Firearm Damage Too Low


Gunslinger Discussion: Round 1

51 to 100 of 100 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Mafoon wrote:
houstonderek wrote:


And reality didn't catch up to the idea for nearly 300 years. There's a reason it took a LONG time for hand held firearms to completely replace everything else. Mostly that they weren't terribly effective until the evolution of design made them do what the idea asked.

And, by the time they were effective, they bore zero resemblance to anything that could be called "medieval".

So, again, the OP confuses me with what he wants. Effective firearms are NOT medieval, not by a long shot.

I guess i didn't make it clear but what i was impling is that the majority of people are not trained for combat and would be no challenge for a trained swordsman, but then they have a better chance of killing when given one of these crude guns. This is how the guns presented here are, what i'm saying is that you wouldn't focus on guns as an entire class if they stay at this level of effectiveness. If they want it to become a vialbe option then the guns need to become better or stay an amusing flavor option for all characters.

I agree. I think it's a poorly conceived (and poorly named) class all around. Fighter + gun = gunfighter.

Plus, the archetype the name of the class invokes is Jesse James or Wyatt Earp, not anything from the Middle Ages.


houstonderek wrote:
Mafoon wrote:
houstonderek wrote:


And reality didn't catch up to the idea for nearly 300 years. There's a reason it took a LONG time for hand held firearms to completely replace everything else. Mostly that they weren't terribly effective until the evolution of design made them do what the idea asked.

And, by the time they were effective, they bore zero resemblance to anything that could be called "medieval".

So, again, the OP confuses me with what he wants. Effective firearms are NOT medieval, not by a long shot.

I guess i didn't make it clear but what i was impling is that the majority of people are not trained for combat and would be no challenge for a trained swordsman, but then they have a better chance of killing when given one of these crude guns. This is how the guns presented here are, what i'm saying is that you wouldn't focus on guns as an entire class if they stay at this level of effectiveness. If they want it to become a vialbe option then the guns need to become better or stay an amusing flavor option for all characters.

I agree. I think it's a poorly conceived (and poorly named) class all around. Fighter + gun = gunfighter.

Plus, the archetype the name of the class invokes is Jesse James or Wyatt Earp, not anything from the Middle Ages.

I'm thinking you're hung up on the "middle ages" mind set. This isn't the time period that Golarian is based in. There is an entire country devoted to technology, whom can advance at a rate disproportionate to that of reality. I mean, seriously, in a world where you can summon a demon from the abyss, or a ball of fire, or even go invisible with an eyelash and bat guano, you can't argue anachronisms.

Liberty's Edge

MooNinja wrote:
houstonderek wrote:
Mafoon wrote:
houstonderek wrote:


And reality didn't catch up to the idea for nearly 300 years. There's a reason it took a LONG time for hand held firearms to completely replace everything else. Mostly that they weren't terribly effective until the evolution of design made them do what the idea asked.

And, by the time they were effective, they bore zero resemblance to anything that could be called "medieval".

So, again, the OP confuses me with what he wants. Effective firearms are NOT medieval, not by a long shot.

I guess i didn't make it clear but what i was impling is that the majority of people are not trained for combat and would be no challenge for a trained swordsman, but then they have a better chance of killing when given one of these crude guns. This is how the guns presented here are, what i'm saying is that you wouldn't focus on guns as an entire class if they stay at this level of effectiveness. If they want it to become a vialbe option then the guns need to become better or stay an amusing flavor option for all characters.

I agree. I think it's a poorly conceived (and poorly named) class all around. Fighter + gun = gunfighter.

Plus, the archetype the name of the class invokes is Jesse James or Wyatt Earp, not anything from the Middle Ages.

I'm thinking you're hung up on the "middle ages" mind set. This isn't the time period that Golarian is based in. There is an entire country devoted to technology, whom can advance at a rate disproportionate to that of reality. I mean, seriously, in a world where you can summon a demon from the abyss, or a ball of fire, or even go invisible with an eyelash and bat guano, you can't argue anachronisms.

I'm not hung up on it at all. The OP specifically said he'd not use the class at all if they had six shooters because it wasn't "medieval".

I just think the concept as a base class is flawed. A gun is a tool. Anyone should be able to use a gun. Or we should "sword slinger" or "kukri slinger" or "any weapon slinger" as base classes as well.

Or did you miss my post with "90% of the game isn't medieval"?

Keep up.


Back in my day we had crossover rules for AD&D and Boot Hill or AD&D and Gamma World. As such I really have no problem with the Man with No Name showing up in my fantasy game.

If I want to conform to a strictly western high fantasy setting I'm probably restricting far more than just the gunslinger and the eastern themed classes ;)


thread wrote:
Baww I am sad I can't munchkin x class

It really doesn't matter how hax a classes combat is, but how you play. I've played good combat classes and bad combat classes and both can still fight well enough. One of my favorite classes to play was when I got bad rolls for a sorcerer, and the people I was playing with where to afraid to fight anything. So I melee'd monsters with no AC or HP. It worked out surprisingly well with an occasional spell.

Personally I think the gunslinger class is fine. If they are are early gunpowder weapons, they should NOT be better than a bow. Especially because It looks like a fun class to play, not a munchkined class, I'm all for it. Every game I do stuff that has less than 50% chance of working and is dangerous. I don't see what you guys are whining about really.


It dosen't have to be middle ages that dosen't bother me at all, its just thats how i feel the guns are handled here and that its not enough to base the class on. The gunslinger needs guns better than those avaiable in the middle ages or its broken.


There a difference between a broken class and not being able to munckin it. This class will hold up fine if there are better guns avaiable than the trerrible musket and pistol, otherwise you'll fail to beat challenges tuned to your level.


MooNinja wrote:
I'm thinking you're hung up on the "middle ages" mind set. This isn't the time period that Golarian is based in. There is an entire country devoted to technology, whom can advance at a rate disproportionate to that of reality. I mean, seriously, in a world where you can summon a demon from the abyss, or a ball of fire, or even go invisible with an eyelash and bat guano, you can't argue anachronisms.

To add to that. In a world like the core books allow for (I am not saying every game played will be that way or any of that) Why wouldnt technology keep advancing as you have demons, orcs, etc. threatening your people. Why wouldn't wizards and sorcerers with polymorph any object be tinkering with cased ammo, revlovers, rifling barrels to then generate protoypes than can be duplicated to arm the armies with effective means to defer a demon invasion, dinosaurs, orcs, flying menaces(manticores), etc. One mage with a bent to engineering coupled with long lived races that make losing history/acheivements as what happened in the dark ages in Europe on our planet less likely to occur.


b l wrote:


It really doesn't matter how hax a classes combat is, but how you play. I've played good combat classes and bad combat classes and both can still fight well enough. One of my favorite classes to play was when I got bad rolls for a sorcerer, and the people I was playing with where to afraid to fight anything. So I melee'd monsters with no AC or HP. It worked out surprisingly well with an occasional spell.

Personally I think the gunslinger class is fine. If they are are early gunpowder weapons, they should NOT be better than a bow. Especially because It looks like a fun class to play, not a munchkined class, I'm all for it. Every game I do stuff that has less than 50% chance of working and is dangerous. I don't see what you guys are whining about really.

The problem is that unless a full BAB class is functionally equivalent to another full BAB class (I'm not touching the martial/caster debate here) you have a situation where one class is obsolete in comparison to another.

3.x had this in spades with completely worthless classes like CW Samurai stinking up the joint.

Unless the Gunslinger is functionally equivalent in terms of his/her niche with the archer fighter then it's absolutely a waste of space. It becomes a newbie trap where something looks cool but simply does not measure up to any sort of objective standard.

Yes you can stick to a stormwind fallacy in order to suggest that classes aren't meant to be balanced and "sometimes it's rewarding to play something subpar" but a) that's lazy designing and b) something most game players and buyers don't tolerate.

Paizo has made great strides in limiting any sort of power creep in their optional products (some APG feats being a noticeable exception. I don't want them to start generating vastly underpowered optional classes either.

Thus far the Playtests have been good at highlighting the problems with relative power level. Summoner in it's original incarnation was too potent, Magus was too weak, later versions hewed much closer to the commonly accepted power levels.

I think it's only reasonable for Paizo to modify these new alternate classes according to playtest feedback.

Liberty's Edge

vuron wrote:

Back in my day we had crossover rules for AD&D and Boot Hill or AD&D and Gamma World. As such I really have no problem with the Man with No Name showing up in my fantasy game.

If I want to conform to a strictly western high fantasy setting I'm probably restricting far more than just the gunslinger and the eastern themed classes ;)

I'm the same way, I run a homebrew based on the "Eternal Champion" idea, with some "Myth Inc." type dimensional weirdness, and it's pretty much "anything goes". But, this is after the group has a change to absorb the paradigm of the "home world" (a technologically backward corner of the multiverse, firmly in Donblas' "Law" sphere - things are stable), so that, if they do decide to introduce something new to the setting, they understand why the characters may have some difficulties in a xenophobic, ignorant and superstitious world. Think Skeeve's home dimension.

I don't like to dick over my players, but I do like them to understand that some options aren't as easy to assimilate as others.


vuron wrote:
b l wrote:


It really doesn't matter how hax a classes combat is, but how you play. I've played good combat classes and bad combat classes and both can still fight well enough. One of my favorite classes to play was when I got bad rolls for a sorcerer, and the people I was playing with where to afraid to fight anything. So I melee'd monsters with no AC or HP. It worked out surprisingly well with an occasional spell.

Personally I think the gunslinger class is fine. If they are are early gunpowder weapons, they should NOT be better than a bow. Especially because It looks like a fun class to play, not a munchkined class, I'm all for it. Every game I do stuff that has less than 50% chance of working and is dangerous. I don't see what you guys are whining about really.

The problem is that unless a full BAB class is functionally equivalent to another full BAB class (I'm not touching the martial/caster debate here) you have a situation where one class is obsolete in comparison to another.

3.x had this in spades with completely worthless classes like CW Samurai stinking up the joint.

Unless the Gunslinger is functionally equivalent in terms of his/her niche with the archer fighter then it's absolutely a waste of space. It becomes a newbie trap where something looks cool but simply does not measure up to any sort of objective standard.

Yes you can stick to a stormwind fallacy in order to suggest that classes aren't meant to be balanced and "sometimes it's rewarding to play something subpar" but a) that's lazy designing and b) something most game players and buyers don't tolerate.

Paizo has made great strides in limiting any sort of power creep in their optional products (some APG feats being a noticeable exception. I don't want them to start generating vastly underpowered optional classes either.

Thus far the Playtests have been good at highlighting the problems with relative power level. Summoner in it's original incarnation was too potent, Magus was too weak, later versions...

I think Summoner is still silly right now, to be quite honest, but that's a whole nother story. I can now see there are some good points that you have in favor of changing gunslinger, but I think if you are taking guns from the period when gunpowder was still emerging, they weren't as good as a bow. That's just how it was. What would defeat the purpose of a gunslinger is having it be the same as bowman. And besides, damage isn't the only factor that determines a battle's outcome, and battles are not the only part of dnd. That's what video games are for.

Dark Archive

Sooo... what youre saying is the gunslinger has guns, but is not a combat focused class, and is more of a socialite. Oh yes I see it now (sarcasm).

The weapons available/applicable make the gunslinger a non-viable character.

So they take a long time to load. If you can swap them out with quick draw and fire a separate pistol for each iterative attack, they become a bit more competitive. Then lower the cost to maybe 75 gold, and the pistol here becomes a decent option as the weakest pistol you can get, Ie the hand crossbow of pistols.

These are clearly not intended as the early medieval ones anyways. I don't see any mention of wicks, and the picture made them look like either flintlocks or percussion cap firearms. The big difference there being if it stops working in the rain, or just if you put it underwater. (And whether its like 1500s or 1600-1700s tech).

I dont mind having renaissance firearms or even post renaissance firearms in my D&D. I don't want revolvers, shotguns, or gatling guns, but if paizo makes them for the more modern campaigns then good for them.

But you can't make a gun character with the guns available be any good.
As many others have said, and as I'm reiterating:
problems with the current guns:

1. They cost way too much.
2. They are crappier than a bow.
3. They take an exotic feat.

So the cost needs to be lower, and either they should be competitive with a bow (and martial), be left as is (and simple), or be better than a bow (and maybe keep the exotic.)


vuron wrote:

Back in my day we had crossover rules for AD&D and Boot Hill or AD&D and Gamma World. As such I really have no problem with the Man with No Name showing up in my fantasy game.

True, But AD&D and Gamma World use the same game system for the most part. So you were able to just slid between worlds with only minor world twicks.

Also, both system were 80% simpler back then (not counting thaoo charts). The addition of Skills, Feats, and soon to be unrealistic weapon, has complicated things greatly.

Dark Archive

Well, we've all pointed out the problems we have with the firearms. I'm going to move over to suggestions. I'm going to start by making the weapons I posted initially be more consistent with the Pathfinder gun mechanics. I'm hoping Paizo fixes this situation before firearm rules (I know I wont use them they are now and will avoid using guns in any game that does use them as they are now).

Firearm Stats
Pistol, Light: 100gp, 1d6, (s) 1d8(m), x4 crit, range 20 ft., misfire 1 (0 ft.), 3 lb. Piercing.
Pistol, Medium: 150gp, 1d10, (s) 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.),5 lb. Piercing.
Pistol, Heavy: 200gp, 2d6, (s) 2d8(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.), 6 lb. Piercing.
Musket: 250gp, 1d10 (s), 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 100 ft., misfire 1-2 (5 ft.), 12 lb. Piercing.

Ammunition:
Bullet (20) 1gp.
Black Powder: (10) 5gp.

Those are much more reasonable prices, and the black powder is still a bit pricey.

Feat choices
Quick Draw
If you use quick draw, between iterative attacks, you can pull out a new pistol for each shot and shoot with it (which is cool). You've now got the rate of fire of a bow, until you run out of loaded guns. This also means you probably won't get them enchanted, since either only one will be enchanted, or it'll cost you a fortune. So you're getting to use magic bonuses much less often than on a bow. It's easier to hit than a bow is at close range though.

New feat: Quick Sheathe
You can sheathe your weapons faster than most.

Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You can sheathe a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can sheathe a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

Normal: Without this feat, you may sheathe a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement. Without this feat, you can sheathe a hidden weapon as a standard action.

Quick Draw + Quick Sheathe means firing at the rate of a bow without dropping the guns on the floor after each shot. Quick sheathe is just a possibility though.

So now we have firearms that cost less, and a way to get full rate of fire (at least for a little while).

Better than the bow:
- touch ac
- damage comparable to (or better than) a bow
- x4 crit
- Works with two weapon fighting.
- Can be fired laying down.

Worse than the bow:
- Don't need to confirm fumbles.
- Fumbles break your gun.
- Enchanting guns would cost way more, it's almost like paying the cost to enchant your bow, for each arrow the bow uses (with the stipulation that all the magic arrows are recoverable).
- Cost: To keep up with the bow, you need several pistols or muskets. So while you may pay for a bow once, you're paying for several guns to achieve the same effect.
- Can't shoot over walls now.
- Ammo costs more due to black powder costs.

If the bonuses are about equal to those drawbacks, you have a martial weapon. They definitely don't surpass the weaknesses. From a game power standpoint, The firearms should be either martial or simple. I'm leaning toward simple.

Possible Suggestion:
A feat/class feature to give you full attacks with pistols on a 1/3 speed move. We've all see in movies the gunslinger shooting as he walks forward, and it's pretty cool.


Darkholme wrote:

Sooo... what youre saying is the gunslinger has guns, but is not a combat focused class, and is more of a socialite. Oh yes I see it now (sarcasm).

The weapons available/applicable make the gunslinger a non-viable character.

So they take a long time to load. If you can swap them out with quick draw and fire a separate pistol for each iterative attack, they become a bit more competitive. Then lower the cost to maybe 75 gold, and the pistol here becomes a decent option as the weakest pistol you can get, Ie the hand crossbow of pistols.

These are clearly not intended as the early medieval ones anyways. I don't see any mention of wicks, and the picture made them look like either flintlocks or percussion cap firearms. The big difference there being if it stops working in the rain, or just if you put it underwater. (And whether its like 1500s or 1600-1700s tech).

I dont mind having renaissance firearms or even post renaissance firearms in my D&D. I don't want revolvers, shotguns, or gatling guns, but if paizo makes them for the more modern campaigns then good for them.

But you can't make a gun character with the guns available be any good.
As many others have said, and as I'm reiterating:
problems with the current guns:

1. They cost way too much.
2. They are crappier than a bow.
3. They take an exotic feat.

So the cost needs to be lower, and either they should be competitive with a bow (and martial), be left as is (and simple), or be better than a bow (and maybe keep the exotic.)

1) Gunslingers get them for free, other characters shouldn't be toting around expensive things if they start from level 1. At level 1 everyone is dirt poor. Later on 1000 gold is nothing. I don't know what to think of the weight part of it though... sounds bad for a dexy class.

2)They should not be a bow though, they should be different. Just because they are omgranged doesn't mean that they should be equal to bows.

3) If you aren't a gunslinger fighter. Why doesn't it upset you that some classes can't even use martial weapons without a feat?

Quote:
Soto... what youre saying is the gunslinger has guns, but is not a combat focused class, and is more of a socialite. Oh yes I see it now (sarcasm).

I'm very sorry you're upset, I think? I liked the other guy that had points instead of snipes. I guess I should make sure everything I say is annoyingly lawyerized.

I usually don't post but today I was irked by how angry people were. I wasn't per se against making it easier for gunslingers to make more attacks. I'm against the extreme outrage that people are feeling. It's a playtest for a game, not a government meeting to talk about health care. It just really sounds like everyone plays omgcombat and nothing else, like my one friend expected it to be when he played with my group. He expected to be able to solve everything the dm threw at us by hitting it repeatedly with a sword, and got enraged/frustrated when he couldn't kill things for 5 seconds. And, battles aren't always straightforward either. The 'weak' monk can turn the tide of a battle sometimes.
When you say the 'ha ha he thinks the gunslinger is a socialite' it implies that if a class is not omgcombat it is omgsocial. I'm pretty sure that there are a bunch of classes that do things besides combat and talking. I think endurance in body and willpower, but also quick reflexes are a staple of the gunslinger archetype, which is represented. I think that utility, right the f now snap powers (grit), fit well with the theme, and that if you are playing like how most of my group plays, which is balls to the wall, you will gain back grit more often than people think. Wizards flying around above the battle or fighters full attacking every turn is a girly way to play, and I like that this class is rewarded for doing things outside the box.

tl;dr, I think they made a good base for the class, they just need to tweak things, people are way more angry than they should be, and people seem lame when they talk about 'damage potential'.


Darkholme wrote:

Well, we've all pointed out the problems we have with the firearms. I'm going to move over to suggestions. I'm going to start by making the weapons I posted initially be more consistent with the Pathfinder gun mechanics. I'm hoping Paizo fixes this situation before firearm rules (I know I wont use them they are now and will avoid using guns in any game that does use them as they are now).

Firearm Stats
Pistol, Light: 100gp, 1d6, (s) 1d8(m), x4 crit, range 20 ft., misfire 1 (0 ft.), 3 lb. Piercing.
Pistol, Medium: 150gp, 1d10, (s) 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.),5 lb. Piercing.
Pistol, Heavy: 200gp, 2d6, (s) 2d8(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.), 6 lb. Piercing.
Musket: 250gp, 1d10 (s), 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 100 ft., misfire 1-2 (5 ft.), 12 lb. Piercing.

Ammunition:
Bullet (20) 1gp.
Black Powder: (10) 5gp.

Those are much more reasonable prices, and the black powder is still a bit pricey.

Feat choices
Quick Draw
If you use quick draw, between iterative attacks, you can pull out a new pistol for each shot and shoot with it (which is cool). You've now got the rate of fire of a bow, until you run out of loaded guns. This also means you probably won't get them enchanted, since either only one will be enchanted, or it'll cost you a fortune. So you're getting to use magic bonuses much less often than on a bow. It's easier to hit than a bow is at close range though.

New feat: Quick Sheathe
You can sheathe your weapons faster than most.

Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You can sheathe a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can sheathe a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

Normal: Without this feat, you may sheathe a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement. Without this feat, you can sheathe a hidden weapon as a standard action.

Quick Draw + Quick Sheathe means firing at the rate of a bow without dropping the guns on the floor after...

+1 like those gun rules better that what was presented in the playtest.


In my campaign I use firearms all the time a pistol does 2d6 dam 19-20x3 range inc of 30ft. It works great and the players like it. I also allow the first shot in combat from the firearm to act as a free intimadate check agains creatures. casue what troll is going to expect a handcannon in a fight. I look at it like this the combination of a crossbow and a bow stats.

Dark Archive

b l wrote:
1) Gunslingers get them for free, other characters shouldn't be toting around expensive things if they start from level 1. At level 1 everyone is dirt poor. Later on 1000 gold is nothing. I don't know what to think of the weight part of it though... sounds bad for a dexy class.

I dont know anyone who uses "starting packages". At the beginning of a campaign, you don't tend to get anything for free, you get X gold, to buy what you want. In most games I've played, starting gold at level 1 is 500. So a gunslinger wouldn't even get to start with a gun at this ridiculous a price unless the GM changed the weapon cost.

b l wrote:
2)They should not be a bow though, they should be different. Just because they are omgranged doesn't mean that they should be equal to bows.

If you don't want them to be as good as bows, they should cost less, and not waste an exotic weapon feat. I thought I covered that. As exotic weapons they should be better than martial weapons. Otherwise they shouldn't require extra feat taxes.

b l wrote:
3) If you aren't a gunslinger fighter. Why doesn't it upset you that some classes can't even use martial weapons without a feat?

I don't see guns as something to be only used by a gunslinger class. They might be best at it, but just like I don't expect the fighter to be the only guy who can use a longsword, I don't want the gunslinger to be the only guy who can use a gun.

b l wrote:
I'm very sorry you're upset, I think? I liked the other guy that had points instead of snipes. I guess I should make sure everything I say is annoyingly lawyerized.
b l wrote:
people seem lame when they talk about 'damage potential'.

I opened with a sarcastic remark, but those ARE points. a character who is a "gunslinger" should be good at fighting, using guns. As the guns are terrible, that makes this rather difficult.

b l wrote:
It just really sounds like everyone plays omgcombat and nothing else, like my one friend expected it to be when he played with my group.
Everything may not be OMGCombat, but if a gunslinger is not to be good at OMGCombat, then he should be good at OMGSocial, or OMG Skill checks, or OMGMagic, or some combination of the above, which he is not. That leads me to believe that OMGCombat is where his focus lies, and therefore he should be compared to the other OMGCombat Classes. As a ranged combat focused character, he should be compared to other ranged combat focused characters. So what matters is: How does he compare to a fighter archer or a ranger archer?

As I said, I haven't really gone through the class abilities yet, checked the weapon rules first. And I've heard some complaints about the grit system, but haven't gone over it yet.

Looked at gun rules first. Commented on the gun rules.

Dark Archive

Forgot something with the first Collection of gun rules I put up.
Formatted, and sorted into light, one handed, and two handed.

Firearm Stats:

Light Ranged Weapons
Pistol, Light: 100gp, 1d6, (s) 1d8(m), x4 crit, range 20 ft., misfire 1 (0 ft.), 3 lb. Piercing.

One Handed Ranged Weapons
Pistol, Medium: 150gp, 1d10, (s) 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.),5 lb. Piercing.

Pistol, Heavy: 200gp, 2d6, (s) 2d8(m), x4 crit, range 40 ft., misfire 1 (5 ft.), 6 lb. Piercing.

Two-Handed Ranged Weapons
Musket: 250gp, 1d10 (s), 2d6(m), x4 crit, range 100 ft., misfire 1-2 (5 ft.), 12 lb. Piercing.

Ammunition:
Bullet (20) 1gp.
Black Powder: (10) 5gp.

Those are much more reasonable prices, and the black powder is still a bit pricey.

Feat choices
Quick Draw
If you use quick draw, between iterative attacks, you can pull out a new pistol for each shot and shoot with it (which is cool). You've now got the rate of fire of a bow, until you run out of loaded guns. This also means you probably won't get them enchanted, since either only one will be enchanted, or it'll cost you a fortune. So you're getting to use magic bonuses much less often than on a bow. It's easier to hit than a bow is at close range though.

New feat: Quick Sheathe:

You can sheathe your weapons faster than most.

Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1.

Benefit: You can sheathe a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can sheathe a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.

Normal: Without this feat, you may sheathe a weapon as a move action, or (if your base attack bonus is +1 or higher) as a free action as part of movement. Without this feat, you can sheathe a hidden weapon as a standard action.

Quick Draw + Quick Sheathe means firing at the rate of a bow without dropping the guns on the floor after each shot. Quick sheathe is just a possibility though.

So now we have firearms that cost less, and a way to get full rate of fire (at least for a little while).

So: Comparing firearms to bows

Better than the bow:
- touch ac
- damage comparable to (or better than) a bow
- x4 crit
- Works with two weapon fighting.
- Can be fired laying down.

Worse than the bow:
- Don't need to confirm fumbles.
- Fumbles break your gun.
- Enchanting guns would cost way more, it's almost like paying the cost to enchant your bow, for each arrow the bow uses (with the stipulation that all the magic arrows are recoverable).
- Cost: To keep up with the bow, you need several pistols or muskets. So while you may pay for a bow once, you're paying for several guns to achieve the same effect.
- Can't shoot over walls now.
- Ammo costs more due to black powder costs.

If the bonuses are about equal to those drawbacks, you have a martial weapon. I'll not that they definitely don't surpass the weaknesses. From a game power standpoint, The firearms should be either martial or simple. I'm leaning toward simple.

Possible Suggestion:
A feat/class feature to give you full attacks with pistols on a reduced speed move. We've all see in movies the gunslinger shooting as he walks forward, and it's pretty cool.

Scarab Sages

There are 2 NPC Shooty types in my Kingmaker game.

Yargh, Half-Orc Fighter (Archer)
Full attacks with Deadly Aim looks like +10(11 w. 30') D8+10(+11 w 30/).
First arrow is with Many-Shot, so 3 possible hits.

Dorn von Bendrek (Human Crossbowman)

If is is aiming at the start of an encounter (He is the Baron's Sniper -'Just in case' Cohort) +11/12 w 30' D10+12/13 w Deadly Aim
Full attack is +11/12 D10+9/10 with 2 shots.

This at 5th Level.Both are set to gain an itinerant attack next Level.

I don't think that the damage is too high compared to the dual-shooters that travel with my PCs. Too Low, I'll have to see.
I'm thinking of a small 4-6 Challenge Mini-Dungeon with a Gunslinger,Samural,Magus and Ninja.

-Uriel


i was going to suggest using different calibers for the weapons, since there is a note of pebbles and stones in the campaign setting being used to reference the size of rounds being used, but someone put forth an idea of light/med/hvy pistol/rifle/musket, each with a different dmg rating.

more to come...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:


My point, mdt, is that Pathfinder is setting neutral. It's not medieval fantasy, it's just fantasy.

He's totally free to ban wild west era (or hell, even modern) firearms in his campaigns, but that doesn't make them unsuitable for Pathfinder as a roleplaying game system in general.

EDIT: Upon re-reading the post of his that I quoted, I realize that my message isn't very clear here. There's nothing wrong with him choosing whatever he wishes for his campaign. I was more responding to some lobbying I've seen Earnest doing trying to keep old west era firearms out of Ultimate Combat.

Ah, ok, yeah, it did seem disjointed to what you actually quoted. :)

I agree completely, the RPG should be setting neutral, and then GM decides what fits in his world. One of my campaigns bans barbarians completely, and the other bans them unless they're half-orcs, elves, or half-elves from specific countries. Why? Because there are no barbarian halfling tribes, nor barbarian dwarf tribes. The continent is old and well settled, and the only two countries that are still barbaric is one Elven country and 3 Orc countries.

In the other campaign, there's plenty of barbarians all around. But the players are all citizens of a specific city that is heavily military and under permanent martial law, so they don't have barbarians in the city. At most, someone might be able to play a multiclassed barbarian who'd turned neutral.


Darkholme wrote:
b l wrote:
1) Gunslingers get them for free, other characters shouldn't be toting around expensive things if they start from level 1. At level 1 everyone is dirt poor. Later on 1000 gold is nothing. I don't know what to think of the weight part of it though... sounds bad for a dexy class.
I dont know anyone who uses "starting packages". At the beginning of a campaign, you don't tend to get anything for free, you get X gold, to buy what you want. In most games I've played, starting gold at level 1 is 500. So a gunslinger wouldn't even get to start with a gun at this ridiculous a price unless the GM changed the weapon cost.

It's not part of a starting package, it's a class feature.

Playtest Document wrote:
Firearms: At 1st level, a gunslinger gains either 1 musket (along with 50 bullets and 50 doses of black powder) or 2 pistols for free.

Denying a gunslinger this weapon would be equivalent to denying a wizard who chose a weapon for their Arcane Bond their free masterwork weapon: it is certainly well within a GM's right to do so, but defeats the point of the class feature.

Dark Archive

Alright, I didn't read carefully enough.

There is still the problem that they won't be able to afford ammo, or to replace it if it breaks and explodes (it will happen) or if it gets stolen.

Dark Archive

Darkholme wrote:

Alright, I didn't read carefully enough.

There is still the problem that they won't be able to afford ammo, or to replace it if it breaks and explodes (it will happen) or if it gets stolen.

It kindof reminds me of what happens to a witch if her familiar dies during level 1.

Sovereign Court

Darkholme wrote:

Alright, I didn't read carefully enough.

There is still the problem that they won't be able to afford ammo, or to replace it if it breaks and explodes (it will happen) or if it gets stolen.

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)

Dark Archive

You can't repair it if it explodes, unless I misread that. And since you cant afford a second one as backup, youre more likely to need to keep using your broken gun at low levels, at least until the enemies are dead.

Come to think of it, if my gun is enchanted, and "explodes" that's a huge chunk of money down the drain if it can't be fixed.


One of our players is contemplating this class. As a stand alone it, like all the other classes, has some issues. But one of the first things that is happening is a spellcaster with mending at the ready, a back-up basic weapon, and as soon as we can afford it, an item for him to do the mending with.


Ronin Pi wrote:
One of our players is contemplating this class. As a stand alone it, like all the other classes, has some issues. But one of the first things that is happening is a spellcaster with mending at the ready, a back-up basic weapon, and as soon as we can afford it, an item for him to do the mending with.

Unless that item is a wand or scroll (with the use of UMD if he's using them himself) that item is a houserule. (Nothing wrong with houserules, just trying to keep things in perspective for the sake of the playtest.)

Also keep in mind that once the weapon is magical mending won't cut it anymore.


b l wrote:
tl;dr, I think they made a good base for the class, they just need to tweak things, people are way more angry than they should be, and people seem lame when they talk about 'damage potential'.

Ok, Let us for sake of argument that the gunslinger will only need to attack 3 times in any given encounter to be "reasonably effective". On the fast progression, it takes approximately 14 encounters to level up each level. Therefore to get to level 20 it takes about 280 encounters. Each shot cost 11gp. So each encounter the gunslinger will be spending 33gp simply on ammo. That means the gunslinger will be spending 9240gp just on ammo by level 20. Now if they want a close comparison for DPR, since both weapons do roughly the same amount of damage, the gunslinger will have keep up with archer rate of fire which approximates to about 3/round over the whole 20 period (yeah I know I'm approximately a nonlinear progression with constant but I'm simplifying the math here, archer will start with 1 attack and end at 5 it's close enough). That bumps the cost up to a heavy 27720gp by level 20. That is completely unreasonable. The gunslinger had to effectively pay for a WISH in order to do his job. Meanwhile our archer friend had to pay a mere 126gp doing his job. I'm ignoring all the mechanical difficulties, feat issues, weapon costs, but the gunslinger is down an entire WISH by the end of it. This isn't about munchkinning it is about the class being reasonably playable.


Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:
Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

To be honest, that is one of the things we want to playtest. I also have concerns that the gunslinger is not reaching her proper damage potential, and some more tweaking of class features and deeds may have be done.

Her current build mixed with feat choices, the class abilities she has right now, and how firearms work create a new standard when it comes to damage output for a class. Finding the right equation requires more data.

If you are playing a gunslinger, feel free (and by feel free I mean please do) take a little time and write down your accuracy and damage number in play. I am very interested in that data.

Change the damage the gunslinger does, not the damage the weapon does.

I would personally make the pistol this

Pistol: S:1d6 M:2d4 18-20/x2 exploding dice
Musket S:2d4 M:2d6 19-20/x2 exploding dice

Guns tend to do major damage more often than less often. This also means that a skilled (increased critical feat) gunslinger, can hit with more deadly shots more often, rather than 1 in 20... or 2 in 20 (with feat).

+1 the damage of the gun is just fine, it is the rate of fire that brings down the Gunslinger, giving him a few abilities that allow him to make the most of his attacks would be a big benefit


What I remember my DM doing is having a rifle with a pretty high failure rating (1-5) and then rolling D20 again and on a 1 something inside breaks and it misfires but doesn't blow up. It would take two turns to reload a standard flintlock pistol and three for a musket (Matchlocks were two turns if I remember).

BUT damage worked out at around 2D6 for a pistol and 3D6 for a rifle which wasn't too bad as it meant that two characters armed with muskets could fire at boss level creatures doing some damage or knocking out a pair of minions before joining in the melee. Which gave firearms a supporting role rather than a horrorific thing where all characters packed a rifle because it never failed and high damage.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

I'm cross posting the math part of another post I made to this thread as it is more relevant to here.

I pulled out a character I played in a 15th level game. It was heavily optimized for unarmed strike, but would have been better built using a more damaging weapon combo.

My 15th Level CORE only, non-Monk unarmed Fighter using non magicical Unarmed Strike
Amulet of 1d6 fire and no Cestus/Brass Knuckles/etc (because they are non CORE)
The only non-Core item is a Wayfinder for the Dusty Rose Synergy bonus
+21/+21/+16/+16/+11/+11 1d8+21+1d6 Fire 19-20x2 for Unarmed Strike (Power Attack) and +2d6 Sneak Attack (TWRend)
DPR vs AC 30 (CR 15 average)
2*(.70*(9+21+9)+.1*.70*(9+21))+2*(.40*(9+21+9)+.1*.40*(9+21))+2*(.20*(9+21+ 9)+.1*.20*(9+21))+.7*.7*(5.5+13)
118.265 DPR Flanking (93.065 DPR not flanking)

If I geared him to be a Gunslinger (without Gunslinger levels)
Swap all TWF related + 1 more for Improved Precise Shot/Deadly Aim/Rapid Reload/Rapid Shot/Quick Shot
+15/+15/+10/+7 1d8+10 19-20x4 for 4x MW Pistols (Say I own only 16; or 4 rounds of shots) Deadly Aim
Can't use my Fighter +2 Atk/Dmg Weapon Training because there is no Pistol group
Can't use Str or Dex to damage, so I pump up my Con.
Can't use Sneak Attack after the first shot (so only calculated into first)
Ignore AC for cover/concealment (so on par with Unarmed Strike)
DPR vs AC 30 (CR 15 average)
.45*(4.5+10+1+9)+.45*(4.5+10+1)+2*(.1*.45*3*(4.5+10+1))+.20*(4.5+10+1)+.1*. 20*3*(4.5+10+1)+.05*(4.5+10+1)
.40*(4.5+10+9)+.40*(4.5+10)+2*(.1*.40*3*(4.5+10))+.15*(4.5+10)+.1*.15*3*(4. 5+10)+.05*(4.5+10)
26.99 DPR Sneak Attacking <30' (22.2325 DPR >30')

So best damage in a round from the Unarmed is 438 percent (%) of the Pistol shooter, assuming a guy with 16 loaded MW Pistols ready for 4 rounds of Quick Drawing combat.

Liberty's Edge

erik542 wrote:
b l wrote:
tl;dr, I think they made a good base for the class, they just need to tweak things, people are way more angry than they should be, and people seem lame when they talk about 'damage potential'.
Ok, Let us for sake of argument that the gunslinger will only need to attack 3 times in any given encounter to be "reasonably effective". On the fast progression, it takes approximately 14 encounters to level up each level. Therefore to get to level 20 it takes about 280 encounters. Each shot cost 11gp. So each encounter the gunslinger will be spending 33gp simply on ammo. That means the gunslinger will be spending 9240gp just on ammo by level 20. Now if they want a close comparison for DPR, since both weapons do roughly the same amount of damage, the gunslinger will have keep up with archer rate of fire which approximates to about 3/round over the whole 20 period (yeah I know I'm approximately a nonlinear progression with constant but I'm simplifying the math here, archer will start with 1 attack and end at 5 it's close enough). That bumps the cost up to a heavy 27720gp by level 20. That is completely unreasonable. The gunslinger had to effectively pay for a WISH in order to do his job. Meanwhile our archer friend had to pay a mere 126gp doing his job. I'm ignoring all the mechanical difficulties, feat issues, weapon costs, but the gunslinger is down an entire WISH by the end of it. This isn't about munchkinning it is about the class being reasonably playable.

Umm, staying in core, it is eminently possible for that 20th level Fighter archer to be getting 6 attacks using 7 arrows during a full attack for 10 rounds or more.

Feat chain:
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
Manyshot (PFRPG version appears to stack with Rapid Shot)

Magic Enhancement:
Boots of Speed (12,000 gp, 10 rounds/day) OR
Longbow of Speed (+3 bonus, variable gp, no limit/day)

So, for a feat chain that is almost required for an archer build anyhow, and a moderate (low at high level, of course) gp cost, you get an archer who can "fill the air with a barrage of arrows".

To be honest, the problems with the Gunslinger appear to be multitudinous; and fixing one problem causes others to pop up their nasty little heads.

Problem 1) Low rate of fire

Example:
1st level human archer build:
Purchases a normal shortbow, 60 arrows, 33 gp total
Point Blank Shot
Precise Shot
Rapid Shot
2 arrows per round as a full attack, 1d6+1 per arrow within PBS range

1st level human gunslinger build:
Two pistols free, has to buy bullets & black powder, 11 gp per shot, so 3 shots for the same price as the archer gets 60 shots.
Secret Stash Deed (3 shots per grit expended)
Rapid Reload (pistol)
1 shot per round, using his move to reload & standard to fire, for as long as his ammunition holds out, 1d8 per shot.

Feats still needed for best effect:
Extra Grit (at least once)
Lightning Reload Deed (another place to burn that grit)
Dodge (needed to take the following feat)
Deft Shootist Deed (yet another place to burn that grit)
Point Blank Shot (needed to take Precise Shot)
Precise Shot (needed to take Rapid Shot)
Quick Draw (needed to allow use of multiple firearms with Rapid Shot)
Rapid Shot (needs Lightning Reload Deed for full effectiveness, past the number of pistols the PC is carrying)

Add in that the Gunslinger gets the class-provided bonus feats at half the rate the Fighter archer gets them, and he quickly loses ground from a bad, and expensive, beginning.

The following is an example of a couple possible feat chains after 1st level for both classes:
2nd:
Fighter: Weapon Focus (Longbow)
He will also have upgraded to a strength-bow by this point
Gunslinger: None
3rd:
Fighter: Deadly Aim
Gunslinger: Dodge
4th:
Fighter: Weapon Specialization (Longbow)
Gunslinger: Deft Shootist Deed
5th:
Fighter: Point-Blank Master
Gunslinger: Extra Grit
6th:
Fighter: Manyshot
Gunslinger: None
7th:
Fighter: Dodge
Gunslinger: Quick Draw
8th:
Fighter: Improved Critical
Gunslinger: Lightning Reload Deed
9th:
Fighter: Greater Weapon Focus (Longbow)
Gunslinger: Point Blank Shot
10th:
Fighter: Mobility
Gunslinger: None
11th:
Fighter: Improved Precise Shot
Gunslinger: Precise Shot
12th:
Fighter: Penetrating Strike (Longbow)
Gunslinger: Rapid Shot
13th:
Fighter: Shot on the Run
Gunslinger: Weapon Focus (Pistol)
14th:
Fighter: Far Shot
Gunslinger: None
15th:
Fighter: Greater Weapon Specialization (Longbow)
Gunslinger: Extra Grit
16th:
Fighter: Pinpoint Targeting
Gunslinger: Improved Precise Shot
17th:
Fighter: Greater Penetrating Strike
Gunslinger: Penetrating Strike
18th:
Fighter: Critical Focus
Gunslinger: None
19th:
Fighter: Staggering Critical
Gunslinger: Improved Critical
20th:
Fighter: Stunning Critical
Gunslinger: Greater Weapon Focus

I should have probably gone the rest of the way up the Shot on the Run feat chain for the Gunslinger, might improve his survivability at that point; bounce in, bounce out, add Wind Stance and Lightning Stance when he qualifies to improve his survivability more, and reduce his expenses per encounter to a constant one shot per round. That would need moving Improved Critical and Critical Focus up, as well, then, to improve what little damage he'll do.

Side question:
Can bullets be made out of special materials and/or enchanted?
Cold Iron bullets: 2 GP each
Silvered bullets: 3 GP each
Adamantine bullets: 61 GP each
Ghost Touch bullets: 8,301 GP each (Eek!)


James Risner wrote:

I'm cross posting the math part of another post I made to this thread as it is more relevant to here.

I pulled out a character I played in a 15th level game. It was heavily optimized for unarmed strike, but would have been better built using a more damaging weapon combo.

My 15th Level CORE only, non-Monk unarmed Fighter using non magicical Unarmed Strike
Amulet of 1d6 fire and no Cestus/Brass Knuckles/etc (because they are non CORE)
The only non-Core item is a Wayfinder for the Dusty Rose Synergy bonus
+21/+21/+16/+16/+11/+11 1d8+21+1d6 Fire 19-20x2 for Unarmed Strike (Power Attack) and +2d6 Sneak Attack (TWRend)
DPR vs AC 30 (CR 15 average)
2*(.70*(9+21+9)+.1*.70*(9+21))+2*(.40*(9+21+9)+.1*.40*(9+21))+2*(.20*(9+21+ 9)+.1*.20*(9+21))+.7*.7*(5.5+13)
118.265 DPR Flanking (93.065 DPR not flanking)

If I geared him to be a Gunslinger (without Gunslinger levels)
Swap all TWF related + 1 more for Improved Precise Shot/Deadly Aim/Rapid Reload/Rapid Shot/Quick Shot
+15/+15/+10/+7 1d8+10 19-20x4 for 4x MW Pistols (Say I own only 16; or 4 rounds of shots) Deadly Aim
Can't use my Fighter +2 Atk/Dmg Weapon Training because there is no Pistol group
Can't use Str or Dex to damage, so I pump up my Con.
Can't use Sneak Attack after the first shot (so only calculated into first)
Ignore AC for cover/concealment (so on par with Unarmed Strike)
DPR vs AC 30 (CR 15 average)
.45*(4.5+10+1+9)+.45*(4.5+10+1)+2*(.1*.45*3*(4.5+10+1))+.20*(4.5+10+1)+.1*. 20*3*(4.5+10+1)+.05*(4.5+10+1)
.40*(4.5+10+9)+.40*(4.5+10)+2*(.1*.40*3*(4.5+10))+.15*(4.5+10)+.1*.15*3*(4. 5+10)+.05*(4.5+10)
26.99 DPR Sneak Attacking <30' (22.2325 DPR >30')

So best damage in a round from the Unarmed is 438 percent (%) of the Pistol shooter, assuming a guy with 16 loaded MW Pistols ready for 4 rounds of Quick Drawing combat.

as you cant use deadly aim with guns (per the devs) what does that drop your dpr to?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

Dragonsong wrote:
as you cant use deadly aim with guns (per the devs) what does that drop your dpr to?

I noticed an error during the change to remove Deadly Aim, so here is the new numbers without it:

33.4875 DPR with Sneak Attack

25.6275 DPR without SA


Since this seems to be the most reasonable thread discussing firearms stats, I though I'd contribute my take/homebrew:

Smooth bore firearms have a maximum of only 5 range increments.

Smooth Bore (SB)
One Hand
SB Pistol, 125 gp, 2d4, x3, 15 ft., 3 lb

Two Hand
SB Carbine, 250 gp, 2d6, 19-20 x3, 45 ft., 7 lb
SB Musket, 375 gp, 2d8, 19-20 x4, 60 ft., 10 lb

Rifled
One Hand
Rifled Pistol, 250 gp, 2d4, 19-20 x3, 15 ft., 3 lb

Two Hand
Rifled Carbine, 500 gp, 2d6, 18-20 x3, 75 ft., 7 lb
Rifled Musket, 750 gp, 2d8, 18-20 x4, 100 ft., 10 lb

Multi-Barrel weapons - add 50% per additional barrel.

Bullets (10) 1 gp
Powder (10) 5 gp

Reload is Full Round Action per Barrel

A pistol or carbine can be fired from horseback, a musket can not.

There is no catastrophic failure chance. There are several reasons for this:

1 All weapons should have a catastrophic failure chance or none should
2 It's only purpose is to discourage the use of the weapon
3 It creates double jeopardy in conjunction with critical fumble rules

All stats and pricing are based relative to existing items, particularly the hand and repeating crossbows, sling bullets, and alchemist fire, as well as historic references.

Honestly the reload time should fall between the light crossbow and heavy crossbow, but due to the limitations of the rule set I made it equal to the heavy crossbow.

Based on my knowledge of wound ballistics, the damage is actually inflated, but I feel these numbers strike a good balance between realistic and cinematic firearms damage.

The firearms rules presented in the official rules and by most publishers tend to be prohibitive by design. This is most likely to placate the "keep your guns out of my fantasy" crowd by keeping them niche oddities rather than viable options.


Joseph Davis wrote:
Throw in Vital Strike, and you have some pretty decent damage (if lvl 16+, your looking @ 4d12+dex+other bonuses) which isn't anything to scoff at.

I apologize if this sounds offensive, but you are wrong. By 16th level, 4d12+dex+other bonuses is in fact something to scoff at. It has an average of 26 damage from weapon, and if we're overly generous and say you have a +12 dexterity and a +5 weapon, that would be about 43 damage; assuming of course that you A) Hit (since you could miss via % miss chances, roll a 1, or whatever) and B) Are using the Vital Strike feat.

Meanwhile, the Ranger (not even Fighter - who has the best damage in the game) is popping off 2d8+42 on his first shot, 1d8+21 on his second, third, and fourth shot, and possibly a 5th shot if he's also hasted via a now piddly buff, boots, or potion. So the ranger is dealing more damage than you on his first shot without several vital strike feats; and he can do it from 110ft away, with a +21 or higher to hit easily.

I'm sorry, but yes, we're scoffing. Scoffing hard. It's so heinously bad at this level that it's effectively like wielding a 1d2-1 beat up stone knife at 1st level with a halfling with an 8 strength.

Quote:
Granted, you can only fire once every other round without grit or other modifiers, and I'm assuming you take rapid reload, but it's still not bad.

You're right, it's not bad. It's absolutely horrible. It's the worst you could possibly do in the game. A Fighter with a SLING could make you look pitiful.

Quote:
Other feats to take would be deadly aim and point blank shot. Still not crazy awesome, but it's comparable, for a touch attack. And to solve the defense issue, you could also take Combat Expertise and shrug off the penalties, since your attacks are touch.

Deadly Aim specifically doesn't work on Touch Attacks. Point Blank Shot gives +1 to hit and +1 to damage, which the hit would mean little to you if you're targeting touch AC, while the damage is negligible. Combat Expertise is a good idea, but you're still going to get destroyed in melee.

Quote:
You can also dual wield/get lots of shots with multiple pistols, 2-weapon fighting, and quick draw.

Not really. You need a lot of feats, and you've already noted that you'll need the vital strike line, combat expertise, and point blank shot, which is 5 feats right there. You'll need 6 for Quick Draw, 7 for Two Weapon Fighting, and you'll be required to continuously drop huge piles of cash (your weapons) on the ground during a full attack; which unless you're carrying about 100 lb of pistols, means you will stop making full-attacks in one or two rounds.

Meanwhile, Ranger is shooting more arrows, and also has them in various tasty flavors (silver, cold iron, adamantine, good, evil, lawful, chaotic, various sprinkles of bane, and maybe some elemental, holy, or merciful ones too), doesn't have to drop a mountain of cash or carry tons of magic weapons around to function.

Quote:
We also don't know what other guns they may add later, so the "single attack" concept may become moot.

Then the playtest is horribly incomplete. Why playtest something that revolves around a piece of equipment it doesn't have access to during the playtest? That's akin to asking someone to please playtest an archery based Fighter, but only use slings, throwing weapons, and perhaps crossbows.

I just felt compelled to point these things out, because describing them as fine, "nothing to scoff at", or anything even similar to fair damage at 16th level is just deceptive to anyone who doesn't know what the numbers actually are.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ossian666 wrote:

A buddy and myself were kicking around stuff like this as possible options to help scale the Gunslinger.

We thought that maybe the weapon was more of a bonded one (since people are up in arms [pun intended] about costs) that could be upgraded/altered as the Gunslinger gains levels kind of like the Alchemist's bombs. You get enhancements that you achieve by making alterations to the gun like making the barrel longer for accuracy or at level 10 you can alter it to include a small clip.

We're gonna attempt to use the Gunslinger in a real campaign setting and see how it goes...maybe play out a couple player vs. player groups of 4.

I really like this concept. As a bonded weapon, perhaps as you progress in levels, you can fine-tune it to function with greater damage output, quicker reloads, greater range, and maybe even magazines, clips or means to fire more than one bullet per round. This could conceivably offset the penalties that currently exist in firearms.

I also think that the cost of powder and bullets could be offset with class progression - learning ways to build cheaper bullets and powder.

Heck, you might even be able to learn how to manufacture different kinds of bullets: hollow point, armor piercing, exploding, etc.


Saurstalk wrote:

I really like this concept. As a bonded weapon, perhaps as you progress in levels, you can fine-tune it to function with greater damage output, quicker reloads, greater range, and maybe even magazines, clips or means to fire more than one bullet per round. This could conceivably offset the penalties that currently exist in firearms.

I also think that the cost of powder and bullets could be offset with class progression - learning ways to build cheaper bullets and powder.

Heck, you might even be able to learn how to manufacture different kinds of bullets: hollow point, armor piercing, exploding, etc.

This has the problem of making the gunslinger magical from 1st level, or introducing the concepts of "just because we said so" from 4E (I can't dual wield without being a ranger why exactly?).

It also ignores one very, very, veeeery major problem. If only gunslingers can wield guns with any reliability or effectiveness, then there will not be guns. There cannot be guns in a world that cannot use them. If the world, barring gunslingers, cannot use them, then they are worthless. If you go into a town and say "Hey, I got this thing of a badguy who was shooting us with it, but we can't use it, we wanna sell it", the shopkeeper goes "Sorry, nobody else can use that piece of junk either. I'll give you money for its weight in iron, 'cause that's all it's worth".

If you want swashbuckling high seas adventure with gritty industrialization, inner-sea goodness, they have to be more realistically priced here. As is, you're paying 1 gp more per shot than you can comfortably live on in a month. That's gross on so many levels, and really looks bad from both a world-building and mechanical standpoint.


Ashiel wrote:


This has the problem of making the gunslinger magical from 1st level, or introducing the concepts of "just because we said so" from 4E (I can't dual wield without being a ranger why exactly?).

Reading it wrong: in 4E anyone can dual weield but only Rangers can twf.

Everyone can holds a weapon in either hand but onbly rangers can (through powers) attack with both at same time.


Starbuck_II wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


This has the problem of making the gunslinger magical from 1st level, or introducing the concepts of "just because we said so" from 4E (I can't dual wield without being a ranger why exactly?).

Reading it wrong: in 4E anyone can dual weield but only Rangers can twf.

Everyone can holds a weapon in either hand but onbly rangers can (through powers) attack with both at same time.

Alternately reading it wrong: powers, like all of D&D combat, are an abstraction. You can describe yourself attacking with both weapons, just as how I describe myself as dodging blows and feinting attacks when I full attack ;p


Starbuck_II wrote:
Ashiel wrote:


This has the problem of making the gunslinger magical from 1st level, or introducing the concepts of "just because we said so" from 4E (I can't dual wield without being a ranger why exactly?).

Reading it wrong: in 4E anyone can dual weield but only Rangers can twf.

Everyone can holds a weapon in either hand but onbly rangers can (through powers) attack with both at same time.

Let me put it another way. My character holding a weapon while she fights with another weapon does not a dual-wielder make. Dual-wielding implies she's wielding both, at the same time. Wielding = using. This was one of the biggest beefs I had with 4E, was the fact much of it is completely nonsensical. I, me, myself, normal person, can hit you with two weapons within a 6 second period of sparring; but my 30th level demigod cannot unless he's a ranger.

That's pretty much a failure compared to every RPG ever. Every tabletop RPG I've ever played (from D&D through Shadowrun) has the opportunity to dual wield, albeit at a penalty. 4E basically said "You can't dual wield, pretend you can, but you can't". I'm not really cool with that.

EDIT: Also before anyone asks, I'm entirely cool with refluffing things; but I'd like the fluff to fit at least somewhat with the mechanics. For example, if you want flesh to stone to instead turn them into a super-hard block of unmelting ice, then I'd totally say that was quite awesome and go for your theme. If you wanted to say that your Rapid Shot was effectively you firing two arrows at once, like Legolas in LotR does when he shoots two different foes with the same shot, I'm totally down with that.

When I waste what would be a shield bonus or extra damage from a two-handed weapon to say I'm attacking with two weapons as a dual-duelist and I actually make one attack and it's reflected in every way as one attack, that's not cool.

It's like saying "I turn them to stone" and then casting fireball. Pretend as you like, but I ain't buying it.

Silver Crusade

Some things on Gun damage.

1: it needs to be increased from what it is now. Guns do more damage IRL than any bow.

2:Black powder firearms should have an ROF of 3 round per miniute before feats.

3:There should be no Small or medium size damage or fire arms
a .44 darringer does the same damage to a human body as a 44-40 revolver. the diffrence is the range of the two and thats how that should be resolved.

4: Guns need to be priced so gunslingers can buy them within the gold per level rules that are out. RAW now place them far aabove the GPL limit before enchanting them.

5: Fireearms should not be able to be enchanted period. Tech should be tech and magc be magic and the two shold not mix. To keep the damage of firearms on pace with magic, increase the weapons traing fire arms to each 3 levels and allow gunfighters to take the feat weapon spiecaliztion feats for firearms only.

Damage should be increased as follows
.58 musket 2d10 x4 rnage increment 15ft pistol 50'rifle
.69 musket 4d6 x4 Range Increment 25' pistol 75' rifle
44-40 4d6 19-20x4 ranage increment pistol 50' pistol 100' rifle western rifles and pistols.
Boarding gun 4d10x6 Range increment 30' 6 barreled pepperbox style gun

9mm 3d6 x4 range increment 50'
.45 4d6 19-20 x4 Range increment 60'
.357 mag 3d6 x4 Range increment 50'
.50 4d12 4d8 18-20x4
12G shotgun 4d8 17-20x5 increment 20' not effective beyond 60' .00 buck
12g shotgun 4d10 19-20x4 Range Increment 60' not effective beyond 90'
.600 Elephant 3d12 x4 range increment 50'
.30 cal carbine 2d8 x4 range increment 50'

The damage for the above weapons was taken from another unnamed fansty game that was well tested and worked very well. The Critical threat ranges are extrapolated as the crit system in the unnamed game was percentage based.

Allow masterwork firearms -1 chance to misfire and +1 to hit and damage
superior firearms no misfire chance and +2 nonmagic to hit and damage.

Things to change in the class.
do away with brave and tough replace with good reflex save medium will and fort save. 1 less thing for players to track and look up on their sheet.
gain Gun training at EL 3 and each 3 levels negates need fr enchanted guns

Do away with pistol whip pistol whip someone with a musket pistol
and you will break it and not be able to use it.

I like the concept of grit bt not its implementation don't know how to fix it.

Do away with Deeds and give gunslingers a bouns feat at each even level
and make most of the deeds into bonus feats.
Suggested bonus feats: Gunslinger Quickdraw, rapid shot, far shot, point blank shot percise shot, improved percise shot, Targeting, Covering shot, Deadly shot, Gunslinger Initiative, Dodge, Mobility shoot on the Run, pin point targeting, parting shot.

Gunslinger Quick Draw same as qick darw but gives an extra swift action
to holster your pistol.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies, Representative - D20 Hobbies

I took my "Monk" (Unarmed Optimized) character and rebuilt him (keeping the same levels as before) as a Light Crossbow guy.

Deadly Aim, Rapid Reload, Rapid Shot, Bleeding Critical, I.Precise Shot, GWSpec Light Crossbow and more with many many many feats left over (Mainly because core only.)

Used a +1 Speed Large Crossbow, Light (because he had money remaining to pay for a +4 and the +4 didn't make sense for Guns when you would be needing a ton of guns and Speed wouldn't work anyway since you can't reload the Guns)

Sneak Attack +2d6 (first attack only) <=30' using Deadly Aim & Rapid Shot
+21/+21/+21/+16/+11 2d6+13+1+2d6
DPR vs AC 30 (CR 15 average)
.45*(4.5+13+1+9)+2*.45*(4.5+13+1)+3*(.2*.65*(4.5+13+1))+.20*(4.5+13+1)+.2*. 40*(4.5+13+1)+.05*(4.5+13+1)+.05*.25*(4.5+13+1)
.40*(4.5+13)+2*.40*(4.5+13)+3*(.2*.65*(4.5+13))+.15*(4.5+13)+.2*.35*(4.5+13 )+.05*(4.5+13)+.05*.20*(4.5+13)
42.57625 DPR Sneak Attack < 30' (32.72500 DPR >30') plus roughly 4.3425 DPR from Bleeding Critical

Not nearly as good as a Bow


Here are some of my ideas to increase damage output through a new deed and modified gun training...

Accurate Shot (Ex): At 1st level, as long as a gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she gains the ability to strike precisely with firearms, adding her gunslinger level to her damage roll. A gunslinger's accurate shot only works against living creatures with discernible anatomies. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is also immune to an accurate shot, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from an accurate shot.

Gun Training (Ex): Starting at 5th level, a gunslinger can select one specific type of firearm (such as pistol or musket). She gains an additional die of damage with that firearm equal to its type (1d8 for pistols or 1d12 for muskets). Every four levels thereafter (9th, 13th, and 17th), a gunslinger gains an additional die of the appropriate type. Furthermore, when she misfires with that type of firearm, the misfire value of that firearm increases by 2 instead of 4.

(comments and suggestions welcome)


Bryan Moe wrote:

Here are some of my ideas to increase damage output through a new deed and modified gun training...

Accurate Shot (Ex): At 1st level, as long as a gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she gains the ability to strike precisely with firearms, adding her gunslinger level to her damage roll. A gunslinger's accurate shot only works against living creatures with discernible anatomies. Any creature that is immune to critical hits is also immune to an accurate shot, and any item or ability that protects a creature from critical hits also protects a creature from an accurate shot.

Gun Training (Ex): Starting at 5th level, a gunslinger can select one specific type of firearm (such as pistol or musket). She gains an additional die of damage with that firearm equal to its type (1d8 for pistols or 1d12 for muskets). Every four levels thereafter (9th, 13th, and 17th), a gunslinger gains an additional die of the appropriate type. Furthermore, when she misfires with that type of firearm, the misfire value of that firearm increases by 2 instead of 4.

(comments and suggestions welcome)

That Gun Training seems like it might be a bit much. 5d12+34 (av. 66, spread of 39-94). That is also without any enchantments other than +5. Maybe its not, I don't have much experience in high level campaigns.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

What about introducing a knock-down ability? Kind of like a ranged trip? it might offset the poor damage if occasionally the bad guys ended up on the dirt.

The Exchange

Based on one of my players' ideas last night, and adding some of my own, we came up with this suggestion to amp up the damage potential for a gunslinger without changing the weapons' base damage:

Scale both damage and critical threat range.

Scale the damage by adapting the rogue's sneak attack feature, but without the requirement that the target be flanked or flat-footed. Call it something different, like "bullet rend" rather than "sneak attack."

Scale the critical threat range by +1 for every four levels of gunslinger.

As such, a 15th Level gunslinger with a +5 musket and Dex of 22 would do 1d12+8d6+11 with a critical threat range of 17-20, not counting any grit augments.

And perhaps remove Signature Deed Lightning Reload to compensate for the increased damage potential.

The Exchange

lastblacknight wrote:
What about introducing a knock-down ability? Kind of like a ranged trip? it might offset the poor damage if occasionally the bad guys ended up on the dirt.

The Targeting deed already does that (see pg 4 of the playtest pdf). You can also pin them in place or severely restrict their movement with deeds like Covering Shot, Startling Shot and Stunning Shot.

51 to 100 of 100 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Combat Playtest / Gunslinger Discussion: Round 1 / Firearm Damage Too Low All Messageboards
Recent threads in Gunslinger Discussion: Round 1