I know it's dangerous to speak of realism in Pathfinder and tabletop in general, but one thing that raises questions for me is how a double barreled pistol can fire shots simultaneously to essentially double their damage.
I could be completely wrong here, but wouldn't two bullet wounds in nearly the same spot be equivalent to just one larger bullet?
Another thought: If a trident can strike with three prongs at once, shouldn't they do triple damage as well? Would the most efficient melee weapon be a stick with twelve knives in a circular pattern on the business end?
Some one else can probably find the links to images to show you, but there are actually a few different possibilities here.
There were ones that actually didn't both fire at the same time. Part way back would fire barrel, then full trigger pull would fire the other.
There was another style that had one trigger firing mechanism with 2 barrels and chambers. You would fire one then rotate the whole barrel/chamber mechanism to fire the other barrel.
But even with 2 side-by-side barrels that fire on 1 trigger pull, the differences caused by the poor manufacturing methods of the barrel, bullet, and powder would pretty much ensure they would hit the exact same spot. Really, they probably wouldn't both hit the same target unless at point blank range. Kinda like separate pellets from a shotgun really.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some one else can probably find the links to images to show you, but there are actually a few different possibilities here.
This one is an actual antique as opposed to the earlier modern reproduction.
This is a typical design, but of course there were lots of variants. Note the double trigger. Pull the front trigger, one barrel fires, pull the second, the other fires, and a strong pull will fire both barrels with the same motion.
But even with 2 side-by-side barrels that fire on 1 trigger pull, the differences caused by the poor manufacturing methods of the barrel, bullet, and powder would pretty much ensure they would hit the exact same spot.
I assume you mean "wouldn't hit the exact same spot"? Because those things really wouldn't hit a manhole cover at five paces.
But I think a better way of looking at is is not "how much more damage do both barrels do," but "how much less damage does a single barrel do?" Saying "it would be just like being hit by a larger bullet" is not bad as an approximation, once you recognize that a larger bullet does more damage.
There are two reasons for this. The first is simply that a larger bullet (or two bullets) has a greater chance of actually hitting something important. The second is that the muzzle energy of two bullets (or a larger bullet with the same muzzle velocity) delivers twice the energy to the target, which in turn produces twice the hydrostatic shock.
The comparison to a trident isn't really apt, since you can't attack with a single prong of a trident at once. And while you could easily make a pentadent or a dodecadent if you wanted to maximize the number of puncture wounds, you'd probably reduce the actual effectiveness of the weapon because it would be too heavy and awkward to wield effectively. Basically, you now have 5 or twelve pointy bits, but still only one set of arms. That's not the case with a double-barreled firearms, since you've got twice as many bullets, but also twice as much gunpowder so it really does hit twice as hard.
Thanks for your insight guys!
The way I see it, getting two attack rolls might be a poor aproximation of how firing two barrels at once would work.
I feel like it'd be more reasonable to either increase just the die damage or increase the critical threat range as you have a higher chance of hitting something important.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...
I assume you mean "wouldn't hit the exact same spot"? Because those things really wouldn't hit a manhole cover at five paces.
...
Yeah, that's what I meant. Too much blood in my caffeine this morning.
Thanks for your insight guys!
The way I see it, getting two attack rolls might be a poor aproximation of how firing two barrels at once would work.I feel like it'd be more reasonable to either increase just the die damage or increase the critical threat range as you have a higher chance of hitting something important.
Why is firing two barrels at once different from and less effective than John Woo-ing two flintlock pistols at once?
Why is firing two barrels at once different from and less effective than John Woo-ing two flintlock pistols at once?Thanks for your insight guys!
The way I see it, getting two attack rolls might be a poor aproximation of how firing two barrels at once would work.I feel like it'd be more reasonable to either increase just the die damage or increase the critical threat range as you have a higher chance of hitting something important.
It has to do with not quite exactly parallel and straight barrels and not quite simultaneous ignition will cause problems dealing with the recoil.
Theoretically (but not really) firing 2 separate weapons would allow each arm to individually deal with each weapon. I.e. the recoil from 1 would not significantly effect the aim of the other. Which is complete BS, but it is a BS that is pretty common to gaming.
But really it has more to do with the whole abstracted hit point, armor class, ability score system. Your never going to get every one to agree on exactly how to abstract anything.
Edit:
On an almost completely unrelated note, I saw a show last week about some trick shooters. There was a guy shooting a pistol so fast that it sounded like a burst from a submachine gun. He would draw another clip from his belt while firing with his right, hit the magazine release with his thumb while slide was still on it's way back, very slight pause while one magazine was ejected and he slid the new one in, then right back to firing. It was amazing.
With slow motion video and electronic timing they showed that he really wasn't quite as fast as a modern submachine gun, but was actually faster than a lot of the older guns. And the submachine guns are so much slower to reload that he was actually faster than many of them when it went across multiple clips for them.
I don't remember the exact numbers. But I think it was 2 of the 30 round magazines in the submachine gun was almost exactly the same time as him shooting 5 of the 13 round clips from his pistol.
The trident comparison is totally wrong. If you think in energy, in the trident the energy is applied once and then is splitted between the three prongs, while in the double barred pistol, the energy is applied twice, to each of the single bulled separately, thus resulting in greater energy output.
Gotcha.
Still seems weird mechanics-wise to me. But I guess it does make some sense.
Edit: Now we just need a gnome tinkerer to make a quad barrel pistol!
Why is firing two barrels at once different from and less effective than John Woo-ing two flintlock pistols at once?Thanks for your insight guys!
The way I see it, getting two attack rolls might be a poor aproximation of how firing two barrels at once would work.I feel like it'd be more reasonable to either increase just the die damage or increase the critical threat range as you have a higher chance of hitting something important.
I think it's because you aim once with a double pistol but aim twice for each pistol. so he's kinda thinking 1 attack roll is needed. but i don't know how'd you take into account the inaccuracy of flintlocks elsewise.
I think it's because you aim once with a double pistol but aim twice for each pistol. so he's kinda thinking 1 attack roll is needed. but i don't know how'd you take into account the inaccuracy of flintlocks elsewise.Why is firing two barrels at once different from and less effective than John Woo-ing two flintlock pistols at once?Thanks for your insight guys!
The way I see it, getting two attack rolls might be a poor aproximation of how firing two barrels at once would work.I feel like it'd be more reasonable to either increase just the die damage or increase the critical threat range as you have a higher chance of hitting something important.
That was my reasoning. Felt like Deadly Aim and Dexterity would only be added once, so firing two barrels at once might give you an attack penalty to do 2d6+X damage or crit on a mad 19-20/x4 (might be a bit much).
Yeah, it's not really a fair mechanic.
In Fantasy (referencing Black Prism), double pistols are common because misfires are common, so it's mostly to have good odds of actually shooting the target. In PF, it's just doubling your damage for a relatively small gold cost.
Yeah, it's not really a fair mechanic.
In Fantasy (referencing Black Prism), double pistols are common because misfires are common, so it's mostly to have good odds of actually shooting the target. In PF, it's just doubling your damage for a relatively small gold cost.
pretty sure it's reload times that cause double pistols to be a thing.
pretty sure it's reload times that cause double pistols to be a thing.Yeah, it's not really a fair mechanic.
In Fantasy (referencing Black Prism), double pistols are common because misfires are common, so it's mostly to have good odds of actually shooting the target. In PF, it's just doubling your damage for a relatively small gold cost.
I doubt it's an either/or thing. Both are pretty good reasons.
I've got an actual double barreled .38 derringer pistol, with 2 triggers allowing you to possibly fire a second shot immediately following the first one, though I remember firing single shot at a tree 20 feet away and missing the tree, even though I'm a decent shot.
I doubt it's an either/or thing. Both are pretty good reasons.pretty sure it's reload times that cause double pistols to be a thing.Yeah, it's not really a fair mechanic.
In Fantasy (referencing Black Prism), double pistols are common because misfires are common, so it's mostly to have good odds of actually shooting the target. In PF, it's just doubling your damage for a relatively small gold cost.
Reliable firearms, rapid reload, alchemical cartridges and the Pistolero archetype make all the penalties disappear.
Double barrel pistols are stronger than pretty much every other firearm, just with a mediocre range (Try being a mythic champion gunslinger with limitless range!)
I know it's dangerous to speak of realism in Pathfinder and tabletop in general, but one thing that raises questions for me is how a double barreled pistol can fire shots simultaneously to essentially double their damage.
I could be completely wrong here, but wouldn't two bullet wounds in nearly the same spot be equivalent to just one larger bullet?
Another thought: If a trident can strike with three prongs at once, shouldn't they do triple damage as well? Would the most efficient melee weapon be a stick with twelve knives in a circular pattern on the business end?
Ignoring the mechanical things... no, two bullets in the same sport are not the same as one large bullet- it might be worse. Think about trying to sew up a wound like that- it is hard to get a grip on and stretch the flesh between the two holes, since it is being used to sew up the other hole too. Ergo, you are less likely to get clean treatment of the wound, and that can lead to all sorts of problems.
If you live in a world without the ability to instantly heal wounds with even basic magic.
And on further though, it gets even worse. With a single bullet twice the mass and muzzle energy, you are more likely to go clean through. With lower energy, you tear more along the way. Also, since the distance is slightly different, there is twice the chance of hitting something importnt
If i were to rebuild firearms, i would increase their reload times significantly but make them extremely stronger.
If i were to rebuild firearms, i would increase their reload times significantly but make them extremely stronger.
I've seen many people want to make that approach and it makes sense, but firearms seem tricky to implement. You want them to be strong but not TOO strong.
Just strong enough to be scary.
Overall I do like the gunslinger for the most part. Though rapidly shoving alchemical cartridges down a barrel between shots looks silly in my head.
Two weapon fighting with juggling, a tail, or three arms is even sillier.
If i were to rebuild firearms, i would increase their reload times significantly but make them extremely stronger.
You'd prefer firearms were only beginning of battle or for emergencies?
Think is you'd need them very strong or they become worthless at later levels (compared to bows/crossbow who will get multi-attacks due to BAB and those extra attacks add up due to extra bonuses).
If i were to rebuild firearms, i would increase their reload times significantly but make them extremely stronger.You'd prefer firearms were only beginning of battle or for emergencies?
Think is you'd need them very strong or they become worthless at later levels (compared to bows/crossbow who will get multi-attacks due to BAB and those extra attacks add up due to extra bonuses).
like really really strong, and independent of player's skills, because they're just guns, they do what hey want.
They're cool.
|
If i were to rebuild firearms, i would increase their reload times significantly but make them extremely stronger.You'd prefer firearms were only beginning of battle or for emergencies?
Think is you'd need them very strong or they become worthless at later levels (compared to bows/crossbow who will get multi-attacks due to BAB and those extra attacks add up due to extra bonuses).
You could go the GURPs route and implement blow through. There a decently high caliber shot that hits you in the head just kills you, where as a similar shot that hits you in the hand or arm does a relatively trivial amount of damage and keeps going out the other side, (possibly and mostly randomly hitting anyone beyond you with a reduced damage.)
That would be a far more accurate modeling of actual gun fights, but it tends to result in gunfights either involving a lot of called shots, or being highly randomly lethal. A skilled gun fighter is just as dangerous as a lucky amatuer, and only more consistently dangerous, and at some point all that matters is the relative strength of your armor and the other guy's gun.
Dire Flail, Barbazu Beard(a metal beard for fighting), and the Battle Ladder.
Point taken.
Dire Flail, Barbazu Beard(a metal beard for fighting), and the Battle Ladder.
In the battle ladder's defense its description mentions that Gnomes use it, so it has an excuse for being a weird weapon.
In reference to the comparison of multiple bullets versus one large bullet... It would be far worse to have multiple bullet wounds as opposed to just one larger bullet. The potential for seriously damaging an internal organ is greater. Plus the additional wounds create extra avenues for blood loss. This is why shotguns are extremely dangerous at close ranges... Imagine trying to stop blood pouring from 5 holes (although slightly smaller) than from one.
Is there not a -4 penalty for firing both at once? That is a balance for them...
Is there not a -4 penalty for firing both at once? That is a balance for them...From a balance perspective it's a really terrible setup, because the gains massively outweigh the costs. Guns target Touch AC, which on the whole gradually scales down where straight AC scales up. A -4 really doesn't mean much; the best Gunslinger feats are already those that let you convert your to-hit bonus into something else (Rapid Shot for more attacks, Deadly Aim for more damage). Would they trade -4 in something that they already don't care about in order to double their damage output? Of course they would. The -4 is meaningless to them.
-4 isn't meaningless, it's a huge penalty. It's almost as bad as being Cursed.
If we are talking about a high level character, who cares about the Gunslinger, casters of course can do way more damage.
I know it's dangerous to speak of realism in Pathfinder and tabletop in general, but one thing that raises questions for me is how a double barreled pistol can fire shots simultaneously to essentially double their damage.
I could be completely wrong here, but wouldn't two bullet wounds in nearly the same spot be equivalent to just one larger bullet?
Another thought: If a trident can strike with three prongs at once, shouldn't they do triple damage as well? Would the most efficient melee weapon be a stick with twelve knives in a circular pattern on the business end?
So to actually answer your original question, they do double damage because they fire double the number of bullets.
Even with modern guns, firing two bullets at once you probably aren't going to hit the same place twice. It will be two distinct and separate wounds.
A hefty -4 penalty applies if firing both at once, but as others have pointed out, this means little if attacking within the first range increment (as it is touch AC).
Is there not a -4 penalty for firing both at once? That is a balance for them...From a balance perspective it's a really terrible setup, because the gains massively outweigh the costs. Guns target Touch AC, which on the whole gradually scales down where straight AC scales up. A -4 really doesn't mean much; the best Gunslinger feats are already those that let you convert your to-hit bonus into something else (Rapid Shot for more attacks, Deadly Aim for more damage). Would they trade -4 in something that they already don't care about in order to double their damage output? Of course they would. The -4 is meaningless to them.
-4 isn't meaningless, it's a huge penalty. It's almost as bad as being Cursed.
If we are talking about a high level character, who cares about the Gunslinger, casters of course can do way more damage.
The difference in Touch AC between a CR1 and a CR5 is actually negative.
So, if that level 5 Gunslinger gets a double-barreled gun and starts double-tapping everything, he's only shooting at 1+Dex, just like if he was at first level. The difference is that at first level he was shooting at touch AC 14, now he's shooting at touch AC 11.
So, his attack bonus is the same as it was at first level, but his actual to-hit went up, because target AC went down. Assuming he has a Dex bonus of +5 and no other accuracy boosters, he went from a +6 attack bonus, hitting on an 8 or better (65% accuracy) to a +6 attack bonus, hitting on a 5 or better (80% accuracy). And he gets two shots, so the chance of him landing at least one is 96%.
Note that if he didn't use a double-barreled gun in the same scenario, he'd have an attack bonus of +10, meaning a 95% accuracy rating... so, by the numbers, going double-barreled improved his accuracy.
This is level 5. We aren't talking about "high levels" here. 5 might be a tad early if only because you go for Rapid Shot first,...
Nice mathing.
I still contend that a -4 is more of a penalty than not having a -4, I'm not sure that you showed otherwise there.
In any case, at level 5 casters start the 'win arc' (wizards get fireball/fly/lightning bolt) so I doubt most sensible people will worry about 2D8 at a -4 to hit within very close range, when they have to deal with area effect, no attack, 5D6 radius 20 stuff that can be launched hundreds of feet away.
yeah the -4 means nothing against touch AC.
Another thought: If a trident can strike with three prongs at once, shouldn't they do triple damage as well? Would the most efficient melee weapon be a stick with twelve knives in a circular pattern on the business end?A trident has only one person's worth of strength behind it. A double pistol has two charges of gunpowder.
Yeah that was a dumb comparison. Let's pretend my brain didn't go there.
*Shrug* The math pretty much proves your contention false.
Looking strictly at accuracy, the single shot is better only when:
1. Your to-hit is exactly two points lower than their AC (such that you miss on a one and hit on a two, and miss one a 1-5 with two barrels). In that instance, two barrels gives you a mere 93.75% accuracy rating, down from 95%. Of course, in that instance two barrels also gives you a 56.25% chance to double your damage, so you're still massively ahead in actual damage output.
2. Your to-hit is 45% with a single barrel (you hit only on a 12+). For a Gunslinger, this should basically never happen in touch range. However, note the logical conclusion of this-- if you only hit half the time with a single barrel, you should still eat the -4 for that second shot.Rapid Shot tilts this further. You need a 20% hit rate (hit on 17+) before you should turn it off (there is no upper bound like there is with Double-Barreled guns alone). With Double-Barreled guns and Rapid Shot, you eat that -6 right up until your base accuracy rating is 40% (13+).
Note that this isn't considering the damage increase from potentially landing multiple shots-- this is looking solely at accuracy. Mathematically you have to be in some very strange positions for a Gunslinger before you seriously consider only shooting one bullet at a time. You are more accurate shooting four times at a 15% chance to hit than once at 45%.
And frankly, if a fifth-level Gunslinger can't outdamage a Fireball, he needs to retire, because he's screwed up a lot of life choices. Our intrepid example Gunslinger, with his 20 Dex, Rapid Shot, and a double-barreled pistol (but no Deadly Aim; he's been lazy) hits 4D8+20 if he lands everything, and with a 70% hit rate more-or-less regardless of target CR, that's not hard. That Wizard is much better off Hasting him, not trying to race him.
My contention that -4 is more of a penalty than -0?
Ooookay...
As for your above example, against a single target this is true, but against a group, I'm gonna go with the caster, apparently people have figured out ways to optimize them as well :)
In any case, I like gunslingers, and agree they can hit pretty easily, but at longer ranges/against multiple opponents, they just aren't as good, no amount of theorycrafting will convince me otherwise (it's sort of a given that casters rule, as far as I can tell on these forums).
My contention that -4 is more of a penalty than -0?
Ooookay...
As for your above example, against a single target this is true, but against a group, I'm gonna go with the caster, apparently people have figured out ways to optimize them as well :)
In any case, I like gunslingers, and agree they can hit pretty easily, but at longer ranges/against multiple opponents, they just aren't as good, no amount of theorycrafting will convince me otherwise (it's sort of a given that casters rule, as far as I can tell on these forums).
that's sort of true for anyone who uses BAB to do things.
*Shrug* The math pretty much proves your contention false.
My contention that -4 is more of a penalty than -0?
I think your contention was that the -4 was a balancing factor for double-shot pistols. I base this on the following statement you wrote:
Is there not a -4 penalty for firing both at once? That is a balance for them...
Kestral's math shows that it's not a balance in any meaningful sense.
*Shrug* The math pretty much proves your contention false.
My contention that -4 is more of a penalty than -0?
I think your contention was that the -4 was a balancing factor for double-shot pistols. I base this on the following statement you wrote:
Is there not a -4 penalty for firing both at once? That is a balance for them...Kestral's math shows that it's not a balance in any meaningful sense.
Ah.
Yeah that's true. Personally I do think it balances them somewhat, not that I consider them overpowered in relation to other classes, just when compared to other firearms.
My regular group includes one serious powergamer, and I've never seen him use guns, so I just assume they suck based on that. :D
I don't have the time/inclination/patience to sit down and crunch the numbers like some people do on here, besides, even an off-handed or casual comment often results in massive blocks of text with tons of calculations already done for me.
For example, if I wanted to know how to get the best touch AC at mid level (say 5), I wouldn't likely have to even ask someone to figure it out, I'm sure someone will just do it (or already has).
Ramble ramble ramble.
As for my contention being false, I don't see how throwing numbers on a screen can prove an opinion wrong.
I believe the -4 balances the double barreled pistol. Showing math that proves that full BAB types often hit stuff doesn't really change my mind.
People may disagree, and that is their right, but you can't prove me wrong when I have a belief in something. It's just my opinion.
As for my contention being false, I don't see how throwing numbers on a screen can prove an opinion wrong.I believe the -4 balances the double barreled pistol. Showing math that proves that full BAB types often hit stuff doesn't really change my mind.
People may disagree, and that is their right, but you can't prove me wrong when I have a belief in something. It's just my opinion.
because your asserting your opinion like you think the sky is red.
some things are opinions other things are gut feelings that are wrong.
As for my contention being false, I don't see how throwing numbers on a screen can prove an opinion wrong.I believe the -4 balances the double barreled pistol. Showing math that proves that full BAB types often hit stuff doesn't really change my mind.
People may disagree, and that is their right, but you can't prove me wrong when I have a belief in something. It's just my opinion.
because your asserting your opinion like you think the sky is red.
some things are opinions other things are gut feelings that are wrong.
Interesting thought you have there.
Thankfully, you don't get to declare what is and is not my opinion. Such is the nature of free will.
At my table, people don't even play Gunslingers, so I don't consider them overpowered, nor do I think the -4 to be a negligible penalty. It changes your odds of hitting by a pretty large amount, and also reduces chances of critting.