I just downloaded this PDF and was simultaneously thrilled and terrified by the inclusion of the Gunslinger. I've always tip-toes around increased technology in my games, and either had to house rule a class or come up with strange builds in order to accomplish this type of character. I was happy to see that the developers are brave enough to make legitimate rules, but it's always easy for something this unique to fail to live up to its intent.
To be perfectly honest, I'm fairly disappointed.
Some of my issues come from strictly things that I would have done differently. I would've left out Knowledge (local) from class skills - as my understanding is that there is one place in the world of Golarion where firearms are at all common, and that doesn't lead me to believe that your average gunslinger is going to be up on the local rumors and traditions due to the suggested isolation. Of course, my gunslinger need not put ranks in it, so I need not concern myself. Second is the proficiency with martial weapons - seems that a fellow who spends more of his time with a gun wouldn't bother learning swords and axes. It also seems that a gunner would develop a natural disinclination towards bows.
I'm also sketchy about granting a gunslinger a free gun at 1st level. No other class (save perhaps a wizard's spellbook) gets free items - they have to pay for them with their starting gold. Not only does the gunslinger get his for free, but it's a weapon of exceptional value? My suspension of disbelief is tested concerning the random manifestation of a firearm for those who pursue this class - particularly in cases of multiclassing.
Unfortunately, my biggest issue with the class is the ruling mechanic - grit. First and foremost, there is exactly one reason for a gunslinger to have a high Wis score. Perception, arguably the most common use for a high wisdom, isn't even a class skill for this guy. The Wisdom based skills he does have are of fairly limited utility - Heal (from my experience) going out the window with the introduction of the stabilize spell, and Profession being a skill that I have never actually seen a PC take.
Second, there are three ways to regain grit. One is via a 1 in 20 chance (or 1 in 10) - urging the gunslinger to take certain feats to capitalize on critical hit chance. Then there is the misleading 'killing blow'. It's worth mentioning that reducing a creature to 0 hit points or less doesn't actually kill it unless it's negative hit point total is equal to its Con score - otherwise Diehard would be a wasted feat for villains. Finally, a vague, GM discretion 'heroic act'. While the dashing gunslinger who leaps from train car to train car at the risk of his life is cinematic and appealing, it puts more emphasis on the character's role of 'impressing the GM'. While this may appeal to the diva style players, those who wish to play the stoic gunslinger are out of luck. It should also be noted that the Hero Points system from the Advanced Players Guide also awards Hero Points for 'heroic acts', thus allowing the gunslinger to double dip - at which point it's up to the GM to either disallow him to receive one of each, give both, as he's fulfilled the requirements, choose one or the other, or allow the character to choose. Regardless of the solution, it's going to slow the game, which would be a big letdown after some fancy heroics.
And when the gunslinger has the grit he needs he can accomplish a few pretty cool things - and a few that seem like deeds he should be able to accomplish without spending finite 'points'. Targeting, for one, was a mechanic that I got a little glow at the idea of. I was disappointed to see that shooting someone in the arm doesn't deal damage and amounts to a ranged disarm. So much emphasis was placed on the CMB/CMD rules as a reparation of poorly constructed 3.5 mechanics that allowing a character to disarm with an attack seems very much like a step back. I have similar concerns with what is effectively a glorified ranged trip, but at least that one lets the bullet deal damage.
I am similarly uncertain about the 'blast lock' deed. It begs the question - why does this take grit? It's a lock, and the character has a gun. Hitting a lock with a battleaxe doesn't take any kind of points - why is a gun different? I can't for the life of me make sense out of extra effort being applied towards shooting an inanimate object at point blank range.
Mind you, a lot of the rest of them I like. I am just left scratching my head over a number of the rules tied to the class.
The last time I built a gunner for my Pathfinder campaign, I just used the crossbowman archetype from the APG and replaced all instances of 'crossbow' with 'firearm'. It works surprisingly well. Most of all, it's simple and believable - something I can't say I got from this class.
I sincerely hope for the best. I enjoy anything the provides new options for the game that I love so dearly - but I hope that this particular addition, with all its potential, goes through some very extensive revision through the playtest.
|
I would've left out Knowledge (local) from class skills - as my understanding is that there is one place in the world of Golarion where firearms are at all common, and that doesn't lead me to believe that your average gunslinger is going to be up on the local rumors and traditions due to the suggested isolation.
The RPG isn't designed to be Golarion-specific, so the GM could be running a campaign where guns are spread out over a whole continent.
In Golarion, yes, Knowledge (local) may well count as Knowledge (Alkenstar).
To be fair Knowledge(local) is now the skill that covers knowing about humanoids IE player races not knowledege (nature) anymore. So I can see it for that reason.
The more I think about it the less I like Grit in general. Just have the class do things. It doesnt need fiddly points. Its not over powered without them, I think. If you need to restrict uses have them simply be X per day (Cha or Wis?). There is beauty in simplicity, and while the uber fine tuning needed for say the Inquisitor is nice, on occasion, such unnecessarily complex sub-systems don't really bring anything to the game and should not be incorporated so often.
In short, unique, flavorful, elegant, substantive abilities make a class fun to play, not more book keeping.
Naw, savage worlds uses lots of points, and its really fun to toss poker chips about. (ESPECIALLY For a gunslinger)
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Naw, savage worlds uses lots of points, and its really fun to toss poker chips about. (ESPECIALLY For a gunslinger)
They also used points for raging in beta and look how it turned out. But maybe if the system was more like the ki pool and dropped the whole earning points through deeds. Cool for flavor, but not to GM.
I have no problem with the resource management side of grit. Tracking with chips or stones is simple.
However the name 'grit' itself just makes me think of fine gravel. Is the use of 'grit' to mean 'resolve' an Americanisim?
It is indeed Brock, as is "sand," among others. Something that you here a lot of in American Westerns, and not limited to just the ones with the title "True Grit." =-)
Does the wizard begin play without his spellbook and spell component pouch? Does the cleric or oracle begin play without his holy symbol and spell components? Does the druid begin play without his holly and mistletoe and spell components? Does an alchemist come without his alchemy kit?
Every class should come with whatever it needs to use its primary class features FOR FREE from level 1. To do otherwise is to impose a tax on the character's starting funds, which is unfair.
Does the wizard begin play without his spellbook and spell component pouch? Does the cleric or oracle begin play without his holy symbol and spell components? Does the druid begin play without his holly and mistletoe and spell components? Does an alchemist come without his alchemy kit?
Every class should come with whatever it needs to use its primary class features FOR FREE from level 1. To do otherwise is to impose a tax on the character's starting funds, which is unfair.
AFAIK, all those classes have to buy their starting equipment, and the money they get reflects this. Otherwise you might as well say the fighter should get his weapons and armor free at level 1.
|
However the name 'grit' itself just makes me think of fine gravel. Is the use of 'grit' to mean 'resolve' an Americanisim?
It's also the name of a street drug sold in the Puddles District.
Strange that it would be used again in a Paizo product?Is there a secret meaning hidden in the word-play?
In a word, perhaps.
AFAIK, all those classes have to buy their starting equipment, and the money they get reflects this. Otherwise you might as well say the fighter should get his weapons and armor free at level 1.Does the wizard begin play without his spellbook and spell component pouch? Does the cleric or oracle begin play without his holy symbol and spell components? Does the druid begin play without his holly and mistletoe and spell components? Does an alchemist come without his alchemy kit?
Every class should come with whatever it needs to use its primary class features FOR FREE from level 1. To do otherwise is to impose a tax on the character's starting funds, which is unfair.
A fighter can kill, disarm, trip, power attack, or use any number of his other abilities even when left with just his fists.
A gunslinger without a gun or a wizard without his spellbook can't use any of his primary class abilities.