Search Posts
I work at a gaming store in Manchester, NH and was interested in starting a regular Pathfinder game. I was wondering if there was anyone here interested; and, if so, if you were interested in Pathfinder Society or ins a homebrew campaign of my own creation.
Type: humanoid (catfolk) (0 RP)
Type: humanoid (half-construct, dwarf) (7 RP)
Here's my version of an elf-orc hybrid.
Type: humanoid (elf, orc) (0 RP)
Sterile (-1 RP): Prerequisites: Humanoid with two or more sub-types. Benefit: Members of this race cannot produce offspring with each other or members of any other race (including parent races).
The final rules in Ultimate Combat will have rules if you want to play with firearms that are not new, rare, expensive, and even easier to use, but those will be options rather than the baseline for the campaign. But we're not playtesting for the campaign, were playtesting for the basic rules. While I understand that the rules being presented with the Gunslinger will also be publish with a campaign setting supplement, this is the Ultimate Combat playtest, not a Golarion playtest. Playtesting the Gunslinger is useless if we cannot also playtest firearms simultaneously.
Really good point here. No need to replicate existing mechanics under different names. By using Gunslinger to vary the versatility of the ki-mechanic, a viable alternative to the point-per-level psionics system is created.
Really the ki based powers could be once a day with extra uses being allowed with the ki pool. This would allow everyone to use them, but allow the Ninja more use out of them. Sounds fair enough.
Realist needs to be removed from the equation! No one wants to play a realistic musket guy that takes two or three full round action to load. While I do not agree that realism needs to be suspended, I do agree that ease and enjoyment of play prevent realistic loading times from being an option. There's already a complaint that loading takes too long. I will agree that, to compensate for the slower loading, firearm damage needs to be increased. My group has been using firearms on and off for several years (we haven't play-tested as many rules sets, mind you), and we find that 1d10 is a decent damage for a pistol and 2d10 for a rifle.
Since the grit system already acts a lot like the ki-sytem, why not just make the Gunslinger just another ki-using class? While ki does have cultural associations, it already exists in Pathfinder as a mechanic for "that little something extra." By allowing grit to be ki, ki can be used from or with other classes.
If the Gunslinger were allowed to be its own base class instead of an alternate class, a sidekick would be a great addition.
I just want to know their reasons for going off of fighter when ranger is so much better suited to both the swashbuckler AND cowboy archetypes. Ranger does have the potential of being both. Perhaps this one alternate class for Fighter should be reworked as two archetypes for Ranger instead.
Perhaps grit should be replaced with a mechanic that augments Hero Points for the class.
Agreed. This is why I am in favor of renaming the whole alternate class "Musketeer." [Actually, I am in favor of the Musketeer as a new base class.] This would require a complete overhaul of the flavor text, forcing a new name on "grit." But what would that be called? Or would the entire mechanic have to be changed? There are those advocating for a discovery-like mechanic instead of the current ki-like mechanic--this would unite the Musketeer with the Alchemist in a set of almost-tech classes that would be a good fit for renaissance campaigns.
Yes, there would be only rogue talents. One list, not two. It is better for everyone. I agree that Ninja tricks should just be called what they are: Rogue Talents--and they should be available to all rogues, regardless of archetype/alternate class. Those talents that require ki would be limited to either ninjas, or rogues who gain ki through multi-classing. This would make the Ninja feel more an an alternate class (which it is supposed to be), and less like a new base class (which is appears to be). After all, Samurai can take Cavalier orders and vice-versa--the same versatility needs to be allowed for the Ninja/Rogue.
I'm not entirely fond of grit, either. However, it is the best choice for an alternate class called a gunslinger. The two words go hand-in-hand to create the concept. I have argued that "gunslinger" is inappropriate for a fantasy setting (it would work great in a steam punk setting). For what the mechanic represents, however, "grit" is the perfect word; alternately, "moxie." "Grit" is a combination of all your suggestions--it is prowess, daring, cunning, and finesse. The challenge here is to find the western equivalent of "ki."
Favored Enemy and Favored terrain would not be good fits for the gunslinger, so would have out be traded out for alternate abilities. Really, the only thing to make the Gunslinger-Ranger connection is fighting style. While the ranger class might be a good model for attack, saves, and skills, the similarity really ends there. The Gunslinger really needs to be its own class, one of the greater subset of skill-based characters.
I suppose by making the Gunslinger (I really do prefer the name Musketeer) a Fighter alternate and the Swashbuckler a Rogue archetype, an obvious cross-class option is made plain. Back in AD&D2E, when I wanted to play a pirate, the best option we had was a dual-class Fighter/Thief. With the Gunslinger and Swashbuckler as they are currently presented, that is essentially the way it works here, too.
But King's Dark Tower intentionally combined several genres, including fantasy , sci-fi, horror and western elements. The eponymous gunslinger in this series is, in fact, a spaghetti western character placed in a strange world. Both "Gunslinger" and "Musketeer" invoke people who carry guns around--they are both time-period specific, however. In a settings like Golarion and Eberron (which is the setting I use with the Pathfnder ruleset), Musketeer (IMHO) better captures the idea of the character in relation to the worlds backdrop. Hopefully we can help Paizo make the "alternate" class over the next couple weeks.
I will agree that the nature of the preferred weapon would demand both Disable Device and Perception as class skills. Not too sure about Survival, though. I will also agree that this "Alternate" class may be better off as a Core Class in its own right.
While there are those here that have a problem with the use of the names "ninja" and "samurai" and the images they invoke, I take no issue with them. Though clearly Japanese in flavor, the image they conjure is still fantasy, despite a cultural jump from West to East. With the number of Western-specific cultural names (Bard, Druid, Paladin), this is acceptable. I do take [mild] issue with the name "Gunslinger," however.
I like the idea of malices. They should be the inverses of mercies: cause fatigue, cause sickness, cause disease. I've enjoyed the alternate paladin ever since I first picked up UA. They reached back into BD&D to redeem the Avenger.
This is just a pet peeve of mind, but I feel I should clarify: "Jabberwocky" is the name of the poem.
Kind of like Odysseus and the Odyssey. |
