Kommadore's page

I would like to say agree with previous posters that the gold gain is not significant after say, level 3 or so, and that level is going to be pretty important when your party mates are hitting important levels in their classes faster than you. None of the class features at level 1 are helpful to someone who doesnt wield a gun.

In short, the only way this gunslinger dip is beneficial is if the campaign is only going to run from about level 1-3

Kommadore wrote:

Also may i point out that specific trumps general. If something can't be done and something says it can be done in a specific way, then it can

That's an awfully big assumption.

IDK about pathfinder, but that was the official ruling of D&D. that and text trumps chart.

Also may i point out that specific trumps general. If something can't be done and something says it can be done in a specific way, then it can

Not saves, this should be included as an expanded point in the Flight skill rules. For example a anti-air flack barrage would be something I'd expect from a fantasy world that had both dragons/flying monsters and the capacity to make mortars. It makes more sense to add a flight check for getting hit by serious amounts of damage while in the air.

Ooh ooh it could be a flight check DC= attack roll

I think the main reason for the misfire chance is to prevent a character such as a rogue or assassin from picking up a random pistol and sneak-attacking against flat-footed touch AC. The -4 to hit is insignificant when their AC drops to about 10+deflection, but the 25% misfire chance drops the reliability.

I know this board isn't for discussing homebrew, but as a DM I would allow a feat from ye olde D20 Modern called "Armed to the teeth" which allowed a player to two weapon fight melee and ranged weapons. I think if a feat like that made an appearance this class would be allowed to feel as piratey as people want it to.

Kommadore wrote:

Jess Door wrote:

The problem is the gunslinger spent the first half of his career (more for typical campaigns or pathfinder society) unable to make use of iterative attacks that supposed to be a major class feature.

There is no reason to believe that guns such as the revolver will not make a come-back in the full book, that would allow a character up to 10th level to make full attacks for 3 rounds before reloading

Unfortunately until we hear definitively there is no guarantee of that. And, as we are told to test the class with only the tools provided to us we must assume that there is going to be some single shot per round (or fewer) gunslingers running around.

I know that you are right, and this is most aggravating. Its like they told us to play test wizards without any spells higher than 4th level. You cant get to level 20 with starting gear, throw us a bone paizo

The problem is the gunslinger spent the first half of his career (more for typical campaigns or pathfinder society) unable to make use of iterative attacks that supposed to be a major class feature.

There is no reason to believe that guns such as the revolver will not make a come-back in the full book, that would allow a character up to 10th level to make full attacks for 3 rounds before reloading

Then this is definitely a suggestion to Paizo, Reword the ability to be a little more clear.

I think the problem here is the limited selection of guns, if you have faith that guns like the revolver from the campaign setting will eventually come back allowing you to get off six uninterrupted shots each. Remember guns are not here for playtest, the class is

Kommadore wrote:

Sarrion wrote:

Kommadore wrote:

A steadfast gun, +4 enhancement bonus, reduces the misfire chance by 2, minimum 0, that means the gun never explodes

No, it reduces the misfire chance by 2 AFTER it gains the broken condition, bringing it down to 3 with a pistol.

So your odds to have it blow up during a full round attack are quite high and your rate of return is quite low when compared to a +5 Bow which will cost slightly less.

I'm pretty sure that it applies whether the gun is broken or not, so a non broken gun will not misfire, but if the gun otherwise becomes broken, such as using the gun while not proficient which increases the misfire by 4. I really don't think they would have made a +4 enhancement bonus as useless as you described.

Unfortunately it really is that useless...

** spoiler omitted **

Believe it or not I did read the book before posting here, the wording is poor but it does state that: A steadfast gun is enchanted so as to be less likely to jam than other firearms. It reduces the misfire value

Only at 1 range increment, which is 40ft for the gun, only 20 for the pistol, this is only true at really close range. The bow can hit just as easily at 10ft as 100ft

I just want to point out the overall bad damage that these guns do, letting them make touch attacks at close range still makes them weaker than a warlock in 3.5. Warlocks could eldritch blast at will as a touch attack for more damage than the firearms do, plus the host of abilities the warlock gets.

By comparison gunslingers use expensive ammunition in expensive guns, must reload their weapons, and have little utility.

Kommadore wrote:

A steadfast gun, +4 enhancement bonus, reduces the misfire chance by 2, minimum 0, that means the gun never explodes

No, it reduces the misfire chance by 2 AFTER it gains the broken condition, bringing it down to 3 with a pistol.

So your odds to have it blow up during a full round attack are quite high and your rate of return is quite low when compared to a +5 Bow which will cost slightly less.

I'm pretty sure that it applies whether the gun is broken or not, so a non broken gun will not misfire, but if the gun otherwise becomes broken, such as using the gun while not proficient which increases the misfire by 4. I really don't think they would have made a +4 enhancement bonus as useless as you described.

It's not about the name, its about the class. The class features rely on guns much like a Crossbowman fighter archetype uses crossbows, its already been done

A steadfast gun, +4 enhancement bonus, reduces the misfire chance by 2, minimum 0, that means the gun never explodes

i think its would be ever reasonable instead of giving a lvl 1 pc 1000gp

items as they start off, to let the gunslinger class abilities also apply to crossbows. this would make the class more class open to pcs whose dm dont allow guns in there games or have low gold games and could not pay for the ammo

hand crossbow = pistol

light crossbow and heavy crossbow = musket

I can't help but notice that every board I've looked at you are advocating the crossbow, while it does make sense from a realism perspective gunslingers use guns, anybody with simple weapon proficiency can use crossbows.

Wizard's spell book, sure it only costs 100G, but obtaining spells and scribing them is expensive to replace, I see the two as similar

The class already gets plenty of grit deeds from the class features, its more akin to a cleric having to take feats to turn undead. Secondly my friends thought that the gunslinger should have to pick deeds from a list with some of them having minimum levels, this would make the class seem more like other pathfinder classes such as the alchemist and the rogue.

I think that the gunslinger's damage needs this kick in the pants. A fighter focusing on bows would be able to buy a mighty composite bow and crank up his damage, melee is even easier, but with long reloads and low capacities the gunslinger is going to be left behind very quickly as a damage dealer, filling a gap of the warlock in 3.5, consistent low damage.

I don't think it's really an issue, for the first several levels that gun is the player's lifeline, he's not going to sell it and run around with a long sword. Its like a wizard's spellbook. Even if the player did try to sell the guns what would he buy?

My point was unrelated. Think of the thousands of gold saved by characters crafting items useful to the party, that mechanic has been around since D&D 3.0 if not earlier

First off, the bullets aren't very expensive the powder is, secondly I like to think that common shopkeeps would be too afraid of the stuff to want to buy it. Thirdly a magic-item crafter may not be able to make a profit selling his wares, but the half-off will add up to way more gold than this feat would.

Edit* the GM should keep an eye on his players however if they select the Signature Deed feat to make it free