A lovely addition overall to the ongoing Gunslinger debate if I might say so. I also enjoyed your thought of renaming the class as simply being a 'Musketeer', though in regards to what you mentioned about Porthos simply siting around and shooting, rather than doing anything else, I recommend you pick up a bayonet for the guy next time around as it'll give him a somewhat viable option in close combat. (Treating it as a short sword or dagger if handheld or as a 2 handed shortspear if fixed.)
I recently stepped into the experience of running an Adventure Path, namely Kingmaker and while usually my only experience DM'ing has been generally just making up an adventure as the PC's go along, I've done little with pre-built adventures let alone rewards for it. My query is rather simple, I've noticed in the first book of the adventure path that the rewards, be they of EXP or of monetary/item value tends to be made in such a way that it's almost expected to be split amongst four people, is that intentional or can the same rewards be viable for larger groups of characters? I for example currently have five people in my group with the potential for a sixth or even seventh member, so would splitting the EXP gained from exploring a hex (100xp) or finishing a quest line (400 extra) as well as other monetary rewards scale appropriately for larger groups, or would a person need to alter these figures?
Looks to be overall a good miniature, one i'd definitely be willing to pick up for my collection! However I've never been much a fan of greataxes, yet I think this mini might've also looked decent with a polearm, perhaps a glaive or halberd instead of that big ol' person-chopper there. Any thoughts?
FiddlersGreen wrote:
You know, that's a good point. I'm really surprised that more people haven't actually sat down and thought to themselves that "Hey, these wonderful weapons of mine that shoot balls of lead had to be transported to where I live across the entire continent, going by wagon train, to ship, to hand cart and to wherever else because Alkenstar is the only country to make them, so 'of course' they'll cost me an arm and a leg if I continue to buy them as I normally do". Of course with the gunslinger character that I've made and been wanting to test for some time, the biggest deterrent that I've had was the previously mentioned notion of trying to craft a weapon yourself given (for example) a standard Musket's base price of 15,000 silver. I honestly think that if a Gunslinger character, a person who has used, cared for, maintained and most likely also disassembled their weapon for a long enough period of time should be able to craft another of the weapon they use at a lessened cost than what they had initially bought a weapon from Alkenstar for, perhaps 'at cost' of what it might run up in the country itself. (Mayhaps 150gp instead of 1500, therefore requiring only 50gp worth of materials?)
Jason Bulmahn wrote:
this. I mean really, everyone still complaining about it now is rather silly, considering Mister Bulmahn here has just shot the notion down.
See though, these are all examples of what training there has been/was for using a firearm as a melee weapon after the weapons themselves had become commonplace, when it would be expected for a soldier to keep a hold of their firearm much in the way as they had when initially firing it and jabbing and swinging with the butt end by itself or thrusting forward with the muzzle if a bayonet was plugged/fixed. Yet back during the time when guns were much rarer (as would be the case in Golarion and many other settings)where the weapons are few and far between, let alone not arming entire armies it could possibly be seen that most soldiers would either abandon the weapon in favor of a traditional melee weapon, or to turn the rifle over and grasp it by it's barrel to use it as a large club and to swing it almost akin to a modern day baseball bat, which of course would be far more unwieldy than to use the tactics found in later periods.
Jesse Firebaugh wrote:
It's not that they're the only ones to think of it, it's just that using muskets/pistols as clubs of varying sizes can be awkward for most people, as well as it not being the actual purpose of the weapon. It's not to say you couldn't do it anyways! Typically most people would just use the stats for an improvised weapon with the appropriate damage die depending on size, but would incur the normal attack penalty as a result. However I think the grit ability is simply be there to 'simulate' brief moments when the gunslinger has to rely on that improvised attack to make ready his escape, by dealing the extra damage as appropriate as well as being more accurate with the swing itself, though i do believe it should at the very least be a lvl 1 grit ability.
Darkholme wrote:
Well if you're worried about the lack of ammunition, what about the 'hidden stash' Grit ability gained from the feat of the same name? It allows you to find 3 rounds and 3 doses of powder hidden on your person per grit point spent. While the amount of ammunition isn't phenomenal that is found, it 'is' a means with which to keep a gunslinger in the fight for a time at least. And there 'are' means to repair these weapons as stated within the Craft skill's description. (1/5th the cost of the weapon in question in materials and a successful craft check)
vuron wrote:
Well it's not like I meant that by doing those things that i'm describing every little intimate detail on how i polish a single link of chain from my suit of maille, but at the very least it's a mention while in camp or on the road that: "Oh, and before anything else I make to un string my bow before bed." or "During our downtime, I spend the next few hours cleaning my armor after removing it." It doesn't need to be something 'huge', and while yes the inclusion of it in the monthly cost seems agreeable, however unless you're playing with a group of morons or undoubtedly lazy people with no attention to detail, there needs to be at least a mention of you taking the necessary steps to maintain your own equipment as mere assumptions leave wide open gaps for players to exploit.
Zombieneighbours wrote:
Agreed entirely.
Heretek wrote:
Agreed, obviously the design creators wouldn't have included such an important ability with the class, if it's primary weapon wasn't compatible. When in doubt, it's inevitably up to the GM to decide.
On the mention of a lack of 'creativity' here, why has no one thought about the potential of a gunslinger 'rifleman' and tinkerer, one who most likely attempts to modify his precious weapon or make one from the ground up, to develop new types of ammunition (perhaps even self contained shells) or the like? When in doubt people, remember that this is a roleplaying game, and as most of these RPG's in the past, be it pathfinder, D&D, L5R and EVERYTHING in between usually states that NOTHING is set in stone, and that the rules are merely to have fun with! Personally, when I saw the gunslinger class, I thought not of making a dual pistol fighter going akimbo style, nor a grizzled wester shooter or a drunken pirate, I immediately thought of a soldier. Imagine this: Most people forget about the 'bayonet' weapon that is featured in the APG, and although in the APG it states that the bayonet temporarily renders the weapon unable to be fired, has no one else remembered the old spike type socket bayonets that used to be affixed to old flintlock weapons? or even the knife bayonets that are even still in use today? I fully intend using the Gunslinger class as is (and still hoping for an update to it) and I will be using a rifle and bayonet combination. 'Cause even after that first shot is done, I fully intend on remaining useful, even up close. Thank you.
Magus Black wrote:
I enjoy your concept of improving the standard sights on a firearm, though admittedly the 'advanced' Iron sights name could be replaced by simply 'Iron Sights' as most traditional firearms as they came to be known had nearly no means with which to aim with the firearm other than to look down the barrel and pray to hit. However as was mentioned above in the initial post, the pistol whip ability definitely needs reworking, though truthfully I believe the pistol whipping and rifle butting should be an acceptable action no matter what the situation, I believe that the mechanic as it is known now needs to simply be that 'if you manage to hit an opponent successfully with the butt/handle of your firearm, you may spend one grit point to immediately make a trip/disarm attempt on your opponent without suffering an attack of opportunity.' Would make sense, no? @Ashiel Also, in regards to the mentioning of the 'deadeye shot' grit ability, if I happened to have my way with it' I would allow 2 range increments for every grit point spent as well as ignoring the penalty for shooting outside your range increment in that case so long as a full round action was taken to shoot, as that could create moments of intense 'suspense' per se to await to see if that one last enemy got away or if the gunslinger managed to fell him, that or it could possibly represent the sniper taking his time to plant that one clear shot at an intended target of assassination or the like. Just my two cents.
Vic Wertz wrote:
Really hope that someone will make the suggestion for it, that or for more monster types like Orcs and Gnolls.
I've been around, playing D&D since the switch from 3rd ed. to 3.5, and during that time it was stated that Horses are 'large' creatures, yet occupy a space ten feet long by five feet wide, the standard 2x1 format on battlemats, however some times I found things to contradict this, be it in later editions (such as 4th ed) or in 'additional products' such as the animal tokens floating around that occupy a 2x2 area or one of WOTC's old D&D minis of a mounted paladin that occupied a 2x2 area. Not to mention the fact that I cannot find anywhere in the PFRPG Core, Gamemastery, Advanced Player's guide or even the bestiary that will tell me what size of an area they occupy. Anyone out there who can give me an 'official' answer or is it all up to user discretion? EDIT: I also forgot that there are a crap ton of Reaper minis floating out there with 2x1 base equivalences, further adding to the confusion on my part. |