I'm very concerned about the Gunslinger's Targeting ability with it's potential to trivialize single creature encounters, which are already dubiously problematic to balance due to the issue of action economy.
I have no issue with called shots to the torso. A grit point for a 2x Crit Range is fine and dandy.
Head, Arm, Leg/Wing shots, I have issue with. Shouldn't there be a 'Save' attached to the effect somewhere? Or a check? Or a size restriction? Or something? Anything at all...
The ability of a Gunslinger to basically declare "Confused", "Drop Weapon", "Fall Over" and "No Fly Zone" on everything from a Mite to a Dragon gives the Gunslinger a bit too much battlefield control.
I know if I did this to my players, there'd be mutiny later.
----------------------------------
Covering Shot is a bit gimmicky as well. It 'feels' like a good idea, but shouldn't the target have some say in whether or not it's entangled? I can see an Orc hitting the deck to avoid getting shot, but pinning down a monster with DR or something like a Solar or Balor just because the Gunslinger couldn't aim for nuts feels a trite random. Annoying even.
----------------------------------
Pistol Whip. Grit to beat face in close combat. Very nice. Free ability to send someone to the floor is however a bit much. You don't get the secondary effect when being smacked around the head by a Lucerne Hammer or Greatclub, so why should a janky little person who just smashed you in the face with a pistol get to do the same?
----------------------------------
I want to like these effects. They're thematically awesome. I can't as a GM or player without feeling a bit guilty using them though, which is my issue. As they stand, I feel that these abilities should have some degree of limitations coded in rather than the free-for-all they currently are.
As much as the mental image of a Halfling sending a Colossal Dragon plummeting to the ground is amusing to me, I can see potential where it would not only be disruptive, but downright annoying.
I'll probably field test a Gunslinger ambush AS-IS in my current campaign shortly. Expect test reaction to follow.
Firstly, all these things cost a resource, so it's sort of a narrative control style of thing. I picture the Gunslinger as sort of a class based around "toughened luck", so I can see where it might not fit into a lot of themes.
Then again, the Ninja and Samurai will probably rub a lot of people the wrong way for themes as well, so this seems to be the direction of these sub classes.
Second, it feels like they are playing up the "bang! loud noises" effect that guns have, especially on those not used to them. Sort of triggering involuntary reactions sort of thing. You don't have to hit someone hard on the funny bone to make them involuntarily release their grip, etc. Or make them duck out of instinctive fear, etc.
As for the pistol whipping... it requires a CMB check. It's giving a free trip for "Surprise! Didn't expect that smack from this thing, didja!". Someone with Greater Trip can get the same effect in reverse, really.
The Gunslinger deals better damage simply because he's better at using the thing as an improvised weapon than anyone else.
Perhaps there should be a feat that lets a person used to these weapons/surprise effects a chance to avoid them? And let the Gunslinger get this feat for free?
Although, get winged on the elbow, or off the temple, and there's no "getting used to it" that will help there.
Second, it feels like they are playing up the "bang! loud noises" effect that guns have, especially on those not used to them. Sort of triggering involuntary reactions sort of thing. You don't have to hit someone hard on the funny bone to make them involuntarily release their grip, etc. Or make them duck out of instinctive fear, etc.
It's "John Wayne" luck. You missed, but it turns into a gain anyways.
This is why I said it feels like "luck" and "narrative control". It's not an 'on-purpose' use to make them entangled or whatever, it's "damn, I missed, but because I have this thing called 'Grit', it still did something negative to the guy".
It appears to be a method to "give fighters good things" that skirts the edge of real without having to be magic.
As I said, I can see where people can have a problem with that, thematically. I'd imagine you could quote sections of the Gunslinger entry to a Killbot to force it to shut down.
Covering Shot is a bit gimmicky as well. It 'feels' like a good idea, but shouldn't the target have some say in whether or not it's entangled? I can see an Orc hitting the deck to avoid getting shot, but pinning down a monster with DR or something like a Solar or Balor just because the Gunslinger couldn't aim for nuts feels a trite random. Annoying even.
I'm in the same boat.
I don't care for positive effects as a consequence of failure. And making it not an option to do be design compinds that.I really dig the idea, but I think the mechanics need work. (hurray for playtests)
I'd like it to be available as a different kind of action. Covering fire is commonly done by design. I do get that a near miss could rationally pin down the target, but that applies to bows just as well.
Just make it a full round action to pin down a target, or something along those lines.
I had thought of how it didn't make sense against things like zombies or golems. High DR monsters is also a very good point that had not occured to me.
It also gets into that dangerous area of having a valid action last week suddenly become invalid because a new rule "officially" defines it. If an archer wanted to try to pin down a target, I'd let them try, the fact that there is no established rule for it not withstanding. Now that gets fuzzy because he does not qualify. Obviosuly you can ignore the rules and do what you would have done, but not needing to work around a different rule is better.
It mihgt be better to just provide some simple guidelines for this type of action. Ranged attack, will save (?), mind-affecting (?), fear effect (?) Basically a manuever typr option for ranged attacks. and then give the gunslinger a solid bonus to catch the desired feel.
I'm not meaning to shoot down the idea (no pun intended). It is a great idea. But there are some tricks in both the function of the mechanics and the ripple effects on the rest of the game.
Yeah. Anytime missing is better for you, or being hit is better than being missed, something wonky is going on.
You can get into a situation where a 7th level Gunsliger is more useful than a 12th level Gunslinger. The Big Bad is laughing as the 12th level guys bullets bounce off, but frozen by the 7th level misses.
|
Here is my thought on Covering Shot. First, it should not be a positive consequence of an unintentional miss. In fact, they should remove the prohibition on intentional misses altogether. How many times in westerns do we see a gunman "make 'em dance" with precisely placed shots all around them? Covering Shot should be the result of an intentional miss, and I'm thinking that this should be a contested Intimidate check. By adding a point of grit on the intentional miss (AC 10 to hit the ground or a wall) the gunslinger can add his Wisdom modifier to his Intimidate check (or maybe one point for a free intimidate check, or two points to add wisdom modifier to the check). The "target" must succeed on a Will Save (since this is an intimidation effect) against a DC equal to the gunslinger's Intimidate check. If he fails by more than four, the target is "stood up" (or forced to hit the ground or dive for cover, if the target also has access to those grit-based moves, but otherwise cannot move)until the end of his next turn. If he fails by less than four, he gains the entangled condition and can only move half speed and cannot charge or run. If he succeeds, he can move normally. That's one idea, anyway.
Edit: Also a thought on Targeting. Targeted body parts should be considered 1 or more size categories smaller than the target creature (1 for wings, 2 for arms or legs , 3 for head, 4 for hands), with the appropriate bonus to AC.