It's probably WAY too late for this, but I still want to give a bit of criticism and solutions.
I think the gunslinger would be way better as an alchemist-based class, than as a fighter-based class.
Why? In sort of fluff: the alchemist is a user of self-made creations (bombs), and the fighter uses weapons other people have made and masters them. Further more the alchemist already uses more attacks against touch AC and the figher normally lacks this.
Also the range of guns (to touch AC) is closer to throwing bombs.
Problems with fighter:
- guns & blackpowder are expensive (see "too much wealth for first level" thread)
- guns get broken often enough, and the fighter doesn't seem qualified to repair them without a lot of skillpoints.
- blackpowder could be used my anyone to nuke monsters.
Solutions the alchemist could bring:
- guns could replace bombs and blackpowder could be skipped by letting the alchemist innate magic fire the bullet.
- the alchemist has enough skillpoints and alchemy skill for handling guns
- the innate magic the alchemist uses to fuel guns could explain better damage for higher levels.
- blackpowder wouldn't really exist for anyone, thus no powder kegs.
I think that guns replacing mutagens and bombs would do great.
To limit spellcasting, maybe spells that create bullets, thus the player has to give up a lot of gold or some spells per day.
The lower attacks seems reasonable for rifles, but perhaps less so for guns. But as reload takes its time.
Heavy armor together with guns somehow seems weird to me, but that's perhaps just my perception.
a minor problem that probably only will be in playtest:
a mage using major creation could probably create blackpowder. He could get very rich, and create powderkegs without problems.
I hoped for a little more constructive responses.
But aside from that, I don't even know who you refer to.
If you think that I had a specific person in mind when writing my post, you are mistaken. But for arguments sake, I see the gunslinger as a person from Pirates of the Carribean with moves from Matrix and Equilibrium.
I believe that a gunslinging alchemist would be ok.....as an archetype. With the release of guns this would be nice. That way it could add more flavor and more character classes could use guns if so desired.
But I like the gunslinger as a fighter based class. That's just me. Hope that helps a bit.
|
I can definitely see where you are coming with this, but as you said it is almost certainly too late for this drastic of a change.
I think one of the biggest problems with using the alchemist is that with the current gun rules (which are highly unlikely to change at all) a Gunslinger definitely needs to be versed with other weapons as well (Guess that saber in the pic isn't just for show), which an Alchemist is not. Also, an alchemist's extracts are a bit too much without stripping out A LOT of what (at least I think) makes the Gunslinger an interesting class. And if you strip out extracts, mutagens, and bombs (and poison doesn't make sense either), then it really isn't related to the alchemist at all, does it?
At least the Gunslinger is vaguely related to the Fighter class (Bonus feats at every fourth level, Brave and Tough is clearly related to Bravery, Gun Training is similar to Weapon Training), though he is a distant relative at best.
Also, I think they wanted to release their gun rules (which aren't up for playtesting) and then build something off of them that uses them, rather than making it completely separate.
I believe that a gunslinging alchemist would be ok.....as an archetype. With the release of guns this would be nice. That way it could add more flavor and more character classes could use guns if so desired.
But I like the gunslinger as a fighter based class. That's just me. Hope that helps a bit.
+1 to this. Gun combat stuff would be perfect archtype for the the Alchemist to go right along with the Gun Fighter.
I think the class could use several ideas from the Alchemist to improve it (though I'd rather they not have spellcasting).
To address the cost issue, each day, the Gunslinger could prepare a small amount of powder for free (say, class level + Wis), much like the Alchemist can prepare a number of bombs at the beginning of the day. I do think the Gunslinger would work better with scaling damage with Firearms while focusing mostly on standard action shots, so the Bomb model could provide a launchpad for that as well (though personally I think something more like a Monk's bonus damage, which works more like a size increase, fits a bit better).
I spent quite some time talking with the other DM in our circle yesterday. His first thought was to use the Alchemist as a base instead of Fighter as well. I don't entirely agree, but I think the Alchemist's Bombs provide a better model for the Firearm than the longbow and full attacks.
The only problem I can see right now with this is that u never get the full use out of your full attack action. This is why I say they need to bring revolvers into the mix too. I can't see a gunslinger with 3 or 4 attacks in a full attack round only using that with a sword and his guns he can only use as a standard action.
If the guns rules are really a seperate invention that is completly fixed, then the alchemist is really a bit out of the question. (not entirely tough, just as alchemists fire was there before bombs)
For the damage, I wasn't suggesting the very same damage for bombs and for guns, but rather that the damage could improve, much like sneak attack or monk fist damage.
For the use of other weapons, if that was the intend, then fighter makes a bit more sense indeed. But somehow the class doesn't seem to offer much help when wielding sabers. And this would really make it more "piraty" than what I expect of a "gunslinger".
AlanM, I agree that stripping the alchemist of most everything doesn't leave much of alchemist, but poison use would be blackpowder use, bombs would be guns and mutagens would be funky moves. If seeing it like that, it would be related enough in my opinion. More so than the fighter. (those bonus feats would probably disappear with an alchemist base class)
And as said before, the magic of the alchemist could be lowered but making spells that improve guns. Spells that create bullets, blackpowder or something would help. That needs a bit more fine-tuning than I want in this idea-thread, because it would be the main thing that could make the gunslinger under or overpowered.
The only problem I can see right now with this is that u never get the full use out of your full attack action. This is why I say they need to bring revolvers into the mix too. I can't see a gunslinger with 3 or 4 attacks in a full attack round only using that with a sword and his guns he can only use as a standard action.There's nothing inherently wrong with not full attacking. Spellcasters have the majority of their action economy tied up in standard actions, as do Alchemists that don't take Fast Bombs (though obviously most do). Being able to deal damage comparable to (though not equal to) a full attack, at range, and as a standard action is perfectly fine, and you end up a lot more mobile to boot. A Fighter or Monk built around using Vital Strike would operate around the same general idea.
I understand that. But this is a martial class, and even if you did make it alchemist, you would never use your guns for you basic attack actions with a full attack. Which to me goes against the name of the class. Your a GUNSLINGER, not a fighter, why would you hit things with a sword. I could understand a special attack with your guns that does more damage so many times per day though
I can't edit my first post, so I'll just add it here.
If a Person from Paizo should ever stumble in here, could you please deny or confirm that it is too late to discuss the base class for any of the new classes?
These posts are about being constructive, and if this is a done deal, then giving further input is pointless. Until this, let's keep discussing it.