts off by quoting them.
Then the FAQ makes this jump to actually numbering and encoding what is reasonable. These suggestions as to what one might consider reasonable are not in line with what is mandated by the core rules. Ergo they are not good suggestions.
Yeah, that's exactly why we have had several threads about it atm.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
As always, the snark here makes me wonder why I bother trying to engage with the people here. At all. Maybe you'd prefer that Jason or Stephen answer your questions.
Because we LIKE you Sean, and respect you. Well, most of us do. Those that count, do.
Remember the faux latin "Illegitimi non carborundum".
|
|
So what purpose does the FAQ serve in this case?A gentle reminder to GMs that they are entitled to limit the number of free actions a player may take if they feel that a player is abusing them or being cheesy. There are a lot of post by SKR on it atm.Great.. and that's wonderful.. in fact [i]that's what the core rules actually do[\i]. And the FAQ starts off by quoting them.
Then the FAQ makes this jump to actually numbering and encoding what is reasonable. These suggestions as to what one might consider reasonable are not in line with what is mandated by the core rules. Ergo they are not good suggestions.
The real problem is that Paizo created items like 'weapon cords' and didn't give enough restrictions upon them.
Then there's guns in the first place which have a good number of issues..
-James
And I like weapon cords.
I dislike the people who don't let us have nice things like weapon cords because the spend so much time looking for ways to game the system, and call it "System Mastery"...
Well, I don't agree with you idea that using an option that's presented in a book as "gaming the system". Some usages may be unanticipated but that doesn't mean its some nefarious plan to ruin your (or anyone's) fun.
As a different take on this (since per Sean's posts around the boards, this seems to have been specifically aimed at Gunslinger shenanigans), what would you think of a FAQ Clarification that said something like:
"For abilities that require a 'free hand,' using a hand for any form of attack results in in not being considered 'free.' Examples include reloading firearms or crossbows, Freehand Fighter, and Duelist. Spellcasters can still make the free touch attack that is part of casting a touch spell."
??
This would eliminate the problems some have with TWF Gunslingers altogether since making the attack with the 'off hand' would mean that it was not longer considered 'free' that round in order to reload. The idea is based on some of Sean's posts and rules on combining natural attacks and manufactured attacks.
