Dolomyte's page

Dolomyte wrote:

I said 13, not 12. The starting wealth for a 13 is 140k, +5 pistols are 50k, so thats 100k. a +6 dex belt is 36k, which, assuming a starting dex of 17, 2 racial, and 3 advancements gets you 28. which is a +9.

Nice, but I know how to read too. You are also missing the 2350 GP needed to craft two DB pistols, and the 72 GP by round of alchemical cartridges. Just some questions :

- Where is, you know, your armor ?
- What are your saves ?
- What are your HP ?

Your character looks so laughably easily to kill that I couldn't care less about the guy hitting hard, nor would any DM worth it's salt consider it a broken foe.
One-trick pony, cristal-fragile, high damage character required to stay at close range to be efficient ? Priority target. Same level archer fighter enters the game and full attacks once, you die miserably.

No it isn't. Pistols are one-handed weapons.
Also, I see that you have found a way to put WF in a TWF pistolero build. I'm curious to know what essential feat you sacrificed to make this possible.
Not that WF is in the slightest optimum for a gunslinger...

Same level archer can't one round a CR 20. One trick pony or not, if that trick is broken, it needs fixing. (if closing the gap is your defense, which im sure it will be, the priest or caster in the group could dimension door you into range)

My fix for gunslingers is make the rapid reload and cartridge combination equal 1, ONE, free reload a round. This way if someone wants to take 6-8 shots in a single round (haste, rapid shot, whatever). They can use a pepperbox, then after the second round of shooting they would need to reload.

I agree wholeheartedly that the double-barrel pistol only means one single extra shot. not in effect manyshot on every shot. but Paizo nver gave a firm ruling on that.

As for the fragility of my build, Its no more fragile then a rogue, or a wizard, with more hp's then either of those classes. And roughly the same AC as the rogue. It's not meant to tank. It's meant to do damage, which is does very well.

- How the heck are you getting a BAB so high ? A level 12 pistolero double-wielding DB pistols has a BAB of +1/+1/+1/-4/-9 +1/-4/-9 with haste, PBS, deadly aim, double tapping and rapid shot on.
- Where did you find two +5 weapons at level 13 ? >_> Can I have a free balor with my fighter too for DPR calculation ?
- DB weapons shot twice per attack, as if using manyshot on each attack, you don't get two attack rolls per shot - that's the most reasonable interpretation of the rules since it doesn't allow for instantaneous misfire explosion nor nova critical hit.

I said 13, not 12. The starting wealth for a 13 is 140k, +5 pistols are 50k, so thats 100k. a +6 dex belt is 36k, which, assuming a starting dex of 17, 2 racial, and 3 advancements gets you 28. which is a +9.

BAB
13 base + 9 dex + 5 magic + 1 PBS + 1 WF = +29.

Off hand is light, so TWF penalty is -2, bringing you to 27

DB is -4, bringing you to 23 to hit.

As for it letting you take 2 attacks per shot. I've seen it interpreted many ways. I for one don't think you should be able to reload More then a single barrel for free.

Valid point on precise shot, you can drop improved crit for that. Someone link me the character builder you all use, and assuming its free I'll post the build.

The pistolero build becomes ridiculously broken at level 13. Before that they are still pretty powerful, but nothing ridiculous.

Pathfinder as a game pretty much breaks after level 11 though, so what can you do.

At 13th level, with no chance of misfire, my "DPR" build would do 12 attacks

+23/+23/+23/+23/+18/+18/+18/+18/+13/+13/+13/+13

with 0 chance of a misfire, crit on a 19/20, so once every two rounds.

D6+3D6+16 Damage, or average rolls of 30 per shot, so 360 damage if every attack hits with no crit. Figure out the DPR on that, I'm guessing it's alot.

The weapons are both +5, so they ignore all DR except epic. Against the larger targets in the game, dragons, whatnot. He would do enough damage to kill CR 20's in a single round of shooting.

Feats (In no order), Mobility, Weapon Focus, Greater-TWF, TWF, Rapid Reload, Dodge, Deft-Shootist Deed, Improved TWF, Point-Blank Shot, Signature Deed (Up Close and Deadly), Improved Critical.

The character that you have in mind shouldn't necessarily be made for a game with a 15-point buy.

If you go ahead with the concept anyway, you'll have to make concessions.

You may aim for 16s or 17s instead of all 18s, because chances are you'll still be way out ahead of the other PCs with those scores. Are you trying to put them to shame or something?

I think he just had a character concept. I dont think it was about shaming other peoples characters.

I suppose my point is that as the player of a fighter, rogue, etc, you should not really care about what your other party members can do, because when it becomes noticible, the game is about to suck anyhow.

I'm in a level 16 campaign right now, and I dont even enjoy playing my character anymore. The ninja was fun, but now that our wizard can mindblank me and allow me to just destroy s@!&, its not entertaining. The story is the only thing that keeps it going.

Wizard does 1d4+1 with magic missile, Fighter does 2d6+9 with greatsword, clear disparity here. ;-)

It falls apart though when the wizard can cast greater invis, fly, and mindblank on himself, making him immune to everything but blindsight and blindsense. which the fighter could never get =p.

The magic item crafting system is ridiculous, that I will agree on. I think the bigger problem is that after level, lets say 11, the game completely breaks. at 15, I know of a gunslinger build that does an average of 595 damage a round (assuming he's fighting something with a s~&@ty touch AC, like elder wyrms), a fighter build that takes 8 attacks that crit on 15-20 and if any one of those hits the creature it hits are blinded and staggered. I can go on.

the game just falls apart at the higher levels.

this thread is so stupid it hurts.

Yes, rogues are worthless compared to a wizard of equal level with infinite resources to make scrolls / wands / etc. So is everything else.

There is nothing a fighter can do that I can't accomplish better by making an optimized lion shaman druid. You can replace any class if you work at it, play what you want to play.

If your the kind of person who would get upset when someone else decided to play a rogue in your party, or would complain about anyone playing anything really, since the game is about fun, you would not be invited to play with my group again.

My opinion neither acts would constitue a alignment shift.

1) one meh adventures get paid to kill things all the time...just because the guy was in jail is meaningless. He still did what he did....and well prisons are not like a failsafe against him doing futher harm.

2) Again what were they going to do with the guy?

If the OP is the DM and not the rogue....what do you think the 'good' course(s) would have been?

TH is the DM, and he can respond to this question as well, but from what he said in our group

For the first action, not taking the money and not killing the guy would have been a neutral act. there was no good choice. I as the player do not know if he would have escaped jail later to cause the city trouble during the invasion.

For the second action, the lawful act would have been capturing the guy and bringing him back to our home city. Again, he could have done more harm then good, or he could have been irrelevant. I would not say that is a good act, but probably more lawful

Another thing to consider, as well, is that the game is supposed to be fun, and alignment is intended to be a guide of sorts as to what sort of moral compass a character follows, although its admittedly a pretty loose guide. The acts the character committed could be sorted and sliced and quantified again and again, but is there really a need for the character to change alignment? Will it be more fun for the character to do so? Unless the discussion between you and the player is one that adds something to both of your enjoyment of the game, I wouldn't beat the subject to death, since a shift to one branch or another of the alignment tree won't even have an impact on his character. I imagine that most players whose characters have had an alignment change forced on them aren't exactly happy with said change---in the interest of overall fun, why split hairs?

This affects our game in three important aspects.

1. Blasphemy and the other demon castable spell does not work on chaotic evil characters, which is an advantage to the character meta wise.

2 - 3. and the really important aspects to me, is that if we are enforcing alignment and making it change based on single incidents, which I think everyones above postings concludes are shades of grey at best. we have a Paladin in the party who is now adventuring with a chaotic evil character, which makes us either ignore that quandry for his alignment, or costs him his power, or forces him to fight the rogue of the party. We are summoning angels to fight said demon invasion, who also face the quandry of overlooking the CE rogue.

I have a funny feeling we're dealing with a player who's telling his side of the story after a DM warned of or enacted an alignment change.

That being said, as described above neither act are evil, and given that no alignment change should be enacted.

That is a true statement. however, the DM has also posted on this thread, See Timothy Hansons follow up questions. Changing my alignment is actually beneficial currently, because a good deal of the demon's spells that we are dealing with in the current invasion do not affect chaotic evil characters.

My arguement was more that neither of those acts was evil, the assassination was morally ambiguous, as it was self serving *I needed money*, however I did research the person in character to ensure he was in fact evil and a demon supporter.

Executing the crime lord himself was not evil in the slightest, just expedient. He would have been executed if we had arrested him and allowed him to face a trial in his home city, although with the demon army days from the front gates, the risk of him surviving and or sabotaging the defense from within was significant.

- also of note, a rogue, not a paladin. If I was playing a paladin or dming a player who was a paladin who assassinated a prisoner, I would have given him a stern warning beforehand and then he would have lost the powers after. Killing the person we had just captured I would have been ok with a paladin doing.

Three questions. I'll try to leave them short and sweet, although I know no thread on alignment ends up that way.

Chaotic Neutral Rogue was offered money to assassinate an imprisoned crime lords Lieutenant, a known demon supporter / collaborater before an impending war with a demon army. The rogue was unaware of this person, and asked around to determine that A. the person was evil and did deal with demons, and that B. he was a potential threat if left alive. Rogue killed crime lord lieutenant.

Was this act evil?

Same Chaotic Neutral Rogue is present with party when they assault a new city the crime lord has taken over. The party kills crime lords retinue and the mage dominates said crime lord. The party questions the crime lord (who has worked with demons, attempted to kill the party numerous times, murdered countless citizens, and murdered the person the party left in charge of this city after liberating it from a black dragon) and he answers all of their questions. The rogue executes the crime lord for his crimes.

Was this act evil?

The third and final question, EVEN if you consider the above two acts evil, are they enough to change the alignment of said rogue from Chaotic Neutral to Chaotic Evil considering the rogue also. Liberated a city from a black dragon, has worked tirelessly to recruit aid for a city about to be attacked by demons (not her own city), including spending time training the citizens within how to defend their churches. and spent money to res a cohort instead of just taking a new one (which with leveling would have actually been more powerful, though that is metagaming)