Lostwriter's page

After reading the book a little more, I'm convinced you get nothing from adding the subtype, nor are you required to take any of the abilities associated with that subtype.

Several alternate racial abilities introduced in ARG replace darkvision.

Minesight and Surface Survivalist both replace darkvision for dwarves. Elves can gain darkvision in place of low-light vision.

Given that, the subtypes as described in the bestiary have changed meaning to be a general guideline not a rule.

Any abilities for a custom race need to be paid for except those granted by the custom race type.

When you add subtypes to a custom humanoid race, do you automatically get the benefits of the subtype?

For example, if you select Orc do you automatically get Darkvision and/or Light Sensitivity?

If so, do you have to pay for those abilities?

Based on the sample races in the back of the book I could see that both are true. You must take those abilities and you must pay for them.

All Orc subtypes have Darkvision and Light Sensitivity (unless it's a Half-Orc).

The Water subtype would get Swim as a class skill.

I could see that you could choose any of those abilities but still have to pay. But I don't believe you would get them for free.

The whole drive of our work was to use as many mechanics directly from Core without adding too many new ones. The spells were converted to match existing spells and spell schools. The discipline is a descriptor (like acid or fire).

And if you follow it along you'll see there is a science behind the whole idea. A lot of this came from an older game we developed, Legends of the Fated Lands, that was for Wizards of the Coast before they bought TSR (never released).

We actually plan to release it as a stand alone at some point. We re-envisioned it to be an RPG for the 4-10 year old set. My son helped me with that version -- "Dad, can you and me play Pathfinder today?"

Here's our last game: Trucks vs. Skeletons

Even more off Topic -- Jeremy, Did you ever hang out at Texas Game Company?

YAY! Definately needed the faiths of balance for our aasimar campaign.

We just finalized a deal for two alternate distribution models. More info coming later.

Seriously , every one, just stop playing with these kinds of people!

Back in the 80s people like this couldn't even get invited to game tables because their rep got around.

THAT! Has been discussed a bunch.

Your problem (seriously) was using advanced firearms, why didn't you just make the gunslinger use single or double barrel pistols?

A revolver is always going to be better than a Bow, but that doesn't have anything to do with the character.

They included the revolver for people who are trying to use them in a different type campaign setting, the gunslinger isnt your problem it's the fire arms you let him have.

Oh, I know. I just have too many "optimizers" in my group. If it's in the book they want to use it. If it's not explicitly stated, it's a loophole. It just wasn't worth the fight. We'll wait and see how it turns out later. We are actually thinking of scaling back to just Core, no splats.

@Lostwriter:
How do you set up encounters? What do they typically consist of? What are your expectations of a CR equivalent fight for your party? I ask because I want to help you find your campaign balance again, without going to the extreme (as much as it isn't) of changing rules, or feeling like you are targeting him specifically.

I would suggest that the real problem you are having more than anything else could be the abundance of wealth. With two +1 weapons (expensive weapons too), a belt, and anything else he has he is way over wealth by level -- I would suggest that fixing that might fix more of the problem.

We scrapped the gunslinger completely. We will wait to see how the rules come out in the book. Even with all your help, we still didn't think the character worked for us. We must still be doing something wrong. His extrapolated damage was over 144 each round at level 8 without using alchemical rounds and even more cheesy optimization. We're going back to just using Core and possibly APG (still debating).

All that is complicated.

Why not just give gun a normal attack roll, and give the guns a + to hit.

Pistol +2 to hit
Musket +4 to hit

Revolver +6 to hit
Rifle +8 to hit

.................

Then you just add that +2 to hit, to your normal attack roll.
This would reflex as better change to penetrate armor.

................

Might not be a realistic example of how firearms worked, but then again, this is a game, and i prefer simple or realistic any day. This would solve both the Armor problem and High level large creature problem with Touch attacks.

A good idea as well. We discussed that too (and increasing base damage in compensation). As many of the discussions show, there is no perfect solution. Yours truly is the easiest to comprehend and use. The method I presented is distillation from a work of art with no playable value (it looked like a rolemaster table).

Ok I'm seeing so many rule breaks it's not funny at this point -- I'm not saying this to be rude -- just factual.

Reloading revolvers is always a move action currently.

Second he would actually shoot faster with alchemical rounds in a pistol instead of the revolver.

Paper cartridges are alchemical rounds -- with which reloading a pistol (but not a revolver) is a free action.

Next up is the character's size -- I'm assuming he's a halfling or gnome right? Otherwise I'm curious about that.

Next: Is he shooting into melee? If so he's -4 for it being a melee and if an ally is in the way that's a +4 to the foe's AC too -- that's a total effective penalty of -8 on his attack rolls, even as touch attacks.

Now another point about revolvers -- they don't misfire, and they get touch out to 5 range increments -- but he still takes the penalties for those range increments -- which is anything beyond 20 feet for a revolver -- be sure he's taking those penalties.

Now this isn't bad for a gunslinger -- and the damage if finally something to be positive about (honestly it is) but he's still not outdamaging a fighter of the same degree of optimization using a bow.

Yes, but he's reloading 2 revolvers, so I make him take a full round to reload both. He has the option to drop them and pull the shotgun if he chooses.

He's usually first to fire before enemies are engaged. And yes, he would take -4 for firing at melee engaged foes (until his next feat).

And yes, he's a gnome (svirfneblin for the story line - all players are outcasts from evil societies in a racist human controlled area).

I'm not debating the math (I know mine is way off a lot of times so I don't bother checking his) or which is better. I just feel that gun training should only allow applying half dex to offhand ranged weapons in the same way that everyone else uses their strength mod. That's about it.

You're using Revolvers. That means he needs to be using Metal Cartridges. Those buggers cost a preeeeetty penny, even if he crafts them with Gunsmithing.

Also. Revolvers never misfire.

Yea, I'm in the process of cash starving him to see how that works. He also has an alchemist making him the black powder.

We also have some house rules we are testing for varying prices based on the availability of firearms.

Lostwriter wrote:

I am seeing the same thing. Different build. He has rapid shot giving him a 3rd shot on full round actions and is using revolvers (we are testing advanced firearms).

I allow my player to respec each week so we can test out different things (we are also play testing my rewrite of psionics).

He gets +9 to hit on each of his 3 shots (+10 now that they are all level 6) and does +12 on each hit. So 3d6 + 36 each of the first 2 rounds (he has to spend 2 move actions to reload).

With deadly aim and gun training working like strength on ranged weapons, this would be different -- +12 damage on the first hit, +7 on the second. It's only 5 less damage each round, but it feels more fair.

Oh, and he never misses with the cleric buffs. He either hits or misfires. I won't let him use alchemical yet, just because I don't want the extra 3d6 damage yet.

You do realize that without alchemical rounds he cannot fire more than two shots in a round right, and that is one with each gun.

Quite frankly I'm calling bull on this. Show me the build -- cause what I posted is all that is possible with pathfinder current rules, and even then I'm fudging wealth by level.

Feats: Two-Weapon Fighting, Rapid-Shot, Deadly Aim, Point-Blank Shot, Gunsmithing (I need to verify his feats though, because he said he had Weapon Focus too).

Dex 22 (18 from 20 point build, +2 racial, +2 item/buff )

2 +1 small revolvers (he's going to lose those to sunder very soon), level 5

Attack = 5 (level 5 BAB) + 6 (Dex) + 1 (Point Blank) + 1 (Size) + 1 (Magic) - 2 (Deadly Aim) - 4 (dual wield) - 2 rapid shot = + 6 attack (I had said +9 because I forgot to take out the -2 for rapid shot and had him down with weapon focus which I don't think he really has) but he also has the cleric buffs so +7-8. He rarely rolls below 10 (even with my dice), so it really doesn't make much difference.

Damage = 1d6 + 6 (Gun Training) + 4 (Deadly Aim) + 1 (Point Blank) + 1 (Magic) = 1d8 +12 damage each shot = 3d8 + 36.

He's not using Alchemical since it would lower his per round damage and raise his misfire. He wants to add Shock and Acid as magical enhancements to his items not use the alchemical shells. We tried that as a test, it was too much (6d6 + 36).

And lastly, why would I try to fudge this? I'm trying to find some balance (even if it's to audit him) because the rest of the party is calling foul.

This brings me back to my main point. I would like to see Gun Training apply only 50% to the off-hand weapon. I think Deadly Aim should work like Power Attack (+50% for two hands, -50% for off hand).

Lostwriter wrote:

Aren't we saying the same thing? -4 (-6 reduced by 2) to primary, -4 (-10 reduced by 6) to off-hand (Table 8-7 on page 202)? Which brings his total to +9 from this base of +13.

Apparently yes. In that case you're leaving off the Rapid Shot -2. With the rules as they stand, you don't get three shots a turn at 5th level or less with Revolvers at only a -4, it's a total of -6.

You're right, I wasn't adding that in (he probably was though). Thank you! That's what I get for trying to do PFRPG math and real work at the same time.

I am seeing the same thing. Different build. He has rapid shot giving him a 3rd shot on full round actions and is using revolvers (we are testing advanced firearms).

I allow my player to respec each week so we can test out different things (we are also play testing my rewrite of psionics).

He gets +9 to hit on each of his 3 shots (+10 now that they are all level 6) and does +12 on each hit. So 3d6 + 36 each of the first 2 rounds (he has to spend 2 move actions to reload).

With deadly aim and gun training working like strength on ranged weapons, this would be different -- +12 damage on the first hit, +7 on the second. It's only 5 less damage each round, but it feels more fair.

Oh, and he never misses with the cleric buffs. He either hits or misfires. I won't let him use alchemical yet, just because I don't want the extra 3d6 damage yet.

No problem you seem tired, and I've been that way before myself.

I'm ambivalent towards the issue -- no one does good damage with the gun in the first place so nerfing their damage more seems unneeded.

Yeah it's a touch attack -- within the first range increment -- all of 20 feet with a pistol, but that's not so bad either.

Bows allow you your strength bonus, and many thrown weapons do the same -- at the end of the day the only way the gun really works for the gunslinger is if he gets all of his dex bonus on damage.

As such I'm willing to not fight this.

I have a min/maxer that is mowing things down with 30+ dmg a round without much chance of missing at level 5. I'm just looking to tweak some things for balance. If he gets out of hand I'd just house rule it anyway.

Lostwriter wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

I don't understand what you are asking: Weapon finesse doesn't scale, and strength on off hand is completely different than getting dex on damage with a weapon.

Weapon finesse allows you to use Dex modifier instead of Strength on attack rolls. Off-hand weapons get 50% of the strength modifier, so that should apply to the dex modifier as well.

With gun training, the dex modifier applies equally to both primary and off-hand weapons. In my opinion, it should only be 50% for the off-hand weapon.

Wow lost you really are lost.

Weapon finesse allows you to apply your dex to your bonus to hit... not to damage.

The 50% strength is only for damage rolls -- not your bonus to hit.

So you don't lose 50% of your strength or dex when attacking with an off hand weapon -- only on damage with an off hand weapon.

Considering how crappy guns are (and they are really crappy) allowing full Dex on an off hand attack from a specialized class, with a bad weapon, isn't a big deal -- especially when that weapon is at best one handed.

Duh sorry. Yea, my mistake. I got way confused on where I was heading.

It would make sense (to me) to have Deadly Aim work like power attack and the Gun Training dex modifier to damage work like strength modifiers to damage. That's what I was trying to say ... badly.

I don't understand what you are asking: Weapon finesse doesn't scale, and strength on off hand is completely different than getting dex on damage with a weapon.

[strikethrough]Weapon finesse allows you to use Dex modifier instead of Strength on attack rolls. Off-hand weapons get 50% of the strength modifier, so that should apply to the dex modifier as well.

With gun training, the dex modifier applies equally to both primary and off-hand weapons. In my opinion, it should only be 50% for the off-hand weapon.[/s]

EDIT: I'm an idiot. Ignore that.

Lostwriter wrote:

Good point. Yea, I didn't take that out of the calc above. He did take multi-weapon fighting, so is only at -4 (+9 total) on all attacks.

Actually, no. -2 from Two Weapon Fighting assumes the use of light weapons, such as daggers or short swords. Revolvers are not defined as such, making what he's doing the mechanical equivalent of using two long swords, so -4 from the Two-weapon Fighting. Now this is a perfectly reasonable thing to House Rule away, but it is a House Rule.

Aren't we saying the same thing? -4 (-6 reduced by 2) to primary, -4 (-10 reduced by 6) to off-hand (Table 8-7 on page 202)? Which brings his total to +9 from this base of +13.

I like the idea that a gunslinger can get their full dex bonus on firearms. But should it be on every shot that is fired during the round? Shouldn't it scale like weapon finesse and strength modifiers to off-hand weapons?

You're forgetting his total of -6 to hit when dual-wielding and using Rapid Shot (since Revolvers aren't light). Even if you house-rule them to light, he's still at -4.

So he actually only has a +7 to hit when doing this.

Good point. Yea, I didn't take that out of the calc above. He did take multi-weapon fighting, so is only at -4 (+9 total) on all attacks.

Advanced firearms will probably disappear for us (and maybe all of the firearms). The ability to apply all that dex to the damage hurts. If it were only applied to the primary weapon that might help.

We all agree that armor penetration is a much easier stat to deal with. We've been doing mock battles with variations.

The current version of what we are testing is an even simpler form from last time.

A Penetration Resistance Bonus (PRB) is granted by armor vs. projectiles resolving as a touch attack (i.e., firearms at close range, etc.).

• Shield (Wood/Iron/Steel): Base 1 PRB
  
• Shield (Mithral): Base 2 PRB
  
• Shield (Adamantine): Base 3 PRB
  
• Light Armor: Base 1 PRB
  
• Medium Armor: Base 2 PRB
  
• Heavy Armor: Base 3 PRB
  
• Mithral Armor: Add +2 PRB to base (Mithral Light Armor would grant +3 PRB)
  
• Adamantine Armor: Add +3 PRB to base
  
• Enhancement: +1 PRB for every +1 enhancement bonus to AC
  
• Natural Armor: +1 PRB for every +2 Natural Armor
  
• Force Armor (i.e., Mage Armor, Force Shield, Blade Barrier): +1 PRB to every +2 bonus to AC
  

Only the highest bonus from a single source is used. A dragon with 30 natural armor would get +15 to touch AC vs. firearms. The same dragon wearing adamantine heavy barding, would still only get +15.

EDIT: for math/adjustments

Lostwriter wrote:

A cleric, a gunslinger, and an alchemist walked into a dungeon, there were no survivors.

Lol. I hadn't actually taken buffing into account. My players tend towards the frugal with spells. Most sessions see the casters with about half their spells left, and the Fighter grumpy about being "excessively damaged".

How did he get a 22 Dex though? Am I overly suspicious?

+2 dex from an item, +2 dex from race, starting with 18 dex (20 point build) = 22 dex.

Attack = 5 (level 5 BAB) + 6 (Dex) + 1 (Focus) + 1 (Point Blank) + 1 (Size) + 1 (Magic) - 2 (Deadly Aim) = +13 attack

Damage = 1d6 + 6 (Gun Training) + 4 (Deadly Aim) + 1 (Point Blank) +1 (Magic) = 1d6 +12 damage.

Dual wielded revolvers with rapid shot allows 3 such attacks. For anything with a 14 touch or lower, he is just rolling for misfires and fumbles.

Damage is 3d6+36 each round with a reload on the 3rd round. He usually drops his revolvers to pull out the shotgun at this point.

He also used a pair of double-barrel pistols (as a test) for 4d6+48 and then swapped out the shotgun.

They started at level 4 with 6,000gp.

He wants to pay a craftsman to enchant both the revolvers to add Shock and Acid attributes. I'm still stalling. This would add another 1d6 per shot.

Hecknoshow wrote:

Lostwriter wrote:

Also, since he's firing 3 shots and has just the right set of feats, he can do 30-50 hp damage every round at level 5. With no save.

Can you post this characters stats?

Agreed - this seems to exceed most other playtests, by a significant margin. It would seem very useful to see how this character has been optimized, because your numbers - if accurate - may in fact indicate a significant problem.

Sure thing. I sent him an email to send me his character sheet.

I know he has +6 dex mod, is getting +13 damage to each shot, and is using a pair of revolvers and a shotgun (depending on the situation - he makes his own and another player is an alchemist). If he loads an alchemical charge, it goes up from there. The entangle shot is brutal.

He has deadly aim and a few other feats to up the damage. He took out a level 7 oracle (built using the 20 point build with a touch ac of 18 and 72 hit points) and 5 level 5 bloody skeletons in a few rounds by himself.

The players excel at min/maxing (the gunslinger's total ac is around 32 when buffed). Part of this is my fault as I'm letting two of them work together to make the items, so cost really isn't a limiting factor for the firearms. The party can mow through creatures faster than they spend money.

A cleric, a gunslinger, and an alchemist walked into a dungeon, there were no survivors.

We did some test and are going to go with this for now (as a home rule):

Hardness grants adjustments to touch ac vs. firearms. Every 3 hardness of armor adds +1 to touch AC vs. firearms. For example, full plate (hardness 10) would grant +3 to touch AC, +1 full plate would grant +4 (hardness 12).

The touch ac vs. firearms can never be greater than the ac granted by the item. Only the item with the greatest hardness bonus to touch ac vs. firearms is used (like a deflection bonus).

Of the ideas put forth, this seems to be the fairest, just not the easiest. We could also try other calculations (like every 4 or 5 hardness).

Mithral and Adamantine in effect become the Pathfinder equivalent of Kevlar.

For force armor and shields granted by spells we will use the same hardness calculation as armor enchantments. For example a shield spell that grants +4 magical bonus to AC would have 8 hardness (2 hardness for each +1 enchantment) granting +2 to touch ac vs. firearms. Most force objects are considered 30 hardness, but that might be too much.

For natural armor, each +1 will equate to +1 hardness. Natural armor +9 would give +3 to touch ac vs. firearms.

Amulet of Natural Armor +1 (+1 hardness) grants no additional benefit to touch AC vs. firearms. An ancient dragon with 30 natural armor would have +10 to touch ac vs. firearms.

Breastplate +1 (+10 hardness for metal + 2 hardness for enchantment) gives 12 total hardness and +4 to touch AC vs. firearms.

Mithral Shirt (hardness 15) would grant +5 to touch AC vs. firearms. Since a mithral shirt would typically grant only +4 to ac, only +4 is granted to the touch ac vs. firearms.

A mithral shirt +1 would have a hardness of 17 and normal AC of +5 so a total of +5 is granted to touch AC vs firearms.

An adamantine breastplate +2 (hardness 24) would grant +8 to touch ac vs. firearms (plus the appropriate DR).

We are having issues with balance from the gunslinger. Basically, the gunslinger in our campaign can hit anything with a 14 or below touch AC without even rolling the dice.

Also, since he's firing 3 shots and has just the right set of feats, he can do 30-50 hp damage every round at level 5. With no save.

So, we're needing to implement a house rule to have some balance before we ditch the class entirely.

We're leaving the touch ac attack as is, but allowing a save.

Since firearms basically resolve like a ray spell, and most of those have a save, it only makes sense for the firearm to allow a save.

We are trying a few ways of this to see which feels better:

• Reflex Save to take half damage (or none with evasion). DC of the save = 10 + gunslinger level + dex modifier (or ranged attack bonus - still debating). Still, the DC will 22 for the character in question at level 6 (22 dex min/maxed with buffs/racials). The advantage is that this is a simple existing mechanic and is our first choice.

• Allow reflex save to negate dex or dex-related damage (deadly aim for example). The bullet still gets through, but you negate their ability aim accurately to increase damage. Harder to calculate, but more in the spirit of firearms. Other thought was to negate the bonuses on the attack side, or even both. But it doesn't feel right to save before you know if you are hit.

• Hardness adjustments to touch ac vs. firearms. Every 5 hardness of armor adds +1 to touch AC vs. firearms. Each +1 enchantment that would add hardness to the armor adds +1 to Touch AC vs. firearms. For example, full plate would grant +2 to touch AC, +1 full plate would grant +3.

• Hardness grants damage reduction vs. firearms. Using the same calculation, +1 full plate would grant DR 3 vs. firearms.

If your interested in psionics in Pathfinder check out Psionics Unleashed by Dreamscarred Press.

Thanks. I'll check it out. I think I went in a different direction so it will be interesting to do a comparison.

Created a preview document (I don't have good distribution option/channel yet) but you a free to review and comment. I am waiting on a full document edit to fix all my spelling mistakes.

PDF on RapidShare

I'm close to being finished with a rewrite of Psionics for Pathfinder. I've been working on it on and off for a few years and finally have something useable.

Some of the basics:

I went with 2 classes: The psion (caster) and the psyker (melee caster). These two classes are meant to mirror the sorcerer and bard classes from core rules.

At a basic level all psionic power are spells. They are manifested as spells by casting. The source is the mind, body, and soul of the individual instead of a deity or material components.

I went with a straight power to spell slot conversion. Each class has a specific number of spells known and spells per day.

HOWEVER, each psionic spell caster also starts with a Ki Pool. This pool is used to augment spells, recall spent spell slots, and generally do all the other things that made a psionicist unique.

My intent was to use core rules wherever possible and keep the mechanics streamlined and intact.

I greatly expanded the disciplines by treating them like cleric domains and sorcer bloodlines. They fall somewhere in the middle for power and number of abilities.

I made the wilder class from 3.5 a discipline (undisciplined) for the psion with their own rules for discipline spells and abilities.

Likewise, I merged the soulknife class and psionic warrior to build the psyker class.

All other psionic mechanics were merged either into existing core rules (skills, metamagic, etc.) or became Ki powered.

All psionic feats are Ki feats, which means a monk can use any of those feats without needed wild talent or being a psionicist.

I took out a few races from 3.5 and added some new ones to have a more cohesive feel. For example, 3 of the new races are related by common history and ancestor: the amchitka (ratfolk), helians (phoenix elves), and drakians (dragon elves). I also expanded the Half-Giant, Dromite, and Elan races. The Maenad and Xeph may get dropped, I'm just not liking the treatment for them. And I'm still on the fence about the Dromite.

I added a full range of alternate racial traits, favored class options, and race traits for each race.

I am going through final edit on the beta version and will make it available through the OGL for any who are interested in using it.

Or take the Heirloom Weapon trait, and select pistol if he already took a musket as his free weapon (or vice versa), and he starts off with a masterworked firearm of one kind and a regular firearm of the other kind, both free of charge, as a beginning 1st level character, without having to spend a level in wizard.

This is exactly what one of my players did in our playtest.

Race Trait in APG states:

"In order to select a race trait, your character must be of the specified race or ethnicity."

Do half-orcs count as both orc and human for the purpose of choosing race traits? Do half-elves count as both elf and human?

My personal feeling is no, but wanted clarification (I tried searching and came to no conclusion based on the ramblings I found).

Also, Adopted (social trait) states

"You were adopted and raised by someone not of your actual race..."

I assume that means if you are human you can't select a human race trait.

However, if you are half-human does it also prevent you from selecting a human race trait.

I guess this really depends on the interpretation of the prior statement.

My rigid interpretation:

• You can only select a race trait if your race exactly matches.
  
• You can not select an adopted race trait if your race exactly matches.