Pathfinder Society Playtest Rules: Gunslinger and Inventor

Tuesday, January 05, 2021

Pathfinder Extinction Curse Adventure Path: The Apocalypse Prophet book cover

Welcome to 2021! How about a playtest to start off with a bang? After not participating in the Pathfinder Secrets of Magic playtest and reading the feedback from our players and GMs, we put our heads together to come up with a way to engage our Organized Play community that worked within the Pathfinder Society framework. We settled on a model based on the Starfinder Society method that will allow our community to participate in the Pathfinder Guns & Gears playtest (see the announcement here). This framework works within established Society guidelines, doesn’t leave credit on unusable characters, and encourages players to get involved. We believe this method is flexible enough to use for future playtests and will add a section to the Guides to Organized Play to provide guidance to players and GMs.

But enough with the whys and wherefores. Let’s get to the details:

A human gunslinger and a dwarven inventor run from brass construct guards

Caption: Art by Roberto Pitturru

Playtest Period: Pathfinder Society participation in the Guns & Gears playtest runs from publication on January 5 to February 5, 2021. Once this period has expired, players can no longer use the gunslinger or inventor playtest classes until their publication in a future Pathfinder product.

Playtest Classes: This playtest includes the gunslinger and inventor classes as outlined in the Guns & Gears playtest found here.

How It Works: We're opening up Society play for the playtest classes via the use of custom created characters that operate much like our pregenerated characters. We believe this should encourage players to test the waters with custom builds, be it with current scenarios or through our growing stable of repeatable options.

Creating a Playtest Character: Prior to playing a scenario during the playtest period, a player can determine if they want to playtest either of the new classes. The character must have all levels in a single playtest class, and not take archetypes. Although archetypes are important for the playtest as a whole, we're limiting play to single classes in the Organized play portion of the playtest for simplicity. Depending on the tier of the scenario, the player can then use a 1st-, 3rd-, or 5th-level character using the eligible playtest classes and created using the following guidelines.

  • 1st Level: The character can be made using the character creation rules presented in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook and Guide to Organized Play: Pathfinder Society.
  • 3rd Level: This character follows the same rules as above, except they can select one 2nd-level and two 1st-level permanent items. In addition, the player can spend up to 25 gp on other available equipment.
  • 5th Level: This character follows the same rules as above, except they can select one 4th-level, two 3rd-level, one 2nd-level, and two 1st-level permanent items. In addition, the player can spend up to 50 gp on other available equipment.

Credit: Choose which of your characters will receive the credit at the beginning of the adventure. The credit earned for playing a Guns & Gears playtest character follows the same rules and guidelines as applying credit for a pregenerated character, presented in the Applying Credit section of the Player Basics page of the Guide to Organized Play: Pathfinder Society.

With all this in mind, we encourage our players to take an active part in the Guns & Gears playtest, both by sharing your opinions online in the playtest forums and by completing the playtest surveys. We hope that by opening up the means in which players can create and customize characters for the playtest, that we can see some unique and fun builds using these new classes and that such tests will provide the design team with priceless field-agent feedback!

We’ll see you back on January 7 for our first monthly update of 2021.

Until then, don’t forget to explore, report, and cooperate!

Linda Zayas-Palmer
Organized Play Managing Developer

Tonya Woldridge
Organized Play Manager

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Organized Play Pathfinder Playtest Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Pathfinder Second Edition Pathfinder Society
1 to 50 of 107 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

TO ARMS !!!


Yay!!

Liberty's Edge 1/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Bomb and Pistol boy incoming!

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

OMFG YEEEEEEEEEESSSSS!! Its not 1:1 but man am I glad PF2 is getting an artificer equivalent!!! (at least in my eyes so far)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Direct link since the website's still borked: Playtest

Vigilant Seal *

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Do the playtest classes count as pregens for the purposes of 1-00 Origin of the Open Road?

**

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Paizo Employee 5/5 Organized Play Associate

Tea4Goblins wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as pregens for the purposes of 1-00 Origin of the Open Road?

No.

LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In the Playtest announcement blog, it was mentioned that the two new classes will be Uncommon.

Will they be allowed for non-boon/ACP cost in PFS2 in their final form?

Want to test it, but don't want to get unrealistic expectations...

Paizo Employee 5/5 Organized Play Associate

7 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:

In the Playtest announcement blog, it was mentioned that the two new classes will be Uncommon.

Will they be allowed for non-boon/ACP cost in PFS2 in their final form?

Want to test it, but don't want to get unrealistic expectations...

We have not decided on a plan to handle Uncommon classes yet. We've discussed it internally, and we'll have a better idea once they are released if they remain Uncommon, but until then we don't have a plan to announce.

**

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.

Just so there's no confusion, are these "legal character options" as they pertain to this sentence of the Organized Play Game Master Basics, Table Variation: "No[] banning legal character options"?

1/5 5/5

Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Alex Speidel wrote:


We have not decided on a plan to handle Uncommon classes yet. We've discussed it internally, and we'll have a better idea once they are released if they remain Uncommon, but until then we don't have a plan to announce.

Thank you for the prompt response!

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Was never a fan of Firearms in 1e as they were broken. Hopefully 2e version will be better.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

LeftHandShake wrote:
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.
Just so there's no confusion, are these "legal character options" as they pertain to this sentence of the Organized Play Game Master Basics, Table Variation: "No[] banning legal character options"?

Legal options are legal options. You concerned about GMs not allowing?

**

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Gary Bush wrote:


Legal options are legal options. You concerned about GMs not allowing?

I agree with you, and yes, that's my concern. That position is being advocated, and I would like official validation that "legal means legal".


1 person marked this as a favorite.

REBOUNDING ASSAULT.... what kinda anime S*** is this!?

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LeftHandShake wrote:
Gary Bush wrote:


Legal options are legal options. You concerned about GMs not allowing?
I agree with you, and yes, that's my concern. That position is being advocated, and I would like official validation that "legal means legal".

If a GM has concerns, yes they can be "forced" to allow the character at the table. But that might impact how that table then flows.

As players, we should be considerate of GMs. I would not want to GM a table full of gunslingers.

Guess I am advocating an open dialog to avoid a bad experience.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

ok after reading all this is, is this play test going too far in the jokey way. blowing up mines at your feet to jump farther, shooting your sword for extra dmg, running and shooting guns behind you to move faster. like this is some loony toons stuff.

3/5 **

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Gary Bush wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:
Gary Bush wrote:


Legal options are legal options. You concerned about GMs not allowing?
I agree with you, and yes, that's my concern. That position is being advocated, and I would like official validation that "legal means legal".

If a GM has concerns, yes they can be "forced" to allow the character at the table. But that might impact how that table then flows.

As players, we should be considerate of GMs. I would not want to GM a table full of gunslingers.

Guess I am advocating an open dialog to avoid a bad experience.

Yeah, I'm not comfortable forcing a GM to run for a playtest character. They may not be familiar with the rules, and the player is new to them as well.

It's probably best to let PFS GMs opt in to running for playtest characters.

**

Inventor!
Oh dear.
Now to spend that AcP on Retraining a PFS character...
But which one!?
There went my evening...


So that makes two more classes that are better at using bombs than Alchemists.

Please tell me that Guns & Gears is going to fix the issue of Alchemist weapon proficiencies...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

> Arquebus (1st level)

> It begins with the same statistics as a level-0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice or another level-0 simple or
martial weapon to which you have access.

Does anyone know what this 'level' refers to when regards to weapons/items? I've never seen this before...

Paizo Employee 5/5 Organized Play Associate

8 people marked this as a favorite.
LeftHandShake wrote:
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.
Just so there's no confusion, are these "legal character options" as they pertain to this sentence of the Organized Play Game Master Basics, Table Variation: "No[] banning legal character options"?

Well, you should ask what you mean then, saves everyone a lot of time.

GMs who are permitting playtest characters in their games should advertise as such. GMs are permitted to disallow playtest options in their games if they feel they would be disruptive to the play experience or they don't feel comfortable with the rules yet.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 *

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So, basic question - does reload require a free hand?

I just haven't used reload weapons as a player or really seen
them used as a GM.

I'm looking at the drifter and seeing a lot of...

*shuffles sword under arm and works on reloading pistol* "Hold on while I reload...argh...."

Other than that, I like what I see so far. Looking forward to seeing it in its final form post play-test.

I know there's a feat under the Dual Weapon Fighter archetype that covers it - Dual Weapon Reload.

I want to get my Master Yupa on and this seems to be in my way :)

**

1 person marked this as a favorite.
QAlchemist wrote:

> Arquebus (1st level)

> It begins with the same statistics as a level-0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice or another level-0 simple or
martial weapon to which you have access.

Does anyone know what this 'level' refers to when regards to weapons/items? I've never seen this before...

Default is Level Zero.

Check out the Scrounger Archetype or Prescient Planner General Feat for an example of when this comes into play!

3/5 *

Liam wrote:

So, basic question - does reload require a free hand?

I just haven't used reload weapons as a player or really seen
them used as a GM.

I'm looking at the drifter and seeing a lot of...

*shuffles sword under arm and works on reloading pistol* "Hold on while I reload...argh...."

Other than that, I like what I see so far. Looking forward to seeing it in its final form post play-test.

I know there's a feat under the Dual Weapon Fighter archetype that covers it - Dual Weapon Reload.

I want to get my Master Yupa on and this seems to be in my way :)

The answer is yes, you do need a free hand. People are already discussing this issue.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***

Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.
Just so there's no confusion, are these "legal character options" as they pertain to this sentence of the Organized Play Game Master Basics, Table Variation: "No[] banning legal character options"?

Well, you should ask what you mean then, saves everyone a lot of time.

GMs who are permitting playtest characters in their games should advertise as such. GMs are permitted to disallow playtest options in their games if they feel they would be disruptive to the play experience or they don't feel comfortable with the rules yet.

So, does this new discretion apply more broadly?

This is in direct conflict with the basic principles, let alone the rules, of Organized Play.

There is one question, if they are legal for the duration of the Playtest they are legal at all Organized Play tables.

If they are not, then they are not legal at any Organized Play tables.

Or you need to add an addendum to the above rules for Organized Play Playtest to allow the banning of some legal options at GM discretion...

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/55/55/5 **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am excited by this playtest! Inventors sound like fun!

Hmm

Shadow Lodge 5/5 5/55/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, California—San Francisco Bay Area North & East

Liam wrote:

So, basic question - does reload require a free hand?

I just haven't used reload weapons as a player or really seen
them used as a GM.

I'm looking at the drifter and seeing a lot of...

*shuffles sword under arm and works on reloading pistol* "Hold on while I reload...argh...."

Other than that, I like what I see so far. Looking forward to seeing it in its final form post play-test.

I know there's a feat under the Dual Weapon Fighter archetype that covers it - Dual Weapon Reload.

I want to get my Master Yupa on and this seems to be in my way :)

Lacking a hand for reloading certainly sounds like Master Yupa. Might need to look into grenades...

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ah, very nice! Wish I has PFS near me :/

3/5 **

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

So, does this new discretion apply more broadly?

This is in direct conflict with the basic principles, let alone the rules, of Organized Play.

There is one question, if they are legal for the duration of the Playtest they are legal at all Organized Play tables.

If they are not, then they are not legal at any Organized Play tables.

Or you need to add an addendum to the above rules for Organized Play Playtest to allow the banning of some legal options at GM discretion...

No.

We can be respectful of GM boundaries when new rules are being tested. Not everyone is going to be comfortable with that right away.

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***

3 people marked this as a favorite.
GM OfAnything wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

So, does this new discretion apply more broadly?

This is in direct conflict with the basic principles, let alone the rules, of Organized Play.

There is one question, if they are legal for the duration of the Playtest they are legal at all Organized Play tables.

If they are not, then they are not legal at any Organized Play tables.

Or you need to add an addendum to the above rules for Organized Play Playtest to allow the banning of some legal options at GM discretion...

No.

We can be respectful of GM boundaries when new rules are being tested. Not everyone is going to be comfortable with that right away.

The GM can ask that no one bring a Playtest Character, but cannot, by the rules, ban someone from playing one.

I'm all for respecting GMs' preferences, but not at the expense of the rules.

This way leads to GMs banning legal options they don't like.

Liberty's Edge

I completely fail to see why Archetypes are not permitted in PFS for these playtest characters.

And yes the blog post definitely needs to address the case of GMs who do not wish playtest material at their table.

The way it is currently written, I can impose my playtest character on any PFS GM no matter their opinion.

This topic will need to be addressed down the road as an improvement for PFS playtest guidelines if it is already too late for this particular playtest.

5/5 *****

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:
Alex Speidel wrote:
LeftHandShake wrote:

Do the playtest classes count as "legal character options" for the duration of the playtest, subject to the restrictions specified?

Yes.
Just so there's no confusion, are these "legal character options" as they pertain to this sentence of the Organized Play Game Master Basics, Table Variation: "No[] banning legal character options"?

Well, you should ask what you mean then, saves everyone a lot of time.

GMs who are permitting playtest characters in their games should advertise as such. GMs are permitted to disallow playtest options in their games if they feel they would be disruptive to the play experience or they don't feel comfortable with the rules yet.

So, does this new discretion apply more broadly?

This is in direct conflict with the basic principles, let alone the rules, of Organized Play.

There is one question, if they are legal for the duration of the Playtest they are legal at all Organized Play tables.

If they are not, then they are not legal at any Organized Play tables.

Or you need to add an addendum to the above rules for Organized Play Playtest to allow the banning of some legal options at GM discretion...

It very clearly does not apply more broadly. Alex's post would be that addendum. It doesnt need to go into the organised play guide because the playtestis only running for a few weeks.

Dark Archive 2/5 ****

Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Pawns, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Gary Bush wrote:
Was never a fan of Firearms in 1e as they were broken. Hopefully 2e version will be better.

Here, here! Gary, I completely agree, Gunslingers were BROKEN in 1e. As a GM, I never liked them because they always attacked a "touch" AC, their crits were x4, and players could find the means to fire numerous shots per action. We used to have to ban gunslingers or limit them to one per table. Most GMs in my area didn't like them because they unbalanced the scenarios. Other players at the table never got to play because they just watched the gunslingers kill everything.

Hopefully, 2e gunslingers will be more balanced this time or maybe they will be a "Rare" class.

1/5 *

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:
The GM can ask that no one bring a Playtest Character, but cannot, by the rules, ban someone from playing one.

I assume you mean other than simply not running the table? :P

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:

I'm all for respecting GMs' preferences, but not at the expense of the rules.

This way leads to GMs banning legal options they don't like.

Nonsense. There is a very clear distinction between playtest material and published material.

1/5 *

The Raven Black wrote:

I completely fail to see why Archetypes are not permitted in PFS for these playtest characters.

And yes the blog post definitely needs to address the case of GMs who do not wish playtest material at their table.

The way it is currently written, I can impose my playtest character on any PFS GM no matter their opinion.

This topic will need to be addressed down the road as an improvement for PFS playtest guidelines if it is already too late for this particular playtest.

Several parts of the text seem to be vestiges of 1E. For instance, what does "The character must have all levels in a single playtest class" even mean in 2e?

2/5 5/5 ***** Venture-Lieutenant, Massachusetts—Boston

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's cut and pasted from the current SFS playtest process.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

rainzax wrote:

Inventor!

Oh dear.
Now to spend that AcP on Retraining a PFS character...
But which one!?
There went my evening...

Keep in mind that these will be not out until the fall of 2021.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

DeciusNero wrote:
Ah, very nice! Wish I has PFS near me :/

It is as close as your computer!

There is a ALOT of online PFS being played right now.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

The Raven Black wrote:

I completely fail to see why Archetypes are not permitted in PFS for these playtest characters.

And yes the blog post definitely needs to address the case of GMs who do not wish playtest material at their table.

The way it is currently written, I can impose my playtest character on any PFS GM no matter their opinion.

This topic will need to be addressed down the road as an improvement for PFS playtest guidelines if it is already too late for this particular playtest.

They want us to test the proposed classes, not the proposed classes changed by something. This is why archetypes are not to be used.

And if you think about it, the pregens are all single class. There are no archetypes in the pregens. Since the playtest characters are considered "pregen" characters, it is consistent with how the pregens are designed.

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:
GM can ask that no one bring a Playtest Character, but cannot, by the rules, ban someone from playing one.

Alex's comment above contradicts this. And yes, I understand that what is written is given more weight than what a someone from Organized Play staff says on the boards.

Alex Speidel wrote:
GMs who are permitting playtest characters in their games should advertise as such. GMs are permitted to disallow playtest options in their games if they feel they would be disruptive to the play experience or they don't feel comfortable with the rules yet.

(emphasis added by me)

So let this discussion begin...

Liberty's Edge 3/5 5/5 *** Venture-Captain, Nebraska—Omaha

bugleyman wrote:
Several parts of the text seem to be vestiges of 1E. For instance, what does "The character must have all levels in a single playtest class" even mean in 2e?

No archetypes or dedications.

1/5 *

Gary Bush wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
Several parts of the text seem to be vestiges of 1E. For instance, what does "The character must have all levels in a single playtest class" even mean in 2e?
No archetypes or dedications.

Maybe, but a character with archetypes or dedications still has "all levels in the playtest class", so...

Paizo would really benefit immensely from a little more attention to detail all around, but I guess that's another thread.

Horizon Hunters

Amazing! Is a little annoying that we can't use archetypes but oh well...

4/5 5/55/55/55/5 ***

Gary Bush wrote:
Stephen Meadows Jr wrote:
GM can ask that no one bring a Playtest Character, but cannot, by the rules, ban someone from playing one.

Alex's comment above contradicts this. And yes, I understand that what is written is given more weight than what a someone from Organized Play staff says on the boards.

Alex Speidel wrote:
GMs who are permitting playtest characters in their games should advertise as such. GMs are permitted to disallow playtest options in their games if they feel they would be disruptive to the play experience or they don't feel comfortable with the rules yet.

(emphasis added by me)

So let this discussion begin...

This is in direct conflict with the rules and therefore cannot be made as a 'clarification' this is errata... that requires a changing the written rules.

**** Venture-Lieutenant, Online—VTT

5 people marked this as a favorite.

This blog, and the contents therein, are the rules for the playtest.

Yes, we can get out our armchair lawyer degrees and be pedantic over the rules, but when the OPA has very clearly stated that this playtest is "GM Opt-In" then that's the rule by official decree.

Let's not forget that PFS uses Core rules. It is a core rule that Specific overrides General. Yes, GM's cannot disallow legal character options, that is a general rule. And Here OPA is telling us for playtest specifically, GM's can disallow playtest characters. That's a specific rule.

So let's save ourselves some time and energy and just cut it out.

Plenty of GM's are opening their games to the playtest options. We didn't get the Secrets of Magic playtest sanctioned for Organized Play so GM Opt-In for Guns and Gears is already a great improvement. Let's keep this whole thing a positive experience so in the future we can continue to have GM Opt-In playtests rather than nothing at all.

Kind regards

2/5 5/5 *

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
Gary Bush wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:

I completely fail to see why Archetypes are not permitted in PFS for these playtest characters.

And yes the blog post definitely needs to address the case of GMs who do not wish playtest material at their table.

The way it is currently written, I can impose my playtest character on any PFS GM no matter their opinion.

This topic will need to be addressed down the road as an improvement for PFS playtest guidelines if it is already too late for this particular playtest.

They want us to test the proposed classes, not the proposed classes changed by something. This is why archetypes are not to be used.

And if you think about it, the pregens are all single class. There are no archetypes in the pregens. Since the playtest characters are considered "pregen" characters, it is consistent with how the pregens are designed.

I could see value in seeing how certain Archetypes interact with the playtest classes to reveal problems. However, that's probably better suited to home game playtests than OP where finding the most broken combination of gunslinger and published archetype could ruin a table's fun.

Sovereign Court 3/5 **

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Society Subscriber
Race Dorsey wrote:
Plenty of GM's are opening their games to the playtest options. We didn't get the Secrets of Magic playtest sanctioned for Organized Play so GM Opt-In for Guns and Gears is already a great improvement. Let's keep this whole thing a positive experience so in the future we can continue to have GM Opt-In playtests rather than nothing at all.

Yes, let's go into this playtest respectful of everyone involved: players, GMs, class designers, and OP staff.

It is best to playtest with GMs and other players ready and eager to playtest with you.

1 to 50 of 107 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society Playtest / Paizo Blog: Pathfinder Society Playtest Rules: Gunslinger and Inventor All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.