|
The same can be said of the barbarianNot exactly. That barbarian can attack for non-lethal damage, while the gunslinger cannot.The eample I used had a Barbarian hit for nearly 100 hp of 'non lethal' on a 20 hp victim.
I would get rubber bullets if I could. Salt shot doesn't work.
I don't normally kill everything in site on impulse. Whereas the Barb did.
I don't think my existing barbarian is even capable of not killing something in a single round unless it has about 200 HP, assuming even three of its attacks hit. Even then, it's probably either unconscious or close. What's that say about doing non-lethal to mobs with far less HP? Of course, we don't actually KNOW how much HP they have, so we can only give our best effort to take'em down without killing them. God forbid it crits with that earth breaker. A full round attack with a single confirmed crit is probably enough to kill a balor demon, and the barbarian is only level 11.
|
Hmm... Clustered Shots doesn't say anything about having to take all your attacks. Just that whatever you do take is added up before DR is applied. You might be thinking of the Gunslinger Deed Dead Shot. EDIT: How I've mostly seen it run is you still resolve all of the attacks one at a time, and if the creature drops, you can stop or move to a new target like any other full attack.
I've got another question... as a GM, should I make the player aware when an enemy becomes staggered? My accidental kill in Season 5, which thankfully did not cost us any prestige, came when I took an attack against a staggered opponent, who I'd just hit during a flurry. Had I known he was staggered, I would have used non-lethal. Is staggered a visible condition? Granted, my character was a Monk, and I should probably have been doing non-lethal the whole time, anyway. After accidentally snapping the guy's neck, the monk went to non-lethal for the rest of the scenario, paranoid he might accidentally kill again.
|
I tend to describe someone staggered as weaving on their feet. I usually try to avoid bloodied, but that is because PF doesn't include that state as a known condition, unlike 4th Ed.
Since I GMed LFR for several years, though, sometimes it sneaks out.
I will, if asked, give a description of how badly someone/something looks, as in barely scratched, scratched, damaged, mauled, barely able to stand, etc.
If I hadn't tossed all my poker chips during a move, I might "borrow" Chris's idea of stacking chips as a visible sign of how much damage a monster has taken. After all, the players can add it up themselves. And some do....
Edit: On the topic of the original post: You are best off taking a break from GMing PFS if you cannot GM any PC impartially. I seldom see any gunslinger have a distinctly western aroma, most have other backgrounds, many into the Asian theme promulgated by Tien.
If you cannot even handle playing with someone running a Gunslinger, you are probably better off avoiding PFS entirely, until you have it under control.
So, probably, GMing a private game, where you can specify that "No gunpowder allowed" is one of your home rules. I am running a home game version of The Dragon's Demand, and didn't get any Gunslinger PCs, even with a few extra player swaps. Another GM specified no gunpowder for the home game Dragon's Demand game he is going to be starting shortly, and I didn't see any objections.
Even so, I do have a musket-wielding Gunslinger, no archetypes, in my PC pile-up. On a crit, he can do significant damage. On a crit, I have other PCs who do significantly more, and do significantly more on a non-crit, as well.
Fighter with a bow, Magus with a scimitar, Rogue with a fauchard, Dex-based fighter with an Agile rapier, Lore Warden Fighter with a whip...
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Late to the party. My apologies.
My contention with the original post is not so much "I don't like Gunslingers." We all have elements of the game mechanics, or types of players, we don't much care for, and there's a reasonable argument between "suck it up and GM, you little booger" and "if it's wrecking your fun, I draw your attention to how much you are getting paid to GM."
My contention is with the title of the thread. Not "How Should I Handle Gunslingers at My Table?" but rather, what's the "Best Way to Handle Gunslingers at Your Table?" The original poster doesn't just want to kill off characters, he has positioned himself to get them out of the game entirely.
And really, I don't understand the motivation behind provoking a whole lot of people to tell him that he should stop GMing. "I'm going to poison my city's water supply, killing thousands of people; or else I'm going to stop GMing Pathfinder Society. Which do you think I should do?"
Unless the point of this thread is to gather evidence that we're all mean and want to throw him out of PFS.
--
Oh, and Kinevon, Discount Poker Supply has a great little set on clearance.
|
|
I am constantly surprised at how often I can say that a creature is bloodied in a pathfinder game and everyone knows what I mean.
I do the same, but I believe it is because that term is the one good thing to have come from 4e. Im not trying to bash the game, but that single term seems to have moved from being a term used just for that game into the larger rpg scene overall, even if unoffically.
Perhaps the same could be said for a 'Skill Challenge', though the idea behind it wasnt new when 4e came out, even if the term might have been.
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
Oh, and Kinevon, Discount Poker Supply has a great little set on clearance.
I'm not Kinevon, but thanks for the pointer!
I've got a couple of sets on order - I plant to use them as condition markers (and I'm going to substitute a Condition deck for the playing cards).
|
|
I searched and couldn't find anything to say that there are visible signs of being staggered, so it's probably correct to not say anything unless the player specifically asks (or has Deathwatch running). If someone asked, I'd allow a heal check to spot it. But since that's unlikely to happen in the middle of a full attack…
So, yeah, I've got to be more careful before I announce all out power attacks against people we might need to take alive.
|
Venture-Captain, California—San Francisco Bay Area South & West
|
John, are you familiar with these condition markers?
Yeah - in fact I picked up a set on the Golem sale.
But the nice thing about the poker chips is that you get lots of them, so you can mark multiple characters affected by the same condition.
I plan on setting the relevant condition card out with one of the poker chips on it, and putting other chips of the same colour under the affected characters. I might do the same thing for buffs, too.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Ferious Thune: There's also no rules stating that there are ever any visible signs of someone being injured at all, but I hope I don't have to make a heal check to figure out which of two prone people went down from HP damage and which went down to a sleep spell.
|
|
This is one of those things I'd make a common sense ruling on in lieu of anything RAW to cover it. Here in the real world, it will be very obvious if you're about to drop. This is readily seen in the MMA, boxing and even random street confrontations you see on the news. So I figure it's perfectly fine for a party to know if a creature looks pretty torn up or not.
|
This is one of those things I'd make a common sense ruling on in lieu of anything RAW to cover it. Here in the real world, it will be very obvious if you're about to drop. This is readily seen in the MMA, boxing and even random street confrontations you see on the news. So I figure it's perfectly fine for a party to know if a creature looks pretty torn up or not.
True, however you also see those on MMA who seem to be full of vigor, taken a beating, not showing any sign of weakness, then drop after a single jab. Similarly, there are the ones who wobble on their feet for minutes and end up standing victorious. It's not always so telling.
Your OP certainly fits Gary Gygax' comments regarding problem GMs. You're taking the wrong approach:
Players and GMs alike, take heed: Despite misguided perceptions to the contrary, the game master is not the enemy of the player characters! At least, he shouldn’t be. Those unenlightened or unscrupulous would-be GMs who take this stance of hostility toward PCs (or worse yet, toward players) won’t be around long anyway, for their players will desert them in short order.
The game master should derive his satisfaction from entertaining the associated group, from testing them and seeing them succeed, and from the approbation they give him in return. But it is possible that through lack of maturity or because of some personal insecurity, the game master might view the player group as hostile and/or as a vehicle for his personal attainment of self enhancement through denigration of the player group’s worth. Such circumstances are extremely difficult to overcome, and the individual who evidences these traits is probably not ready to tackle the job of being a GM.
Because you don't like a valid class, you would ruin a players' experience? The guy who invented the game wouldn't let you sit behind a GM screen. Don't you think you might want to re-examine your three listed options? Gygax is putting forth an early version of, "don't be a jerk."
(italicized quotes are from Gary Gygax, 'Role Playing Mastery')
BTW, Gygax himself was opposed to guns in AD&D and he held firm. But as he explains, D&D was medieval fantasy, not technology. Pathfinder is designed as both, thus gunpowder is approriate. If it's allowed, allow it: or play outside of the PFS system and you won't have to allow it.
Players have tried to convince me to allow the use of gunpowder in my AD&D game campaign. From one standpoint, the thought is tempting. Just imagine kobolds, the most inconsequential of humanoid monsters, armed with Uzi submachine guns-now there’s a monster that would strike terror in the heart of even the most powerful PC! Likewise, regenerating trolls plying bayonetted rifles might be a pure joy to the harassed Dungeon Master looking for a way to put self-important PCs in their place. But the game is medieval fantasy, and the spirit is magic, not technology. Despite my (unexpected by the players) temptation to allow its use just to show them, the idea had to be rejected. The time spent in dealing with it and then having them reject it would be wasted.
|
|
@Ferious Thune: There's also no rules stating that there are ever any visible signs of someone being injured at all, but I hope I don't have to make a heal check to figure out which of two prone people went down from HP damage and which went down to a sleep spell.
Point taken. So what is the correct thing to do as a GM? Let the players know as soon as an enemy is staggered, let them know if they happen to ask, or not let them know at all? I'll happily let the players know (and have in the past) if that's common practice. I was looking for something in the rules to back me up on doing so, not so I could justify not telling the players.
@nosig: That's a pretty harsh interpretation of the spell. It's already such a small hit point range that it can detect that it's almost useless for its intended purpose. I don't regularly cast Deathwatch, as I don't play my cleric often, but that would be a frustrating ruling to run into.
|
|
Let me make a comparison:
Knowledge checks to identify a creature
Without a check - The red creature has four arms, each ended with sharp claws at each fingertip, levels two longbows at you!
With a check - That creature is a (insert name here)
With a better check - That creature is weak to this, immune to that, blah blah blah.
Heal checks to identify states (no hard and fast rules, I believe, so pulling this out my bum)
Without a check - The fighter has been going mano y mano with this bloke for several rounds.
With a check - He seems to be a bit the worse for wear.
With a better check - He's in REALLY bad shape and is about to drop if a leaf so much as brushes against him.
My justification, though, lies in the fact that spells such as Deathwatch exist. Why would there be a spell to identify how bad off a baddy is if one could tell with a cursory glance? (Apologies if I said that up thread already)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I searched and couldn't find anything to say that there are visible signs of being staggered, so it's probably correct to not say anything unless the player specifically asks (or has Deathwatch running). If someone asked, I'd allow a heal check to spot it. But since that's unlikely to happen in the middle of a full attack…
So, yeah, I've got to be more careful before I announce all out power attacks against people we might need to take alive.
a note on deathwatch:
"You instantly know whether each creature within the area is dead, fragile (alive and wounded, with 3 or fewer hit points left), fighting off death (alive with 4 or more hit points), healthy, undead, or neither alive nor dead (such as a construct)."I have had judges say that the status would be the total HP BEFORE death... in other words, a creature is down and bleeding out. If it has a 10 CON, and is at -6 it still is "fighting off death (alive with 4 or more hit points)", if it only has one point left (-9 HP) then it is "fragile (alive and wounded, with 3 or fewer hit points left)"...
so the only time deathwatch is actually useful would be when the creatures are down.But YMMV
Actually, the more I think about this, the more I wonder if that's maybe the right interpretation after all. If Deathwatch detects someone as "fragile" when they are conscious, and presumably they can still shout for healing, then it's not terribly useful. If it can tell the Cleric which of his downed allies are closest to actual death, and thus need priority healing, that would potentially be more useful, since that is a situation where a character can't tell the Cleric how he's doing, and a player would have to metagame to do so.
EDIT: Sior, that would also address how Deathwatch would still be useful, even if a condition like Staggered is obvious just from looking at someone.
|
|
It's gotten pretty far off topic, but I guess the whole point of that line of discussion was to say Guns(lingers) don't kill vital NPCs, Pathfinders kill vital NPCs. I'm with everyone who says you run a game for a Gunslinger the same way you'd run it for any other class. Personally, after playing a Gunslinger through (most of) Rise of the Runelords, I think the touch AC mechanic is a little broken, too, but it's the way the game works, and this is PFS, so short of making sure the player is following all of the rules, a GM shouldn't be looking for reasons or ways to "handle" any particular class. Just do what the tactics for the encounter say, or what makes sense if the tactics have been broken, and remember that as a GM you're there to run the scenario as written, and there's no reason to be frustrated or upset if the PCs beat the bad guy, easily or not.
|
|
Oh, and Kinevon, Discount Poker Supply has a great little set on clearance.
Nice idea, and I like the size. May have to get a set, despite my qualms about purchasing non-local chips, when I live in Las Vegas. ;)
"Just down that street, you see Main Street Casino Supply. Down that street, you see Chips Ahoy! which has nothing to do with chocolate chips or the keebler elves..."
Main Street Casino Supply, which is open to the public, exists. The other one is whole cloth, although I wish I could afford to start it up, just for the punny name outrage it should provoke...
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually given the original poster hasn't said boo for nearly 120 posts.. I think that this was the posted equivalent of leaving a flaming bag of dog poo on the front step..
He was trying to foment nerd rage. And clearly got it.
Or he honestly believed his predicament was both normal and common, earnestly expecting the mainstream GMing community to feel the same and have pointers for how to weed his garden.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@Ferious Thune: There's also no rules stating that there are ever any visible signs of someone being injured at all, but I hope I don't have to make a heal check to figure out which of two prone people went down from HP damage and which went down to a sleep spell.Point taken. So what is the correct thing to do as a GM?
To make a call that is simultaneously fair, informed, and suited to that table's social dynamics. :)
|
I have never really understood the sheer gunslinger hate. I personally hate Summoners, but I will never autotarget or otherwise make the summoner have a bad time. Gunslingers can provide a modicum of constant damage, but do not provide the hardest hitting.
1: Reload Times - You need to spend gold and feats to make your reload time worth anything.
2: Gold Sink - Gunslingers are HUGE gold sinks. A +1 Double Pistol is 5750 GP. A single Double Pistol. For that cost on any other class your getting both a +1 weapon and a +1 armor.
3: Time investment - Gunslingers, even human based ones, take levels to become effective, more so in society with the Fame restrictions. My gunslinger finally got his 2nd pistol at level 3, and neither are enchanted yet.
4: Adequate Damage - Currently, running as a Gunslinger(Mysterious Stranger) 1/Inquisitor 2, I can dish out 1D8+6, using Point Blank, Wrath, and Judgement per shot with a +4 while dual wielding, or +8 if not dual wielding. Sure once I get Deadly Aim I will be able to add about 2-4 to that damage, but I will probably be level 5 or 7 at that point in time. My fiances Bastard Sword Fighter does 1D10+7(8?) at level 1 with only Exotic Weapon Prof, and Power Attack. At Level 5 she could do 1D10+12 using Weapon Spec, Power Attack and a single +1 enchant. Thats 1D10+12 in 1 turn vs. 1D8+8 (which by the way takes 1 to 2 turns to start going due to the use of swift and standard actions needed). That fighter is not even optimized for damage. She could have gone Great Axe or Two-Handed.
5: Lore - Golarion, as has been stated, is not a Tolkienesque fantasy world. Varisia could be seen as such, but add in the nations of Cheliax, Andoran, Osirion, and Kyonin alone, your already WAY outside the normal fantasy setting. The Elves are ALIENS for crying out loud.
This was just my two cents.
|
Gunslingers can provide a modicum of constant damage, but do not provide the hardest hitting.
Bear in mind that specific and unique circumstances can change the nature of the statement I am about to make, but speaking in general terms, low to mid-low gunslingers are not typically ridiculously better than their melee/ranged peers.
Once you break past 13th level though, a pistolero (specifically a pistolero) absolutely sky rockets in damage per round. At 16th level, our single double-barrel pistol pistolero put out an average of about 650 damage a round without any critical hits (and at 12 attacks around, he almost always landed 1 or 2 in a given turn - raising that average to over 700 or 800). Now, true, some melee/ranged class combinations at that level can do very large damage as well - but none of them do so against touch AC on a consistent basis. Often times, the 3rd, 4th, and/or 5th attack of those classes stands a fair to very high chance to miss, which reduces the actual amount of damage they will put out. The gunslinger does not suffer that reality 99% of the time at those levels.
That is no reason to hate on the class, though. It's instead a good reason to keep voicing to Paizo that we want the double-barrel firearms and the up close and deadly deed to get some revision or just go away.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This past weekend, I watched a gunslinger at my table restore balance to the class by rolling nothing above a '2' on the die, all session. And yes, he was using paper cartridges.
--
If I had to take a guess about the visceral reaction against gunslingers , I'd say that ...
It's the same reason other people are opposed to any psionic class that uses terms like "id insinuation", "aura alteration" or "synaptic tempest".
It's not that these genres are different from Renaissance / early Enlightenment culture and society, but that they're incompatable. It's already a stretch to suggest that magic and superhuman skills and abilities wouldn't alter a renaissance culture, that clothing styles, for instance, would look like those of Earth history. But gunslingers throw an Old West sensibility into a place where the American Old West doesn't make any sense.
At least, not to the people opposed to the class.
|
|
3: Time investment - Gunslingers, even human based ones, take levels to become effective, more so in society with the Fame restrictions. My gunslinger finally got his 2nd pistol at level 3, and neither are enchanted yet.
Another thing in this point is the number of feats. Even though they go after the lowest (usually) defense stat, they also have to take into account cover and shooting into melee. This makes some foes much harder to hit. Not to mention range increments, which is really a worry for alchemists more than gunslingers, but still! It's a very feat-reliant class. Rapid Reload, Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, and probably others all before the class will be as efficient as many want them to be. And that can get level-consuming.
|
|
This past weekend, I watched a gunslinger at my table restore balance to the class by rolling nothing above a '2' on the die, all session. And yes, he was using paper cartridges.
--
If I had to take a guess about the visceral reaction against gunslingers , I'd say that ...** spoiler omitted **
This is a very good point. I personally felt they fit it in well, but that is simply my view. I have heard that one as well, but I personally have long since stopped bothering associating the overall genre and feel of Golarion to a single trope. The developers purposely built the world that way to be as inclusive as possible. While some things may not have been done as well, Alkenstar itself is very different from the outside world. The city itself evokes a sense of Steampunk/Victorian/Old West with its factory side and nobility side to it. The underground and blackmarket of the city feeling very steam/cyber punkish even in the feeling of it.
|
|
It is a lot easier to get their combat effectiveness up than people are giving it credit for. The gunslinger very quickly becomes a force to be reckoned with. Sure, you have to be patient until you use your dex on your damage, but it makes a world of difference. Your strength stat is all but useless; dump it, and you will find it does nothing to harm you at all. Strength depleting poisons are few and far between. Besides that, you shouldn't need to be in the thick of things anyway. There are also PFS legal ways to circumvent a lot of the cost of running one, though you still need to pay some to run one to the fullest of its ability. The synergy they have with certain magical items is amazing as well, a prime example being the monkey belt. Any intelligent player can turn them from "good damage dealer" to "boy, this is almost as broken as that tetori monk I saw suplexing a great wyrm last night" with just the investment of a few thousand gold. :P
And truth be told? You really don't absolutely HAVE to have the reliable quality on your firearm. It's always something I'd recommend people take, but you've already got only a small chance to misfire on most of the weapons.
|
|
It commits the double sin of not matching the flavor of the rest of the campaign AND being neigh unstoppable engines of destruction.
Its not often the role and roll players find themselves in the same lynch mob...
Which flavor?
Ancient Japan (Tien)?
Ancient Egypt (Osirion)?
Post revolution America (Andoran)?
Mid-French Revolution (Galt)?
Decadent 19th Century England (Taldor)?
Siberian cliche (Irrisen/Land of the Linnorm Kings)?
BDSM San Francisco (Cheliax)?
ST:TNG Ferengi (Qadira)?
Puritans (Hellknights)?
And that is just off the top of my head. Really, Gunslingers should be required to be Andorans, if you want them to have an Old West flavor.
Meh. I'd rather GM for a Gunslinger played plain than a Chelaxian playing hokey. Or a certain local Taldan of naked repute. (PC, not player)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ancient Japan (Tien)?
Ancient Egypt (Osirion)?
Post revolution America (Andoran)?
Mid-French Revolution (Galt)?
Decadent 19th Century England (Taldor)?
Siberian cliche (Irrisen/Land of the Linnorm Kings)?
BDSM San Francisco (Cheliax)?
ST:TNG Ferengi (Qadira)?
Puritans (Hellknights)?
Knight vs samurai is a classic what if (and thus fantasy)
Knight vs six shooter is why we don't have any more knights. (and thats how pistols work mechanically even if story wise they're blunderbusses or wheel locks)
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wish PFS would get back to historical warfare simulation. No gunslingers, no ninjas, no samurai, no alchemists, no wizards, no clerics, no magi, no witches, no druids, no paladins, no summoners, no sorcerers, ...
Yay! I can still play my elven rangers and dwarven monks!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ancient Japan (Tien)?
Ancient Egypt (Osirion)?
Post revolution America (Andoran)?
Mid-French Revolution (Galt)?
Decadent 19th Century England (Taldor)?
Siberian cliche (Irrisen/Land of the Linnorm Kings)?
BDSM San Francisco (Cheliax)?
ST:TNG Ferengi (Qadira)?
Puritans (Hellknights)?Knight vs samurai is a classic what if (and thus fantasy)
Knight vs six shooter is why we don't have any more knights. (and thats how pistols work mechanically even if story wise they're blunderbusses or wheel locks)
It's not six shooter.. it's flintlock
And if you want to be 'factual' or 'accurate' the pistol is older than the rapier
|
|
I've actually run 56 games (at least that I've reported; I've probably run more). Never have I played against the players. Gunslingers, however, are worth changing styles for.
For the guy who asked for more information: I really can't narrow it down for you more. I DM at conventions, at gamedays, at my home, and everywhere else. Some are private games, and some are public. Typically in my area people don't play gunslingers because they're rational, intelligent human beings. Recently the online games have become more popular, though, so I'm preparing to branch out to a wider audience.
For the person (or people, more accurately) that tried throwing the setting in my face: why don't you bother reading the setting yourselves? I really enjoyed reading the part in Alkenstar that said how they don't allow guns outside of the mountain range because they're afraid of what will happen if guns fall into the wrong hands. That makes it quite odd that about one out of ever 15 or 20 Pathfinders these days seem to be carrying guns outside of the mountain range.
For Mike Brock: Sure, I'll happily GM for you. I'm sure that you're just as excited as I am to kill off all the gunslingers in your campaign!
|
|
Honestly, learn gunslinger. Learn their limitations and abilities, their pitfalls and their promise. You'll see they have weaknesses and drawbacks like every other class. Like a fighter who one-hit-KO's most of the baddies they come across for the first three levels. And you may like them a bit better for yourself. Because all I see right now is a fear of that which you don't truly understand, and being a class you don't see locally a lot, that's perfectly understandable. But keep to the rules of their class, of combat, and of the game, and you may just make an enjoyable game for everyone. Gunslingers included.