Save the Date!

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

Firstly it brings firearms as a technology to play with and secondly the class itself fills many character concepts people love to play.

Also there are now lots of NPCs with guns in setting but no rules for guns lol

demiurge108 wrote:

YES thank you and what is it this new class ?

Classes. Plural. And you have to wait. :)

Just to be clear are you announcing what the classes are on Jan 5 and starting the playtest, or will the classes be announced sometime before that? And are we finding out what book they are in?

bearcatbd wrote:

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

Firstly it brings firearms as a technology to play with and secondly the class itself fills many character concepts people love to play.

And to add to that, a lot of people are hoping the new form of the "Gunslinger" incorporates a lot of the "mysterious stranger" Archetype (Wandering Samurai, Outlaw, etc.)

That and Guns are highly anticipated as they are not only cool but a pretty integrated part of Golarion.

I’m looking more forward to the possibility of these classes being part of items book than anything.

Davido1000 wrote:

bearcatbd wrote:

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

Firstly it brings firearms as a technology to play with and secondly the class itself fills many character concepts people love to play.

And to add to that, a lot of people are hoping the new form of the "Gunslinger" incorporates a lot of the "mysterious stranger" Archetype (Wandering Samurai, Outlaw, etc.)

That and Guns are highly anticipated as they are not only cool but a pretty integrated part of Golarion.

Also, that's the last bit of "PF1" rules that we need to make the setting complete. We have our gishes and summoners in the pipeline, and the most popular classes have already been released.

Correction: we do not currently have an equivalent to Teamwork feats, though I personally think the Tandem abilities we saw on the summoner might be a good start along those lines, as well as some of the ranger abilities involving their animal companion. There were at least 3 classes off the top of my head that used them: Inquisitors, Hunters, and Cavaliers, so having a class or archetype that has similar abilities might work well.

There are of course more classes we're all (I am) eager for, like a Kineticist or Shifter style focus/cantrip caster. But given the differences between the editions, guns are one of the bigger gaps that we're not entirely certain how they intend to make work in PF2.

Inquisitor and Gunslinger !

Aaron Shanks wrote:

demiurge108 wrote:

YES thank you and what is it this new class ?

Classes. Plural. And you have to wait. :)

Just to be clear are you announcing what the classes are on Jan 5 and starting the playtest, or will the classes be announced sometime before that? And are we finding out what book they are in?

On Jan 5 the playtest begins. You will see a banner on the front page replace the holiday banner and a blog, both of which will point to a landing page that will be updated with a free downloadable PDF to get you going. Paizo Org Play details will also be made clear. The pathfinderplaytest.com url will also get you there. There will be emails and social media posts. The Paizo Community Forums will have a place to discuss it.

Much of the staff will be out for the holidays for the next 2 weeks so there will be no additional communications on the topic until the 5th. We will be coming out of the gate running strong and wanted to give you a head's up to consider kindly making a little room in your game schedule for us. Adventures Ahead!

Thanks Aaron and the whole Paizo team.

Warlord / tactician (the prepared Martial?) and likely Gunslinger are my bets.

I guess I'm excited to learn the names and the themes of the playtest classes when I read the playtest pdf.

Everyone has got it wrong. Look at the Blog title!
save the date
Clearly the two new classes are going to be The Bride & The Groom!

I'm seeing proficiency with Thrown weapon: Bouquets and an added Blind-Fight effect so you can throw it over your shoulder!

Edit: Tactitian/Warlord archetype...The dreaded Wedding Planner

Everyone has got it wrong. Look at the Blog title!

save the date
Clearly the two new classes are going to be The Bride & The Groom!

I'm seeing proficiency with Thrown weapon: Bouquets and an added Blind-Fight effect so you can throw it over your shoulder!

Edit: Tactitian/Warlord archetype...The dreaded Wedding Planner

...Who've you been talking to?

A warlord class does sound fantastic, and I'm dying to know what this tactician could be like. I mean I'm hoping for arcanist- that's my favorite kind of spellcasting- but whatever they do, I'm very excited to see it

I'm personally hoping that Arcanist-style casting will be a class archetype that can be applied to many different kinds of casters.

Thewms wrote:

Everyone has got it wrong. Look at the Blog title!

save the date
Clearly the two new classes are going to be The Bride & The Groom!

I'm seeing proficiency with Thrown weapon: Bouquets and an added Blind-Fight effect so you can throw it over your shoulder!

Edit: Tactitian/Warlord archetype...The dreaded Wedding Planner

...Who've you been talking to?

**unmarked van pulls up. Thewms is bagged and pulled inside. Van drives off**

TheGoofyGE3K wrote:

A warlord class does sound fantastic, and I'm dying to know what this tactician could be like. I mean I'm hoping for arcanist- that's my favorite kind of spellcasting- but whatever they do, I'm very excited to see it

I'm personally hoping that Arcanist-style casting will be a class archetype that can be applied to many different kinds of casters.

That's more likely going to be a part of Secret of Magic, I would assume. There's supposed to be a good sized section of alternate magic systems, so an alternate to vancian casting would fit in well.

If it's to be released as part of Secrets of Magic, my guess is Kineticist and maybe Psychic or something. Maybe Inquisitor, but that might work best as some class archetype to Investigator or something.

If it's to be released for another upcoming book, who knows. Could be Gunslinger. Could be Ninja. We'll just have to wait and see!

I wonder whether the character in the art is intended to look like Admiral Cain from Battlestar Galactica, because the resemblance is striking.

I wonder whether the character in the art is intended to look like Admiral Cain from Battlestar Galactica, because the resemblance is striking.

That specific image is from the GMG.

If it's to be released as part of Secrets of Magic, my guess is Kineticist and maybe Psychic or something. Maybe Inquisitor, but that might work best as some class archetype to Investigator or something.

If it's to be released for another upcoming book, who knows. Could be Gunslinger. Could be Ninja. We'll just have to wait and see!

It cannot be for SoM, because after the playtest, SoM will be either already on its way to the printer, of very close to be sent. No time to redesign, rewrite, and edit anything of these classes.

goodkinghadrian wrote:

I wonder whether the character in the art is intended to look like Admiral Cain from Battlestar Galactica, because the resemblance is striking.

That specific image is from the GMG.

Another hint! This is from the Nations section of the book!

This leads me to believe that my half-cocked idea of a full-blown Diplomat/Commander Class is more than just a pipe dream, in fact, it is now a full bore conspiracy with subjective proofs to its validity! HOORAY!

Whatever they are, I hope they are balanced with classes from the CRB and not better versions of class hybrids or anything. The power curve did a lot to negatively impact some 1E players. We are hoping that the foundation of 2E rules will allow for new options to be published without them having to be explicitly better than existing.

Hoping for a gunslinger playtest, if only because I'll actually be able to see some play experience on this one. Starting a new campaign on Monday, one of my players is playing a ranger with Luis Loza's gunslinger archetype homebrew. We've already discussed that, if this playtest is gunslinger we'll switch her character over.

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

For me, it's not so much that I want a gunslinger as much as I want firearm rules. Firearms in my group's home campaign setting are much more common than Golarion, and that's been a major roadblock when it comes to continuing stories that started in PF1.

As far as a gunslinger class goes, though, I really prefer the idea of the "Drifter" that's been passed around on the forums as a class who can do all the gunslinger tropes without being dead weight to a group who doesn't like firearms.

I think the Arcanist, Shaman and Inquisitor will probably the first class archetypes for the Wizard, Druid and Cleric, respectively.

I considered the Inquisitor being a Cleric Doctrine and the Shaman being a Druidic Order but I think they'd make better class archetypes now.

I'd love for the new classes to be the Psychic and the Kineticist but I think we'll have to wait until we go to the Vudra or Jalmeray for those.

I'm going to put my money in the pot for the gunslinger and some kind of "Commander" tactical leader class.

^For a little bit I misread that as the idea of a Drifter who's been hanging out in the forums . . . .

^For a little bit I misread that as the idea of a Drifter who's been hanging out in the forums . . . .

For anyone reading the blog comments who doesn't normally read the forum the basic idea of the "Drifter" is that just like the monk is a clearinghouse for all manner of wuxia tropes, there should be a class that is a clearinghouse for western tropes, and since many of those tropes are shared between westerns and chanbara the class needn't intrinsically involve guns (since, I mean, "A Fistful of Dollars" and "Yojimbo" are the same story so "build the Man with No Name" and "build Sanjuro" shouldn't be *that* different in Pathfinder terms.)

I'd love to see an artificer so I can run PF2 in Eberron. I strongly doubt that's going to happen though, partially because the stuff the class does both in 3e and 5e are so far outside PF2's "comfort zone", and because Paizo doesn't seem to want to explore the same stuff D&D does.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

^For a little bit I misread that as the idea of a Drifter who's been hanging out in the forums . . . .

For anyone reading the blog comments who doesn't normally read the forum the basic idea of the "Drifter" is that just like the monk is a clearinghouse for all manner of wuxia tropes, there should be a class that is a clearinghouse for western tropes, and since many of those tropes are shared between westerns and chanbara the class needn't intrinsically involve guns (since, I mean, "A Fistful of Dollars" and "Yojimbo" are the same story so "build the Man with No Name" and "build Sanjuro" shouldn't be *that* different in Pathfinder terms.)

In Pathfinder 1st Edition, a Medium would actually make a pretty good Drifter not associated with guns (conceptually, that is -- mechanically, I'm not so convinced that Medium worked very well at all). Not sure what Pathfinder 2nd Edition is going to come up with for Drifter or Medium.

Speaking of which -- except for the little piece of it in the Occult Adventures Playtest, we never got our Harrowed Medium in 1st Edition! Wonder if 2nd Edition will ever make up for that?

For those intrested in the Drifter concept, Midnightoker develops an class with this theme in the Homebrew forum.

UnArcaneElection wrote:

^For a little bit I misread that as the idea of a Drifter who's been hanging out in the forums . . . .

For anyone reading the blog comments who doesn't normally read the forum the basic idea of the "Drifter" is that just like the monk is a clearinghouse for all manner of wuxia tropes, there should be a class that is a clearinghouse for western tropes, and since many of those tropes are shared between westerns and chanbara the class needn't intrinsically involve guns (since, I mean, "A Fistful of Dollars" and "Yojimbo" are the same story so "build the Man with No Name" and "build Sanjuro" shouldn't be *that* different in Pathfinder terms.)

Also Magnificent Seven, and Seven Samurai, if I'm not mistaken.

One thing I was just (wishful) thinking about is the 2e Kingmaker AP coming up. Of all the companions you can get, two are classes that aren't in 2e yet, inquisitor and kineticist... Which would be perfect for me since kineticist is what really got me into tabletop as much as I am now and inquisitor is the favorite class of one of my best friends.

One thing I was just (wishful) thinking about is the 2e Kingmaker AP coming up. Of all the companions you can get, two are classes that aren't in 2e yet, inquisitor and kineticist... Which would be perfect for me since kineticist is what really got me into tabletop as much as I am now and inquisitor is the favorite class of one of my best friends.

Just a note that they will be NPCs, and NPCs doesn’t have classes.

Two new classes is quite exciting. Sounds like a lot of people are thinking gunslinger will be one of them.

Personally I am not an huge fans of guns but since I still have like 8 or more classes I havent even played yet, I doubt I will run out of fun characters anytime soon.

I am hoping for a Shifter because even though a Wild Druid is cool I would like one that can use the forms in more interesting ways and be separated from spellcasting.

The other class I would love is kineticist. I am hoping for a character kind of like a Monk but focused more on offense and ranged "strikes" with elements.

Magus probably would be my favorite class but since that is coming out soon I am happy.

Two new classes is quite exciting. Sounds like a lot of people are thinking gunslinger will be one of them.

Personally I am not an huge fans of guns but since I still have like 8 or more classes I havent even played yet, I doubt I will run out of fun characters anytime soon.

I am hoping for a Shifter because even though a Wild Druid is cool I would like one that can use the forms in more interesting ways and be separated from spellcasting.

The other class I would love is kineticist. I am hoping for a character kind of like a Monk but focused more on offense and ranged "strikes" with elements.

Magus probably would be my favorite class but since that is coming out soon I am happy.

I like your thoughts. Kineticist is probably the next-most requested class, anecdotally, after the gunslinger. It'll show before too long, in some form I'm sure.

Shifter is one I was just thinking about. I don't know that much about the 1e class, but I can think of plenty of design space with shape-changing mechanics. Wild-shape druid seems fun but pretty limited, especially as still the bulk of the druid's power curve is behind their full primal casting. A non-caster shifter could really have a lot of room to be a varied and weird martial, from the dude who can only transform into one specific, powerful shape to the broad who can mold herself into the form of aberrations or demons or who knows what! Someone who at will can modify features or limbs with creature-mimicking transformations (like the mutagenist we never got) all the way to someone whose shapeshifting capabilities include a hilarious grab-bag of random, disparate monsters...

I dunno what 1e included. I could see 2e really finding some great design room to allow one of the most popular general fantasy power sets out there.

I still think it will be gunslinger and something else, but really I can't think of too many things it could possibly be that would bore or disappoint me.

Do we still need a Bloodrager, or is it now possible to do that properly by having a Barbarian multiclass into Sorcerer?

Do we still need a Bloodrager, or is it now possible to do that properly by having a Barbarian multiclass into Sorcerer?

You can do it that way, but to do end up with the issue of "whenever you cast a spell in battle it is going to take your entire turn each time", which sounds frustrating.

Also has the issue of taking many levels to come online, since your going to need both sorcerer archetype and moment of clarity.

Unless there’s a feat or ability that lets you cast spells with a verbal component while raging, no. You’re pretty much missing the central mechanic and main point of the class.

Well, using the Eldritch Trickster as a template, I could see Bloodrager being an interesting totem that offers multiclassing. And if we expanded beyond sorcerer, we could also cover stuff like the Rage Prophet.

Do we still need a Bloodrager, or is it now possible to do that properly by having a Barbarian multiclass into Sorcerer?

The biggest thing we're missing from bloodrager is "more ways your body gets weird when you rage" which is probably just a thing we can do with instincts.

But the Barbarian by default gets to do stuff like "Grow huge" or "turn into a bear" or "grow wings and breathe fire" with the right instinct/feats, which captures a lot of the old bloodrager flavor.

I feel the Animal Barbarian is already an interesting take on the shape-shifting Martial.

Now, being able to use shape-shifting as a Martial for out of combat utility and in-combat versatility would be nice.

Maybe an Animal Barbarian with Druid MC can scratch that itch.

Fun fact : you can use Battle Medicine and Lay on hands while raging :-)

I didn't play PF1. What's the deal with Gunslinger and why do so many seem to want it?

Think about the country that the game and game designers come from as well as the majority of the player base. And that is largely your answer in my opinion

It was already mentioned earlier that firearms are a notable part of PF1 rules yet to be ported, and that there are people who want a class to encompass spaghetti western tropes the way Monk represents wuxia. I think that's probably a bigger part of the equation than "Americans just love guns dude", though you're of course entitled to your opinion (and that's probably at least a part of the appeal).

It was already mentioned earlier that firearms are a notable part of PF1 rules yet to be ported, and that there are people who want a class to encompass spaghetti western tropes the way Monk represents wuxia. I think that's probably a bigger part of the equation than "Americans just love guns dude", though you're of course entitled to your opinion (and that's probably at least a part of the appeal).

You picked up on the point I was making but it can clearly be taken with varying degrees of offense.

As a Western European the obsession with guns in the states largely confuses and frightens me. And so when I see a loud clamour for them in an escapist fantasy game (despite being able to own and fire them in real life unlike say - casting a spell) I have always got a bit confused

But I have tried to think more on it and the closest I get is how fundamental they are to American founding mythology / folklore. The whole western / spaghetti western things seems (from an outsider) to be the closest the US has to a true "mythology". The wandering gunslinger in the US almost seems to be the equivalent of the Knight Errant / Robin Hood (I appreciate these are rather different) in Western Europe / the UK

It is partly why I really like the suggestions of wrapping it into a class that contains the wandering mercenary / Ronin trope and not be a pure gun class.

And then there is the obvious issue of a Fighter w. Multiclass "Gunslinger" will have better proficiency in guns than the core class. I cannot see any logic based on the current game design that allows a Gunslinger class to be Legendary in guns. And even if it does then it won't be at level 13 like a Fighter.

And people WILL complain about that (I have already seen it)

How this is resolved?

Either a separate class where the tricks, class abilities and feats offset the proficiency difference (seems to have worked with swashbuckler)

OR

A suite of gun feats be introduced for the fighter and that be the end of it.

I hope for (and assume) the former...

The easiest way to manage the Gunslinger/Drifter vs Fighter with guns difference is through action economy.

As a random proposal:

Firearms would be advanced weapons that do a LOT of damage but have reload 2, making them clunky to use. Introducing the Capacity trait, granting a certain number of shots before reloading would help offset this for the 'good' firearms, but still make them awkward for longer fights.

Gunslingers would gain a feature at 1st level called Quick Reload, which reduces the number of actions needed to reload a weapon by 1, and gain Lightning Reload at 11th level, now reducing it by 2. As such, gunslingers can wield immensely powerful ranged weapons and treat them as having reload 0, which compensates for staying at Master proficiency.

The Gunslinger/Drifter archetype would include Quick Reload as a 4th or 6th level feat, but never give access to Lightning Reload. (The archetype itself would merely grant access to and training in firearms.)

As advanced weapons, Fighters could still use firearms without the archetype, but not having Quick Reload means they really wouldn't want to.

As a thought, if the class goes down the Drifter route and Gunslinger is just a subclass, I think it'd be balanced if it was like this:

Each subclass gets a "Wanderer's Way" at 1st level, which is upgraded at 11th level (akin to the Champion's reactions).

Each subclass would also gain access and proficiency for certain advanced weapons. The Gunslinger gains advanced firearms, the Ronin advanced melee weapons, etc.

The Gunslinger gets Quick Reload, the Ronin gets Iaijutsu, etc. The Multiclass Archetype has you choose a subclass when you gain the Dedication (which would grant access and training for the associated weapons, but nothing else), with feats available to acquire the Wanderer's Way and maybe any other potential specific features at 4th/6th level.

I really, really don't want guns to be handicapped for everyone except one class, then that class's thing is just to remove that handicap. That's what they did with the gunslinger in 1e and it was butts. I'd much prefer it if any martial class could effectively use guns, if they happen to get their hands on one, and "gunslinger" turn into "drifter" who just happens to have abilities that synergize with guns.

Guns aren't a problem if they're balanced along the lines of other weapons, as they should be.

Unless there’s a feat or ability that lets you cast spells with a verbal component while raging, no. You’re pretty much missing the central mechanic and main point of the class.

Doesn't Moment of Clarity handle this?