|
I'm aware i'm going to be told many times over that these rules are final and not open for playtest- perhaps this thread is futile, but I still feel I should say my piece on this.
Theres something about firearms in a fantasy game that makes designers go 'squeeeeeeeeeee' and make new rules for them rather than accomodating them in the normal manner alongside other weapons. This is a phenomena I first noticed with Psionics, and has been somewhat present in every edition of the game that i've played including 4E; a system that was almost a match made in heaven- Psionics represented by at will, encounter and daily. But even then, they had to come up with something different.
Paizo make a good move by not keeping the exploding dice rules from the campaign setting book and representing the powerful nature of firearms with a higher base damage dice and crit rating, as I hoped they would eventually do.
I make the case that having firearms ignoring armour and natural armour is an extremely odd mechanic that seems to be trying to simulate bullet's massive penetration value in a fantasy game. In a fantasy game, armour can be magically enhanced so that it protects you even against ancient artifacts, weapons literally soaked with magic and wielded by legendary heroes. These weapons don't ignore armour, or natural armour- but a primitive firearm does?
I'll quote the appropiate section that concerns me for context-
Range and Penetration: Armor, manufactured or natural, provides little protection against the force of a bullet at short range. When firing upon a target within a firearm’s first range increment, the attack resolves against the target’s touch AC. At higher range increments, the attack resolves normally (including taking the normal cumulative –2 penalty for each full-range increment). Unlike other projectile weapons, most firearms have a maximum range of five range increments.
We don't give weapons a penetration value in Pathfinder- not counting Brilliant Energy, armour is assumed to be as potent against a thrown dart as a point blank shot from a heavy crossbow. Your armour is proof against spears hurled at you by Kobolds and Goblins at first level. It helps you defend against the slams of an Air Elemental at third level. It can protect you from Troll claws as long as longswords at fifth level, despite the massive strength behind the blows. It can deflect the thrown boulders a Stone Giant may hurl at you at 8th level- even if the projectiles are bigger than you! It can weather the blows of mighty adult green dragons at 12th level, with teeth that would realistically tear through metal with the force behind them, and even the Unholy spiked chains wielded by powerful Cornugons at 16th level may not be able to harm you through your trusty armour. Even the claws of a Pit Fiend, the bite of a Tarrasque, or a large sized, +5, unholy, mighty cleaving trident wielded by Dagon himself may not be able to negate your full plate.
Going with this realism logic, natural armour is another conundrum. Your bullet won't be sinking through the sheer metres of thick hide that is represented by the Tarrasque's armour- but actually, RAW, it will be. Completely passing through it as though fired by a brilliant energy weapon (a +3 enhancement I note...), piercing the soft, vulnerable flesh underneath.
Then here come firearms and the dragon slayers wielding them- ignoring armour/natural armour and targeting touch AC from the humblest of levels. In a world where my supremely magically enhanced +5 suit of full plate armour can help against the massive force behind a club bigger than I am, wielded by a creature ten times my size and several times stronger than a normal human- bullets simply penetrate it like paper?
I have been hoping for a gun-wielding class to be released for some time, as have my players. This bizarre mechanic of ignoring armour, even rendering magical enhancement useless; has sadly put me off the Gunslinger class. I believe it harms versimilitude, as well as having nasty implications for class balance. Am I alone here?
I apologise for the semi-rant, and i'd like to add that having open playtests like this is one of the reasons Paizo are, and will remain, my favourite hobby gamer company i've ever bought from.
I agree with the penetration point for armor, there are all kinds of different materials like adamantium in use, plus enchantments, but then I do use exploding dice
I have to agree that I don't like these firearm rules very much. Even in real life, non-rifled firearms (like the flintlocks the iconic is portrayed as using) weren't particularily great penetrators vs. plate armor. Nor were they known for their accuracy.
Targeting a subjects touch AC does seem overpowered; the examples given by Alex above seem like devastating attacks - more so than a lead ball - and they don't get a free pass through armor.
The good news is, this is a playtest, if the mechanic is overpowered, or poorly balanced, it can be changed easily before final release. I'm pretty sure this particular rule won't make it to the finish line.
|
I think this isn't such a big issue as you may believe.
The "Touch AC" attack is going to be happening from 20' away at low levels (Yes, with Grit use & feats like Far Shot that will increase, but probably not much more than 60'.)
The "Super Sight" for two-handed firearms accurately reflects sniper rifles in my opinion, so we'll just have to disagree on that one.
I just made a CR 11 Gunslinger to drop into my Kingmaker game, and while he CAN do some 1d8+12 damage (potentially plus some elemental energy, if time allows for potions/oils) as a touch attack, that's one shot. His only enchanted pistol is now unloaded, and even with Rapid Reload (something I did not select, mostly to allow for Improved Crit and Signature Deed), that's one shot per 2 turns.
I suppose multi-barrel (or revolver-like) weapons are in the coming, but for now that Baddie is left standing some 20' away from his target (not to mention the rest of the party) with an unusable ranged weapon. Much like old school pirates, I forsee a lot of "clear the decks with fire" then "charge into good ol' melee."
In my opinion, this is a GOOD thing. The fighter-type gets to put some hurt on the enemy quickly, which may or may not provoke a reactionary attack / movement against him, which frees up the Rogue to sneak around behind, the Wizard to finish that Summom Monster spell, and the Cleric to go "hummina-hummina" and do some Cleric-y stuff.
Now, if you have a dual-wielding Gunslinger with Quick Draw, TWF, and 2 enchanted Colt Peacemakers, there's some issues there. But honestly, if you make the Neo/Sundance Kid/Wyatt Earp style character and get your hands on such equipment, I think you SHOULD be a badass.
Just my two cents, of course.
|
|
@John- Unfortunately its unlikely to change as the rules I am quoting are 'final and not subject to the playtest'.
@Psionic- The "Touch AC" attack can be enabled at any range on a two-handed weapon, for the small cost of 2,000 gold pieces.
Edit: Saw you noticed that.
My problems aren't particularily with the balance, as they are with massive versimilitude.
Guns make one - maybe two - attacks due to reload times.
Frankly, your first attack will almost always hit anyways due to how slowly AC scales.
Unless you're using a pistol or you're full attacking, the whole touch attack thing simply won't come into effect. And even with the pistol, it'll only barely come into effect.
Theres something about firearms in a fantasy game that makes designers go 'squeeeeeeeeeee' and make new rules for them rather than accomodating them in the normal manner alongside other weapons.
I am not sure this habit is restricted to firearms. I think it is part of the mentality behind D&D. Every Spell is nearly a rule unto itself. New Classes and Feats often introduce new rules.
From a publishing perspective, it is almost a 'must have'. It encourages people to buy all the books so they have all the rules. From a design perspective, it is a nightmare.
Alex - just noticed the final nature of the firearms rules. Yikes! Teach me to read the rules more closely in the future....
I really want to integrate firearms rules into my FR campaign - would suit Lantanese characters (and maybe other Gond worshipers) just great. I just don't know that, as written, I like them very much. I guess the only way to find out is to give them a try! As much as I want to suspend disbelief, though, I can't imagine why firearms get the free pass through armor when so many other, more powerful attacks don't .... I guess, like Alex, I've got an issue with the internal logic of it all, in addition to concerns about the rules as written.
Does every firearm attack only have to hit touch AC? I thought that was only with certain abilities?
|
|
I think that if firearms don't have some bonus against armour it breaks the suspension of disbelief somewhat, and chips away at the rationale for including them at all. Maybe not attack touch, but they should certainly get something.
Perhaps if we're only talking about mundane armour I could have a similar viewpoint- but armour that is enhanced with magic shouldn't be automatically penetrated. I've heard many people claim that heavy crossbows had a similar penetration value to muskets, and they don't ignore armour.
In my homebrew, the Gnomes of a kingdom named Tor Elyr have just created the world's first firearm- a Boomer. It negates two points of armour, and its always been fairly popular with players.
I do appreciate however, that circumstantial rules like that add to the complexity of a class. DM's dont want to be saying 'whats your AC minus two points of armour'?
Edit for Wraithstrike ninja- No; only at close range by default. But this can be extended with grit for any firearm or a cheap 2,000 gold piece wondrous item (a sight effectively) that allows two handed firearms to do it at any range it could fire at.
It's the big advantage the guns have over bows.
Bows will normally end up having way more damage output due to composite, certain spell effects etc that a gun will never have.
A gun will more consistently hit.
A bow will do more consistent damage.
Will a lead ball fired from a smoothbore, black powder flintlock hit more consistently than a bow or crossbow? I don't really think it would.
I noticed the class has status affects that don't have saves or that have to beat CMD's. It seems that is where the power of the class is.
Only at 1 range increment, which is 40ft for the gun, only 20 for the pistol, this is only true at really close range. The bow can hit just as easily at 10ft as 100ft
It seems that the Distance enhancement just became a goo idea.
It's the big advantage the guns have over bows.
Bows will normally end up having way more damage output due to composite, certain spell effects etc that a gun will never have.
A gun will more consistently hit.
A bow will do more consistent damage.
Not really.
Again - AC scales so slowly, your first attack will almost always hit. It's the iterative attacks that need the touch to AC.
Except, guns can't full attack.
It's a benefit that doesn't help. An advantage that never comes into play.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I can see some potential for some highly amusing builds that have very low dex- its not like its needed when your targeting touch AC with a high BAB...
Switch hitters will be happy at least.
Except you'd be dumping your damage output to do so, Gunslingers get Dex as a bonus to gun damage at 5th level.
A gun will more consistently hit.
I see a problem with a multiclass gunslinger/rogue or gunslinger/assassin, when the sneak attack or death attack suddenly only has to beat the touch attack.
Not really.Again - AC scales so slowly, your first attack will almost always hit. It's the iterative attacks that need the touch to AC.
Except, guns can't full attack.
It's a benefit that doesn't help. An advantage that never comes into play.
YET.
Add on a revolver cylinder, and you not have a 6 shoot gun. Just carry two guns.
And single shot pistol.... you just take Quick Draw feat, and carry 6-8 guns on you. Give you two full round attacks at level 16 + warrior.
The problem I have with this is they are trying to create a real world simulation of firearms... but only firearms. Crossbows and bows pack a similar punch and are going to have failure conditions (though obviously not ones that involves explosions). I think a bunch of people need to sit around and brainstorm how to make firearms more unique than bullet-shooting crossbows but not so unique that you are making rules that are counter intuitive just for them.
PS: Speaking of things that shoot bullets, can we do something about slings?
|
|
The problem I have with this is they are trying to create a real world simulation of firearms... but only firearms. Crossbows and bows pack a similar punch and are going to have failure conditions (though obviously not ones that involves explosions).
This is exactly my point- they are incorporating firearms penetration into a fantasy world. Effectively the items being treated very differently to the other weapons etc.
I'd much rather see a higher base damage dice for guns, making them very vital strike and crit friendly, than have versimilitude sucked from the game as guns o' awesomeness pierce through ALL armour and natural armour, even magically enhanced.
Perhaps we should make it so guns work in the game but like no other weapons.
Like guns have a constant range that is relatively short. You can't shoot beyond the because no matter how good your aim is, the variation in pattern is impossible to predict. So let's just have them do other stuff. Like a Blaunderbuss can shoot in a 15 foot cone? Or a rifle can penetrate X squares on a hit (and therefore hit things behind it) and introduce some extra details in there somewhere? And a pistol. Well, I don't know. Make them hand crossbows that shoot bullets and do more damage.
I like the touch attack, not so much for "realism" as for it makes guns clearly distinct from other ranged weapons and it catches the classic gun motif (regardless of real world physics).
I do think that the range should be kept short. And that the reload requirements should be more significant to provide a bit more balance.
There seems to be some problem with trying to be both black powder weapons and late 1800s western gunslingers in the same package.
|
|
I like the touch attack, not so much for "realism" as for it makes guns clearly distinct from other ranged weapons
And what is it about firearms that makes you feel they need to be seperated from other ranged weapons in such a distinct way? To make them so potent, an ancient gold dragon's scales provide no protection from a small metal ball fired from an early firearm?
The problem I have with this is they are trying to create a real world simulation of firearms... but only firearms. Crossbows and bows pack a similar punch and are going to have failure conditions (though obviously not ones that involves explosions).
This is exactly my point- they are incorporating firearms penetration into a fantasy world. Effectively the items being treated very differently to the other weapons etc.
I'd much rather see a higher base damage dice for guns, making them very vital strike and crit friendly, than have versimilitude sucked from the game as guns o' awesomeness pierce through ALL armour and natural armour, even magically enhanced.
The touch attack i do not like now.
Also, real world. As guns become more powerful, the armor people used became thinker and heaver to protect against firearms. Even today, cop were bullet prof vest vs normal attacks, and steel chest plate vs cop killer bullets. Armour went out of fashion, because governments did not want to pay the equipment cost, because it was heavy, because it slowed down troop movement. It was cheaper to give a man a gun, train him in a week, and send him to the front lines.. and replace him, than replace the armor.
................
Yes i know they said guns were already set, and not for playtest.
But as this will be a Pathfinder core book (not a setting book)... now is the time, to fix them before they are set in stone.
I don't like it using touch attacks. Say wizard has mage armor on that provides +4 AC as armor bonus. It applies to touch attacks but is inferior to Full Plate. Now a incorporeal touch attack this makes sense. Hitting you with shocking grasp this makes sense. Shooting you will lead ball it doesn't makes sense. That lead ball is no different that bolt from crossbow when it comes to the armor bonus that Fullplate and Mage armor give.
I think a better way would be to give bonus to hit. To hit a person in heavy armor it's +2 to hit doing base damage +2, for medium it's +4 to a base damage +4, for light armor/no armor it's +6 to hit and base damage +6 to hit. I have the damage bonus because armor will slow the penetration doing less damage.
Now natural Armor needs to ranked. If you 1-4 Nature it counts a light, 5-6 is medium and 7+ is heavy.
If you have Adamantine armor reduce the to hit and damage by 2. So Adamantine Full plate would grant no bonus to hit and not bonus damage if you do damage.
Touch attack just has simplicity on it's side but brings some funny issues.
\
Also, real world. As guns become more powerful, the armor people used became thinker and heaver to protect against firearms. Even today, cop were bullet prof vest vs normal attacks, and steel chest plate vs cop killer bullets. Armour went out of fashion, because governments did not want to pay the equipment cost, because it was heavy, because it slowed down troop movement. It was cheaper to give a man a gun, train him in a week, and send him to the front lines.. and replace him, than replace the armor.
Actually normal Bullet Proof Vest don't stop the blunt trauma, best way to emulate that would be nonlethal conversion.
I mean getting shot in a bullet proof vest usually means you are hurt badly, but not wounded/bleeding. It only stops penetration.I don't have a problem with touch attacks: it mean the attacks/rd are so small that it won't be too much damage. Pretty much limited to Vital Strike feats for damage.
I don't have a problem with touch attacks: it mean the attacks/rd are so small that it won't be too much damage. Pretty much limited to Vital Strike feats for damage.
and when revolvers are add = 6-8 shots per round.
Even now, with quick draw feat, you can carry 6-8 pistols around with you for 2 full-attack rounds, before needing to draw your sword.
...............
voska66 = Love that idea. just give guns a +2 to +4 to hit gun bonus. That lets them better hit people in armor, without killing armor all together.
|
Not really.Again - AC scales so slowly, your first attack will almost always hit. It's the iterative attacks that need the touch to AC.
Except, guns can't full attack.
It's a benefit that doesn't help. An advantage that never comes into play.
YET.
Add on a revolver cylinder, and you not have a 6 shoot gun. Just carry two guns.
And single shot pistol.... you just take Quick Draw feat, and carry 6-8 guns on you. Give you two full round attacks at level 16 + warrior.
If you wana spend that much money.... buying that many guns and trying to make them all magical to bypass DR.... you've suddenly just spent every ounce of your gold.
Radical thought incoming:
Deny dodge bonuses to AC versus firearms unless you have a special bullet-dodging feat. I mean, really. Who dodges bullets?
Also, plate armor (during the rise of firearms in history) had to be tested against pistol fire at point blank range. If you went to buy a suit of armor and didn't check to see if there was a dent in it from a bullet strike, you were dumb.
One might even consider all attacks from guns treating the target as flat-footed. That hurts rogues and such more than the heavily armored fighter, though. Just brainstorming.
I've been playing around more and have found two things that really save the gunslinger for full attacking:
1. Cheaper guns with magical ammunition. With multiple guns preloaded with magical ammunition the gunslinger can 'fire and forget' the firearms to an extent. The major drawback of this approach is keeping enough magical ammunition without it seeming like the GM is just giving it out to keep the gunslinger in stock.
2. Multibarrel guns where the whole gun is enchanted as a single weapon. A gun with 2~4 barrels really helps the gunslinger. By level 6 a gun slinger can reload 2 barrels in a single round easily and 3 barrels if he wants to spend grit. If he keeps 2~4 such multi barrel guns he should be able to get through most fights without having to reload. At 11th level he can reload 3 barrels in a single round and 1 barrel every round at no cost.
A combination of these two ideas could keep the gunslinger going from level 1 up through at least level 15. Using the magical ammunition at lower levels and multibarrel guns at higher levels (possibly still with magical ammunition) with the reload feats/deeds the guns slinger can take would allow him to stay close to even on the damage curve.
Radical thought incoming:
Deny dodge bonuses to AC versus firearms unless you have a special bullet-dodging feat. I mean, really. Who dodges bullets?
Also, plate armor (during the rise of firearms in history) had to be tested against pistol fire at point blank range. If you went to buy a suit of armor and didn't check to see if there was a dent in it from a bullet strike, you were dumb.
One might even consider all attacks from guns treating the target as flat-footed. That hurts rogues and such more than the heavily armored fighter, though. Just brainstorming.
Treating the target as flat footed was what I thought last night too -- I'm going to stick by this idea still. Bullets can be deflected by armor/shields/whatever no matter what era you look at, however they have always been noted as being too fast to simply dodge.
Considering all the costs involved with using firearms right now I think there is a balance between what the rogue could get out of this and what he has to pay to get into it.
Flatfooted AC is a very substantial nerf to gunslinger power. Unless you want to make guns the functional equivalent to composite longbows there is absolutely no reason to invest in them in a game.
Furthermore if we are just making a reskinned archer why do we need an alternate class at all?
Basically in this case verisimilitude needs to take a backseat to gamist concerns or we get another weapon that is markedly inferior to the bow.
Radical thought incoming:
Deny dodge bonuses to AC versus firearms unless you have a special bullet-dodging feat. I mean, really. Who dodges bullets?
Also, plate armor (during the rise of firearms in history) had to be tested against pistol fire at point blank range. If you went to buy a suit of armor and didn't check to see if there was a dent in it from a bullet strike, you were dumb.
One might even consider all attacks from guns treating the target as flat-footed. That hurts rogues and such more than the heavily armored fighter, though. Just brainstorming.
I thought it would help rogue. Allows them to get there sneak attack damage off. Also the well trained snipper in the jungle, shooting one kill shot now makes better since.
I thought it would help rogue. Allows them to get there sneak attack damage off. Also the well trained snipper in the jungle, shooting one kill shot now makes better since.Radical thought incoming:
Deny dodge bonuses to AC versus firearms unless you have a special bullet-dodging feat. I mean, really. Who dodges bullets?
Also, plate armor (during the rise of firearms in history) had to be tested against pistol fire at point blank range. If you went to buy a suit of armor and didn't check to see if there was a dent in it from a bullet strike, you were dumb.
One might even consider all attacks from guns treating the target as flat-footed. That hurts rogues and such more than the heavily armored fighter, though. Just brainstorming.
It wouldn't actually make people flat-footed. It would instead use the flat footed AC number as a target DC.
Guns making people flat-footed would result in very significant game balance issues and would be much more appropriate if the gunslinger was the functional equivalent of a ranged rogue instead of a ranged fighter.
I actually like the idea of a ranged rogue swashbuckler type but that's a huge divergence from the stated goal of the class.
|
|
Basically in this case verisimilitude needs to take a backseat to gamist concerns or we get another weapon that is markedly inferior to the bow.
There is no greater 'gamist concern' to me than versimilitude- the idea of a 20th level archer; the greatest marksman of the age with the most legendary longbow known to the world, crafted by Erastil himself- and he looks on as a 1st level Gunslinger with an early, non-magical firearm is gleefully able to ignore the natural armour of the most powerful monsters he has ever fought. While his arrows have often pinged off armour, natural or otherwise for the majority of his career (for arguments sake lets assume the worlds greatest archer put Brilliant Energy on his bow eventually...).
I just think the rationale of having bullets ignore armour is poor- to me there are better ways to balance the classes DPR and ability to hit and deal damage rather than irrationally negating thick natural armour or magically enhanced armour.
The idea that bullets would easily penetrate plate armor, much less something like a stone or steel construct or a massive treant, is so stupefyingly absurd I cannot even think about it. If that is the final rule that sees print, UC will mark the end of my allegiance to the published canon. I'm sorry, Paizo. If this is your version of the firearms rules, you've blown it.
|
|
The idea that bullets would easily penetrate plate armor, much less something like a stone or steel construct or a massive treant, is so stupefyingly absurd I cannot even think about it. If that is the final rule that sees print, UC will mark the end of my allegiance to the published canon. I'm sorry, Paizo. If this is your version of the firearms rules, you've blown it.
My feelings are similar, but my allegiance is unchanged :). I just won't be using Gunslingers in my games unless this mechanic is changed, or i'll house-rule it; which is a shame as i'm fairly receptive to the idea of them.
Psionics and Firearms go hand-in-hand for being design nightmares (to my eyes anyway) in a high fantasy style game. I shall just hope that the playtest improves the class and the mechanics behind it.
I just think its a huge shame that the firing at touch AC does not appear to be open for debate.
Flatfooted AC is a very substantial nerf to gunslinger power. Unless you want to make guns the functional equivalent to composite longbows there is absolutely no reason to invest in them in a game.
Furthermore if we are just making a reskinned archer why do we need an alternate class at all?
Basically in this case verisimilitude needs to take a backseat to gamist concerns or we get another weapon that is markedly inferior to the bow.
I would like them more equivalent to composite longbows. In cost, damage, firepower.
Guns should have something different about them, but not game breaking.
(Flatfooted AC mostly range from 1-5 ac loss for most creatures, unless immobilized/held/paralyzed which give a -5 dex penalty) This verses (+15 to +25 natural armor for most CR 15+ creatures)
Flatfooted AC, would give them an advantage, but not so much of one, that you need to charge 1000 gold for the gun but only 100 gold.
Allowing rogue to snipe 30 feet with guns, is a nice combo. That does simulate real world advantage that snipers have. Not all classes get it, but nice for rogue snipers.
........
Denying Dex to AC does not a flat-footed target make.
Flatfooted is a way of denying dex.
Denied dex is the requirement for sneak attack.
So were you assuming some kind of special exception clause for firearms in this case? (nothing wrong with that, just wondering.)
I think some people are using the flatfooted AC number as a placeholder for removing the dex bonuses for firearms.
I really don't want to see yet another AC number though as we already have AC, Flat-footed AC, Touch AC.
People have also been mum on whether they feel that shield AC should contribute to AC vs firearms.
Honestly either have them use the regular AC or have them use the Touch AC. Creating a weird firearm AC is just a bad exceptions based design that adds needless complexity to the game.
The reason for using Flat-Footed, would be that the Bestiary already lists that for every creature entry.
Example Bear = AC 16, touch 10, flat-footed 15.
So there is no math involved, and no new system.
You could have fighter gunslinger (western) fighting using guns, in open street brawls. You could have rogue snipers, trying to hide in cover to get within the 30 feet to ambush travelers. Sniper want to sniper from further than 30 feet, well there is a magic item for that.
It would give guns an advantage, while not an overly advantage.
.............
As the gunslinger presented in the play test. I just want to find an evil one, knock him out, take the gun and ammo, and use it with the -4 penaltiy for not being profience with it. (sorry back to bear example) Touch + penalty is still = 14 which is higher than Flat-Footed 15.
My Bard would do this, the advantage is just to great no to vs most creatures.