Heretek, not to put too fine of a point on it, but if your players are saying it makes spellcasters obsolete because of damage, uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Oh they aren't my players, just an unsavory sort which you may be familiar with Cirno, being a Touhou fan.
Then again this is the same group who says the Mobile Fighter invalidates all other melee classes because they can move and get a full-attack.
Heretek, not to put too fine of a point on it, but if your players are saying it makes spellcasters obsolete because of damage, uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhOh they aren't my players, just an unsavory sort which you may be familiar with Cirno, being a Touhou fan.
Then again this is the same group who says the Mobile Fighter invalidates all other melee classes because they can move and get a full-attack.
You have broken me.
You have broken me.
I got a chuckle out of that.
I got a chuckle out of that.
You have broken me.
Already I feel the shame in posting in such a place.
I will have to shower triple tonight.
In my attempt to get more opinions for you Ashiel someone finally really took a bite into the class, here are their thoughts.
"First of three immediate problems I see are the fact that you have no rendered all swordplay obsolete. There is no reason to EVER play a sword-using combatant now. Guns do so much more daamge and have so much more powerful critical effects that archery, pole-arms, and swords have zero play value.
Negative. Melee weapons are exceptionally easy to pump damage with, since strength stacking is also exceptionally easy. 2d6+6 damage is easy to do on a Fighter, Ranger, or Paladin, and is exceptionally easy to do on a barbarian, at 1st level 15 pb. That's an average of 13 damage per hit, with a minimum of 8 and a maximum of 18, which blows even the 10.5 average damage of a solid shotgun blast out of the water; since until you have shotgun nightmare, you're likely to provoke attacks.
Likewise, if you're raging, the damage becomes 2d6+9. If you have Power Attack it's 2d6+9, if you're raging and power attack, 2d6+12. Pumping strength is easy, and thus so is pumping hit and damage. It's still the most effective method for killing things with strait damage; short of perhaps an archery based Fighter.
Second problem I see is they have magic. A lot of those great and legendary deeds are pure magic, with no reasonable explanation for it.
The only abilities they have that are magical are One More Bullet, and Gunslinger's Curse, both of which are supernatural abilities. Call it fate, fortune, or whatever; after 6th level you've already forgotten the realm of reality. Fighters can leap 30ft chasms while wearing full-plate and armed with a dozen weapons, and that's not magical?
No, these are supernatural abilities, and occur because of the gunslinger's "awesomeness". What would you consider to be a "good explanation" for it? One more bullet states that fate always seems to be on the gunslinger's side; while the gunslinger's curse is effectively misfortune catching up with their enemies.
Third problem, and this is a killer, is that they gets deeds at the same time as they get feats, AND they get alternate class abilities at the same time. Because deeds=more powerful feats, you have something with effectively more than 19 feats+more class abilities than any fighter type. You have now rendered barbarians and rangers obsolete.
Deeds are class features, not feats. Wizards get new spells every odd level, which is when they get feats. Spells could be seen as feats that scale with your level and you can use a number of times per day (compare to Stunning Fist, for example). No, Deeds are not feats. They are class features.
Shotgun Nightmare: Do an extra 3d6 per point of grit remaining, without spending it whole threatening and flanking at range. So at 10th level, this is 7x3d6, or 21d6 damage at will, no limits, as AoO, so with combat reflexes you can do this about 3-7 times in a single round. It's BETTER than magic!
Hand Cannons: Remember the example above? Now with CONE EFFECTS.
You seem to have misread it. Shotgun Nightmare adds bonus damage equal to 1d6 per 1/2 your remaining grit; or a maximum of +6d6 damage at 20th level if you conserve all your grit and don't spend it. This gives you an average of 31.5 damage per melee shot at 20th level; assuming you do nothing to maintain maximum grit. Each round you use Hand Cannons, your damage with every hit drops by 2d6 (because you just lost 4 grit).
A 20th level Fighter, compared in the same way, again will easily out-hit and out-damage the gunslinger who has chosen to act with shotgun nightmare, sporting a 50 average damage per hit with a 2 handed weapon, or 31.5 damage if dual-wielding. Likewise, bonus damage is not multiplied on critical hits or as part of feats like Vital Strike, so a critical hit from a 2-handed fighter can easily land for enormous amounts, while the critical hit damage for shotgun nightmare is actually not much more than its basic amount. Also the numbers here do not include Weapon Specialization or Greater Specialization.
Keep in mind, the Gunslinger was intended as a fighter variant, so they should have damage numbers similar to the Fighter. In all cases, the gunslinger's damage per round falls short of the core fighter's (I'm not even counting Advanced Players Guide options).
See, the gunslinger cannot apply strength (or dexterity) modifiers to damage with the shotguns, and virtually all their damage comes from the base d6 dice, which is only an average of 9.5 damage plus 3.5 damage for every 2 grit you have remaining (keep in mind you only get 1 grit every 2 levels, so it's +3.5 damage every 4 Gunslinger levels).
Beginning at a modest 14 strength, a warrior based class can have a 30 strength by 20 easily (+5 levels, +5 inherent, +6 enhancement) without buffs like enlarge person or similar; which adds +10 hit / +15 damage by itself. Rangers sport favored enemy for an additional +10, paladins get smite evil, Fighters get a static +5 to hit and damage, with up to +7/+9 with specialization, while Barbarians can get a +4/+6 with rage, supplemented by rage powers.
As noted previously, if you spend 4 Grit each turn turning the blasts into cone effects (up to 15-20ft, even with eagle eyes), you're also lowering your average damage by no less than 7 per shot because you lose remaining grit and thus your bonus damage falls.
Let's look at the math.
Now, on to the other problems.
The fighter class has 3 class abilities and 21 feats. This Gunslinger has a class abilities every even level, and two feats at every odd level. No class gets two feats every level - rogues get talents at even levels, barbarians get powers at even levels, and so on and so forth. This is an easy fix, but it is still a problem.
The fighter has 14 class abilities, and 10 feats. One of the fighter's class abilities is Bonus Feats, while the others are Bravery, Armor Training, Weapon Training, and eventually Weapon Mastery. While Bonus Feats are generally not viewed as true class abilities, the Fighter enjoys something in Pathfinder he didn't in 3.x, and that is a variety of interesting feats that require levels in Fighter; which essentially means they are optional class features. For example, only fighters can get Deadly Stroke, Critical Mastery, Disruptive, Spellbreaker, Greater Shield Focus, Weapon Specialization through Greater Specialization, Penetrating Strike, and Greater Penetrating Strike.
Again, Deeds aren't feats. They don't work like feats, they aren't feats. They don't get feats every level.
You see the damage and crit tables of firearms? The ONLY weapon with that type of damage and crit factor is the falcata, and you need to spend a proficency to use it. You can enchant it to increase the crit range, so we won't worry about that with it or with guns. Except that the fighter has proficiency with all of these weapons from 1st level. Why would anyone use anythign but a gun slinger, especiallyu with the powers I described above, for any reason other than flavor? 21d6 damage with a 17-20 crit threat for triple damage at 10th level? Sign me right the hell up."
Perhaps you didn't notice that you have to spend a feat to enjoy those phat critical hits. If you lack the Exotic Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) feat, the threat range falls to 20/x2 and requires a full-round action to reload 1 shot. So no, the Fighter doesn't have proficiency with all of these at 1st level (in fact, statistically speaking, he would be better off using a SLING at 1st level than a pistol, since it would reload faster and deal more damage due to his strength modifier).
If you DO spend the exotic weapon proficiency feat, then you get a superior weapon (worth spending a feat on), but it's still not capable of keeping up with the raw damage of the longbow (though it can come damn close in the hands of a fighter that's fully specced for it), mainly because Manyshot doesn't work with firearms (6th level gunslingers can get a class feature that allows them to replicate Manyshot on a weapon, but only 6th level or better gunslingers can).
Again, on the 21d6 thing, you're forgetting the basic rules of the game. Bonus damage dice are not multiplied on a critical hit unless specified otherwise; and it doesn't specify otherwise. In fact, because bonus damage dice are not multiplied on critical hits (only static modifiers like strength bonus, enhancement bonus, weapon specialization, weapon training, smite evil, favored enemy, or inspire courage) the gunslinger gives up a lot of potential damage when making use of abilities that deal weapon damage plus bonus dice; since they could conceivably hit a 25% critical chance if they took the Improved Critical feat.
Here's what a critical hit in melee looks like with shotgun nightmare, by a gunslinger, at 12 grit (highest possible, 20th level only), wielding a +5 scattergun. 9d6+15+6d6 or 67.5 average damage. Compare this, perhaps, to a +4 keen scythe wielded by a 20th level Fighter, which would deal about 10d4+75+25+25+20 or 170 average damage with an automatic critical confirmation.
If I have erred, I would love to continue discussing this with you.
EDIT: Also, reading back over your post, it seems that you believe that you have a threatened space with shotgun nightmare equal to your weapon's range. This is incorrect, as stated here:
"While wielding scatterguns in this way, she is treated as threatening opponents within her reach". Humans have a 5ft reach, while an ogre gunslinger could threaten out to 10ft. At no point does it say or suggest that you threaten at the range of the weapon, nor can flank at the range of the weapon, nor take AoOs at the range of the weapon; you are instead only wielding the shotguns as melee weapons.
Hand Cannons allow you to replace an attack with a cone effect within a range increment, so you could use AoO-cones if you had both of them going at the same time; but as noted before, your average damage will fall and this grants a reflex save for half damage on every attack you make, which further cuts down the damage.
Lots o stuff
Like I said, these weren't my thoughts, merely the thoughts of another, which I feel you have entirely backed up your reasoning.
One question did pop into my head though while I was building one of these dual revolver gunslingers...
How does Rapid shot + Manyshot work with TWF?
Lots o stuffLike I said, these weren't my thoughts, merely the thoughts of another, which I feel you have entirely backed up your reasoning.
One question did pop into my head though while I was building one of these dual revolver gunslingers...
How does Rapid shot + Manyshot work with TWF?
Pretty much the same way that it works with Rapid Shot. "When making a full-attack, the first attack you make" is the double-damage one.
Thus a 6th level Gunslinger with Double Action (the manyshot-copycat), two weapon fighting, and rapid shot, would have 4 attacks per round at +2/+2/+2/-3 before modifiers from Dexterity (and anything else, such as masterwork weapons), and the first attack would deal x2 damage (not multiplying bonus dice damage, if any, as with manyshot).
Ergo, you will probably deal 2d8+2+1d8+1+1d8+1+1d8+1 or 27.5 damage if you land all 4 attacks, with a +1 revolver.
EDIT: Also, no worries. I love talking mechanics, so I'm glad you brought up all of those questions, because it gives a great opportunity to really dive into the class and compare it with the core classes, and give a mechanical breakdown on a fundamental level.
In short, thank you, because it's fun. ^.^
Pretty much the same way that it works with Rapid Shot. "When making a full-attack, the first attack you make" is the double-damage one.Thus a 6th level Gunslinger with Double Action (the manyshot-copycat), two weapon fighting, and rapid shot, would have 4 attacks per round at +2/+2/+2/-3 before modifiers from Dexterity (and anything else, such as masterwork weapons), and the first attack would deal x2 damage (not multiplying bonus dice damage, if any, as with manyshot).
Ergo, you will probably deal 2d8+2+1d8+1+1d8+1+1d8+1 or 27.5 damage if you land all 4 attacks, with a +1 revolver.
This is what I thought but I figured I may as well ask. Really though, the more I read this the more I wish it was the real Gunslinger, but since my DM is loving this also, I think we will houserule that this is in fact the real one.
This is what I thought but I figured I may as well ask. Really though, the more I read this the more I wish it was the real Gunslinger, but since my DM is loving this also, I think we will houserule that this is in fact the real one.
Pretty much the same way that it works with Rapid Shot. "When making a full-attack, the first attack you make" is the double-damage one.Thus a 6th level Gunslinger with Double Action (the manyshot-copycat), two weapon fighting, and rapid shot, would have 4 attacks per round at +2/+2/+2/-3 before modifiers from Dexterity (and anything else, such as masterwork weapons), and the first attack would deal x2 damage (not multiplying bonus dice damage, if any, as with manyshot).
Ergo, you will probably deal 2d8+2+1d8+1+1d8+1+1d8+1 or 27.5 damage if you land all 4 attacks, with a +1 revolver.
I'm glad you're enjoying it. ^-^
It makes me very happy to have people having fun with my work.If there's anything else I can help with, or you would like to see, let me know and I'll see if I can cook something up. After reading some of the wishes on these boards for a Swashbuckler class, I may be attempting that next. >.>
EDIT: Fun fact. After checking my mediafire stats, I've noticed that the class has been downloaded about 200 times; which is pretty cool I think. The most recent version (free of typos) found here has been downloaded 66 times as of this edit.
EDIT: Fun fact. After checking my mediafire stats, I've noticed that the class has been downloaded about 200 times; which is pretty cool I think. The most recent version (free of typos) found here has been downloaded 66 times as of this edit.
Likely due to where I posted it trying to get some opinions for you. Cirno felt dirty after he went there, haha.
Likely due to where I posted it trying to get some opinions for you. Cirno felt dirty after he went there, haha.
EDIT: Fun fact. After checking my mediafire stats, I've noticed that the class has been downloaded about 200 times; which is pretty cool I think. The most recent version (free of typos) found here has been downloaded 66 times as of this edit.
Oh, where's that?
Oh, where's that?Likely due to where I posted it trying to get some opinions for you. Cirno felt dirty after he went there, haha.
EDIT: Fun fact. After checking my mediafire stats, I've noticed that the class has been downloaded about 200 times; which is pretty cool I think. The most recent version (free of typos) found here has been downloaded 66 times as of this edit.
The Traditional Games board on 4chan. Likely one of the easiest means of getting many people to look at something. 4chan gets a bad rap but boards like the aforementioned /tg/ can be very friendly and a good source of information if they are willing to divulge it. Some can get a bit carried away though, like when I mentioned that some believe mobile fighters invalidate all other melee classes.
The Traditional Games board on 4chan. Likely one of the easiest means of getting many people to look at something. 4chan gets a bad rap but boards like the aforementioned /tg/ can be very friendly and a good source of information if they are willing to divulge it. Some can get a bit carried away though, like when I mentioned that some believe mobile fighters invalidate all other melee classes.Oh, where's that?Likely due to where I posted it trying to get some opinions for you. Cirno felt dirty after he went there, haha.
EDIT: Fun fact. After checking my mediafire stats, I've noticed that the class has been downloaded about 200 times; which is pretty cool I think. The most recent version (free of typos) found here has been downloaded 66 times as of this edit.
Ahhh, I wondered if it might have been 4chan. Somehow, the idea of something my name is on the front of being circulated around the chan seems to creep me out; but, I figure opinions are opinions, so thank you. ^-^
Haha, anyway I noticed something else that kind of seemed odd to me.
Burst Fire (Ex): As a standard action, the gunslinger
expends 5 shots from her firearm and creates a 30ft
radius burst within her first range increment. Enemies
caught within this burst take 2d6 points of bludgeoning
and piercing damage for every point of grit she spends
with a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ level + Dexterity modifier) for half-damage. A gunslinger cannot attempt this deed unless she has at least 5 total shots remaining between any firearms she is currently wielding.
Desperado (Ex) : As a standard action, the
gunslinger can expend grit and fire shots all around her
in a blazing storm of smoke and fire. This deed can
only be preformed while dual-wielding revolvers or
short-scatterguns. The gunslinger must expend a total
of 10 shots (if wielding revolvers) or 4 shots (if shortscatterguns).
Each enemy within one range increment
of her weapons suffers 3d6 points of weapon damage
per point of grit spent, with a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½
level + Dexterity modifier) for half damage.
So, Burst Fire is... basically a fireball, for 1 grit, more to increase damage, so really the average fireball damage is 6d6, which is 3 points of grit.
Desperado is basically... I don't even know of a spell that can do this... 1 grit to deal 3d6 to EVERYTHING within 50 ft? 2 grit for 6d6? You empty both clips of your guns but it's still only a free action to reload them.
I can see how they both have their uses, but I can't really see the reason someone would want to use Burst Fire over Desperado.
Now, my thoughts, based on what I have expressed is that Desperado should be a full-round action. Also maybe the range of guns should be lowered a tad, maybe to 40 or 30 instead of 50 ft. and the damage dealt by each deed altered somewhat. Maybe make Desperado only deal 1d6 or 2d6 and make burst fire the 3d6 one since it is more concentrated fire.
|
Ok, I whipped up a 5th level gunslinger this morning for a game I'm running tonight using the playtest rules. I would love to run Ashiel's class tonight, but don't have time to make another NPC. Anyone mind making one up for me?
BTW, I do like a lot of the changes Ashiel made to the class, but I feel there are too many deeds to keep track of in her variant. Also, I think your new variant might still be feat-starved (but not as much as the playtest version).
Ok, I whipped up a 5th level gunslinger this morning for a game I'm running tonight using the playtest rules. I would love to run Ashiel's class tonight, but don't have time to make another NPC. Anyone mind making one up for me?
BTW, I do like a lot of the changes Ashiel made to the class, but I feel there are too many deeds to keep track of in her variant. Also, I think your new variant might still be feat-starved (but not as much as the playtest version).
This is a lvl 8 I just jerryrigged in herolab earlier today.
http://imageftw.com/uploads/20110129/gunslingerhoa.jpg
EDIT: Just deleveled it down to lvl 5, here ya go.
http://imageftw.com/uploads/20110129/gunslingerhoa5.jpg
Haha, anyway I noticed something else that kind of seemed odd to me.
Burst Fire (Ex): As a standard action, the gunslinger
expends 5 shots from her firearm and creates a 30ft
radius burst within her first range increment. Enemies
caught within this burst take 2d6 points of bludgeoning
and piercing damage for every point of grit she spends
with a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ level + Dexterity modifier) for half-damage. A gunslinger cannot attempt this deed unless she has at least 5 total shots remaining between any firearms she is currently wielding.Desperado (Ex) : As a standard action, the
gunslinger can expend grit and fire shots all around her
in a blazing storm of smoke and fire. This deed can
only be preformed while dual-wielding revolvers or
short-scatterguns. The gunslinger must expend a total
of 10 shots (if wielding revolvers) or 4 shots (if shortscatterguns).
Each enemy within one range increment
of her weapons suffers 3d6 points of weapon damage
per point of grit spent, with a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½
level + Dexterity modifier) for half damage.So, Burst Fire is... basically a fireball, for 1 grit, more to increase damage, so really the average fireball damage is 6d6, which is 3 points of grit.
Desperado is basically... I don't even know of a spell that can do this... 1 grit to deal 3d6 to EVERYTHING within 50 ft? 2 grit for 6d6? You empty both clips of your guns but it's still only a free action to reload them.
I can see how they both have their uses, but I can't really see the reason someone would want to use Burst Fire over Desperado.
Now, my thoughts, based on what I have expressed is that Desperado should be a full-round action. Also maybe the range of guns should be lowered a tad, maybe to 40 or 30 instead of 50 ft. and the damage dealt by each deed altered somewhat. Maybe make Desperado only deal 1d6 or 2d6 and make burst fire the 3d6 one since it is more concentrated fire.
Well the burst fire deed is usable with a revolver or rifle at a distance (the revolver could center the burst somewhere within 30ft of the gunslinger, while the rifle could deliver the burst up to 140ft), while Desperado was intended to be used as a ground-zero burst damage ability, where the gunslinger would be in more danger.
However, upon considering your feedback, I think it should definitely be modified. I like the idea of a full-round action, since the idea is you're spinning or aiming in different directions constantly while firing; and I wanted to make a difference between the revolver & scattergun effects; so here's what I got as a proposed change.
Desperado (Ex): As a full-round action, the gunslinger can expend grit and fire shots all around her in a blazing storm of smoke and fire. This deed can only be preformed while dual-wielding revolvers or short-scatterguns. The gunslinger must expend a total of 10 shots (if wielding revolvers) or 4 shots (if short-scatterguns). Enemies within one range increment of her weapons suffers 2d6 points of weapon damage per point of grit spent if used with revolvers, or 4d6 weapon damage per point used with short-scatterguns, with a Reflex save (DC 10 + ½ level + Dexterity modifier) for half damage.
We can see here that the action has been changed to a full-round, and the damage for the revolvers has been downsized by 1d6 (making it an average of 7 damage per grit, or only 3.5 damage on a successful save), while the scatterguns inflict excessive damage but cap at 10ft (literally ground-zero) or 15ft with Eagle Eyes; making it far riskier a proposition.
In both the old version and the new version, the prospect of blowing all your shots at once has a slightly unusual effect. You see, for convenience, I included quick-load cylinders in the document (allowing to change out multiple shots at once), but each cylinder costs 10 gp and weighs 1 lb, so carrying a lot of them can get annoying; and you'd still be limited to reloading 1 / round with the cylinders (unless you have lock & load, and burn 1 grit); while it's impossible to load both scatterguns again in the same round (you could get 2 shots loaded if you had Lock & Load and burn 1 grit, but not all 4).
So perhaps toy around with this variation, and see what you think?
I think I will be adding it to the document; and posting the new one (from this point on, the playtest document will have the version number on the front page).
Dotting this as it seems to be the most coherent and intelligent thread related to fixing the Gunslinger. I hope a lot of these fixes get paid attention to when the revision comes around. Well done.
Dotting this as it seems to be the most coherent and intelligent thread related to fixing the Gunslinger. I hope a lot of these fixes get paid attention to when the revision comes around. Well done.
Thanks. Also, pardon my ignorance, but what's "dotting"? ^.^"
|
Dotting is essentially bookmarking the thread.
Also, tomorrow I'll be playing in a Playtest Game a group of friends have put together. The current classes include: a Witch, a Ranger, a Rogue, each of the three UC Playtest classes, and one new member - me.
After having talked to my buddy who's the GM of this group, I mentioned that there was an "Gunslinger Variant" I wanted to test out. After a short explanation, he said it'd be alright if I gave the "Ashiel Gunslinger" a test drive.
I'll let you guys know how it plays out as soon as possible. Considering I wake up at 3 AM Monday morning and work until 6 PM Monday evening, I'm not sure exactly when that'll be, but I'll try to do it quickly.
Here's with fingers crossed!
Dotting this as it seems to be the most coherent and intelligent thread related to fixing the Gunslinger. I hope a lot of these fixes get paid attention to when the revision comes around. Well done.Thanks. Also, pardon my ignorance, but what's "dotting"? ^.^"
Exactly what severed ronin said. You'll notice that any thread you've posted in has a dot next to it on the big list of threads. And I can check my post history to come back here easily.
BTW, Ashiel, not to sound like a kiss ass, but it's threads and posts like yours here and elsewhere that make reading these boards worth it. So, no, thank YOU.
After reading it all I too am very impressed the class and its abilities (which are far better than the original), a few things that I have a issue with:
Dead Eye Shot: You need to clarify that the bonus damage does NOT get multiplied on a critical hit otherwise the ability really is overpowered (a guy with a distance Rifle could do 36d6 at over 280 feet with a touch attack!). Also by the nature of the ability shouldn’t it take a Full-round action to perform, you are after all aiming (and not simply shooting from the hip).
The next troubling issue is with the range of the musket.
No I’m not one of those people that say the musket should only have a range of 20 feet (just saying ahead of time), or that its broken or whatnot. But since rifling is the technological edge that gave firearms their great range it seems odd that this ‘major’ breakthrough only equals a 20ft difference from its historically pathetic counterpart. I would think (don’t put much insurance in that :p) that it would be more fitting if the ranges fell somewhere in the ranges of the short bow (70 feet) and the light crossbow (80 feet); since the longbow is what firearms are trying to surpass in Range Superiority (which the Rifle does, even better than the Heavy Crossbow by 20 feet).
And then there’s the rifle which is fine…except for the Capacity 5.
While the black powder method works for the multi-cambered revolver, rifles were single shot until the invention of cartridge rounds and if I recall the Spencer rifle was the first to actually be capable of holding multiple rounds before needing to reload the magazine. The idea that rifles should be good for the feat is true but this would total three major technological advancements in firearms all at once, that’s a little much.
To clarify the rifles are too damn good, good damage; high-critical threat range; high critical multiplier; the furthest range of all ranged weapons period; and is multi-shot to boot (and is not too expensive considering the Repeating Heavy Crossbow is inferior in every way and costs 100 more).
Just some thoughts…
So it was a tough choice but I ended up settling on playtesting the Ninja for our next PF session, putting my current char on hold for a day. I especially came to this decision considering none of the other Ninja playtests I have seen have been builds I would use, thus make an entirely new take on a Ninjas playtest.
I look forward to seeing others playtests regarding Ashiels Gunslinger though, so please post those who do try it out.
I really do like this class. I only have a few issues, and they're more personal issues than anything else.
~
~
~
~
1: Grit as 2 + 1/2 class level.
I've only seen a few classes (all 3rd party, if I remember correctly), that completely base a pool of points on the class, and don't take into account any of the character's ability scores. This has always been a problem for me, as it leaves the problem of nearly-identical characters (you bypass this somewhat with your multiple selectable deeds). What I mean by this is that all gunslingers of an equivalent level are just as gritty as the last. Whether it's Roland, wandering gunslinger of fallen Gilead; or Clownbaby, clown gun-warrior of the country Stupidia, they're all just as gritty as the last.
Basing it off of an ability score instead of the number 2--wisdom or charisma, maybe--would create an amount of variation between gunslingers (maybe leave it selectable between wisdom and charisma? Some gunslingers base their grit on a rough-and-tumble attitude while others use a firm mental status and concentration). The fact that you have abilities that cost up to 8 grit points really balances the fact that you might get more grit overall, and can restore it (honestly, I love the idea of restoration. I might house-rule all classes with similar point systems so that they can restore their pool with certain abilities).
2: Deeds on odd levels.
You made the point earlier of wizards getting their spells on odd levels, which is a good point to make (clerics and witches, too). I just feel like classes should be able to select something every level (even wizards choose new spells known every level). As it stands, you get to select 2 things at every odd level (deed and feat), and get an assigned ability every even level. The hallmark of most PF classes is their versatility, and the feel of that versatility. The fact that you get to choose something every level with the majority of non-spellcasting classes (barbarian, fighter, ranger [except for 2], rogue, alchemist, [the cavalier makes up for this with the chosen order, I think]) lends itself to this idea.
I am not suggesting you change this because of 1 post. I'm just saying that, in my opinion, the idea of selecting something every level feels better from a player's stance. Perhaps it could look closer to the fighter's bonus feats: one granted at 1st level and each even level thereafter.
3: Grit should do something on its own.
Grit feels a lot like another variation of the ki pool/arcane pool to me, and I think that, like the rest of these pools off of which it seems to be modeled, it should do something on its own. Monk ki pool grants an extra attack, extra speed, or AC. Ninja ki pool grants an extra attack, extra speed, or stealth. The Arcane pool gives you an enhancement bonus on attacks (or magical weapon effects). Grit...is specifically dedicated to deeds. Perhaps it gives you an extra attack (if you can make one). Perhaps it gives you dex to damage. Maybe it grants you speed (a mobile gunslinger is a very fun idea). Maybe any of these things, similar to how the ki pool can grant multiple different bonuses.
Just a thought, and my 2 cp.
Love the class, keep up the good work, and I hope Paizo takes note of your talent.
-The Beast
EDIT: I do want to say that desperado is my favorite ability overall. It gives me a vision of the Gun Kata in the movie Equilibrium, and I intend to use it as such. And I do love the alteration you made to it; really shows the mechanics of the different guns.
I really do like this class. I only have a few issues, and they're more personal issues than anything else.
~
~
~
~
1: Grit as 2 + 1/2 class level.
I've only seen a few classes (all 3rd party, if I remember correctly), that completely base a pool of points on the class, and don't take into account any of the character's ability scores. This has always been a problem for me, as it leaves the problem of nearly-identical characters (you bypass this somewhat with your multiple selectable deeds). What I mean by this is that all gunslingers of an equivalent level are just as gritty as the last. Whether it's Roland, wandering gunslinger of fallen Gilead; or Clownbaby, clown gun-warrior of the country Stupidia, they're all just as gritty as the last.Basing it off of an ability score instead of the number 2--wisdom or charisma, maybe--would create an amount of variation between gunslingers (maybe leave it selectable between wisdom and charisma? Some gunslingers base their grit on a rough-and-tumble attitude while others use a firm mental status and concentration). The fact that you have abilities that cost up to 8 grit points really balances the fact that you might get more grit overall, and can restore it (honestly, I love the idea of restoration. I might house-rule all classes with similar point systems so that they can restore their pool with certain abilities).
2: Deeds on odd levels.
You made the point earlier of wizards getting their spells on odd levels, which is a good point to make (clerics and witches, too). I just feel like classes should be able to select something every level (even wizards choose new spells known every level). As it stands, you get to select 2 things at every odd level (deed and feat), and get an assigned ability every even level. The hallmark of most PF classes is their versatility, and the feel of that versatility. The fact that you get to choose something every level with the majority of non-spellcasting classes (barbarian, fighter, ranger [except...
The revised version of the magus did this and i think that the grit pointsshould match the magus' arcane pool point and that the deeds should be picked like the magus picks which magus arcana he wants.
Also, a quick question. I'm building a playtest 'slinger, and I'm wondering if weapon special abilities apply to damage dealt by burst fire and desperado? As written, they do not. But it would make sense (at least in my mind) if they did. You are firing several shots from your guns. It seems that magical damage would apply.
I ask because he is currently built with a +1 shock revolver and a separate +1 revolver, and he has desperado.
Also, a quick question. I'm building a playtest 'slinger, and I'm wondering if weapon special abilities apply to damage dealt by burst fire and desperado? As written, they do not. But it would make sense (at least in my mind) if they did. You are firing several shots from your guns. It seems that magical damage would apply.
I ask because he is currently built with a +1 shock revolver and a separate +1 revolver, and he has desperado.
I see your point, but at the same time it seems unbalancing.
BTW, Ashiel, not to sound like a kiss ass, but it's threads and posts like yours here and elsewhere that make reading these boards worth it. So, no, thank YOU.
You don't sound like a kiss-ass at all. Thank you again! That's very encouraging. ^.^
After reading it all I too am very impressed the class and its abilities (which are far better than the original), a few things that I have a issue with:
Dead Eye Shot: You need to clarify that the bonus damage does NOT get multiplied on a critical hit otherwise the ability really is overpowered (a guy with a distance Rifle could do 36d6 at over 280 feet with a touch attack!). Also by the nature of the ability shouldn’t it take a Full-round action to perform, you are after all aiming (and not simply shooting from the hip).
Ahhh, indeed. I forgot that Pathfinder kind of fouled up one of the key lines in 3.x about critical hits, noting that extra dice above a weapon's normal damage dice aren't multiplied on critical hits; and instead noted that precision damage isn't multiplied on critical hits. I think this was a mistake, since it means that you have to call out stuff as not-crit-able specifically (like with Vital Strike noting it's not multiplied on criticals).
Here's the difference:
A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is ×2.
Exception: Extra damage dice over and above a weapon’s normal damage is not multiplied when you score a critical hit.
And the Pathfinder version:
A critical hit means that you roll your damage more than once, with all your usual bonuses, and add the rolls together. Unless otherwise specified, the threat range for a critical hit on an attack roll is 20, and the multiplier is ×2.
Exception: Precision damage (such as from a rogue's sneak attack class feature) and additional damage dice from special weapon qualities (such as flaming) are not multiplied when you score a critical hit.
So while there's obviously a "not precision damage" option for bonus damage (vital strike isn't precision damage, for example), it's also not a special weapon quality and thus has to be called out each an every time (so gross from a design perspective :( ).
I'll note that in the gunslinger class that the extra damage from both Deadeye Shot and Shotgun Nightmare are not multiplied on critical hits, since due to slight changing in wording it's arguable that they could be; and really, I'd like to keep arguments out of my mechanics. ;)
As for the full-round action bit, Deadeye shot is intended to represent a gunslinger's ability to take a single accurate shot and then move. The gunslinger is intended to be a mobile skimisher, and Deadeye shot seems really nice at 1st-2nd level, but since it prevents full-attacking or multiple additional attacks, the moment a Fighter has Rapid Shot and a decent bow, the Fighter can pump out far more hurt.
By 6th level, it's average damage with a rifle or musket is about 2d6+3d6 damage, which is nice for a touch attack but the Fighter schools that damage hard, and should likely hit most ACs around their level anyway. It's also subject to damage reduction, which is something to consider.
The next troubling issue is with the range of the musket.
No I’m not one of those people that say the musket should only have a range of 20 feet (just saying ahead of time), or that its broken or whatnot. But since rifling is the technological edge that gave firearms their great range it seems odd that this ‘major’ breakthrough only equals a 20ft difference from its historically pathetic counterpart. I would think (don’t put much insurance in that :p) that it would be more fitting if the ranges fell somewhere in the ranges of the short bow (70 feet) and the light crossbow (80 feet); since the longbow is what firearms are trying to surpass in Range Superiority (which the Rifle does, even better than the Heavy Crossbow by 20 feet).
While the black powder method works for the multi-cambered revolver, rifles were single shot until the invention of cartridge rounds and if I recall the Spencer rifle was the first to actually be capable of holding multiple rounds before needing to reload the magazine. The idea that rifles should be good for the feat is true but this would total three major technological advancements in firearms all at once, that’s a little much.
To clarify the rifles are too damn good, good damage; high-critical threat range; high critical multiplier; the furthest range of all ranged weapons period; and is multi-shot to boot (and is not too expensive considering the Repeating Heavy Crossbow is inferior in every way and costs 100 more).
Just some thoughts…
I would like to first note that crossbows are terrible weapons, honestly. There's a reason Prof. Cirno's review of the gunslinger included the line "now crossbows have something to laugh at" (quoted from memory so I may be off gramatically). Crossbows are simple weapons that are pretty much inferior to bows in every way, except they can be fired while prone. Even the crossbow fighter from the APG is a trap for players, because you will fall an amazing distance behind a core fighter who's just wielding a bow (it could even be a shortbow! :P).
The heavy crossbow should probably have a 2d6 damage as well given the 1d8->2d6 path for increased weapon size, then given its reload time, the fact it takes 2 feats to reload as a free action, and so forth. As a simple weapon, the musket is inferior to the heavy crossbow (if it's a simple weapon the musket loses its 18-20/x3 threat range and requires a full-round action to reload before firing). To get reloads as a swift action, you must expend 2 feats (EWP: Firearms and Rapid Reload), which should be worth something significant (you're expending 2/10 of your feats).
Also the heavy repeating crossbow is terrible. It suffers all the same problems of the normal heavy crossbow except now it's an exotic weapon as well, and only allows you to fire up to 5 shots before needing a full-round action to reload; which means you must still expend 2 more feats to be able to full-attack each round for less damage than a bowman.
As to the technological advancement of the weapons, I intentionally rose the technology until the weapons would actually see use in a D&D environment. From a development standpoint, most D&D worlds have magic, advanced alchemical developments, and archers that could split a marsh-fly in half from 200 feet away (by about level 6, since the fly would probably have about a +8 size, +5 dex, and +2 from distance for AC 25, and a 6th level fighter can support a +12 easily and can probably ignore the distance penalty if he has Farshot).
In short, firearms just wouldn't be used in a D&D setting if they weren't at least comparable to existing technology that's both superior and cheaper. Up until that point, the weapon would likely have been nothing more than an experiment that was tinkered on by some blacksmith/alchemist who had up until this point dreamed of the possibilities.
Only when the weapons are actually worth something will they be worthy of being in PC hands. Since D&D/Pathfinder is a fantasy world, this isn't very hard. For example, we already have weapons from different ages existing alongside each other on a regular basis. Heck, studded leather didn't even exist, and leather armor is questionable. So as far as historical accuracy, D&D/Pathfinder has pretty much none of it, so I don't really see why someone wanting to wield firearms (anything prior to machine guns really) should be forced to.
The rules I wrote actually assume that the shots can be assumed as shells with actual metal shots in them, and the rifle actually is supposed to be a shell-loaded weapon. This was really the only way I saw that the weapons wouldn't be instantly inferior in game-terms to the bow; and I would have liked to have seen them as a legitimate consideration as a viable weapon, rather than just a trap.
I would suggest that if the 5 shot rifle isn't suitable for a campaign to simply use the single shot musket and ignore the rifle. Note, however, that pretty much means that it will lose function very early (since even with proficiency + rapid reload it will be unable to fire more than 2 shots / round), and thus fall the way of the dodo in favor of the Longbow (which you don't have to spend feats on) once again.
1: Grit as 2 + 1/2 class level.
I've only seen a few classes (all 3rd party, if I remember correctly), that completely base a pool of points on the class, and don't take into account any of the character's ability scores. This has always been a problem for me, as it leaves the problem of nearly-identical characters (you bypass this somewhat with your multiple selectable deeds). What I mean by this is that all gunslingers of an equivalent level are just as gritty as the last. Whether it's Roland, wandering gunslinger of fallen Gilead; or Clownbaby, clown gun-warrior of the country Stupidia, they're all just as gritty as the last.Basing it off of an ability score instead of the number 2--wisdom or charisma, maybe--would create an amount of variation between gunslingers (maybe leave it selectable between wisdom and charisma? Some gunslingers base their grit on a rough-and-tumble attitude while others use a firm mental status and concentration). The fact that you have abilities that cost up to 8 grit points really balances the fact that you might get more grit overall, and can restore it (honestly, I love the idea of restoration. I might house-rule all classes with similar point systems so that they can restore their pool with certain abilities).
The static 2 + 1/2 level was for 2 major reasons.
1) If you make it based on an ability score then it becomes easy to rob the gunslinger of there grit (via ability damage/drain). It's also more easily tracked, especially when ability modifiers kick in. Imagine for a moment if you will. "Well I spent 2 grit last turn, but I got hit by that Lamia and now my maximum grit when down 1 point, but the cleric cast owl's wisdom on me, sooo, my maximum grit is 2 points higher than it is right now, so I think I'm at +1 maximum grit, so I think I can reach up to 4 grit, as long as Lamia doesn't hit me again, and the spell doesn't wear off. Oh, I just got hit with dispel magic, ok, hold on, I need to..."2) It makes the classes' primary feature independent of race, point-buy, and ability scores. This makes the class easier to balance despite a wide variety of playable races and group styles (for example, certain classes like Monk vary wildly in strength depending on the point-buy or ability generation of the game).
The simpler method also allows a smooth progression of +1 grit every 2 levels, making it easy to track. Finally, every ability in the class would need to be revised to take into account what an "expected ability score" would entail, creating a very big headache as you try to guess the top and bottom of the gunslinger's potential based on what ability scores they could have, should have, and may not have.
2: Deeds on odd levels.
You made the point earlier of wizards getting their spells on odd levels, which is a good point to make (clerics and witches, too). I just feel like classes should be able to select something every level (even wizards choose new spells known every level). As it stands, you get to select 2 things at every odd level (deed and feat), and get an assigned ability every even level. The hallmark of most PF classes is their versatility, and the feel of that versatility. The fact that you get to choose something every level with the majority of non-spellcasting classes (barbarian, fighter, ranger [except for 2], rogue, alchemist, [the cavalier makes up for this with the chosen order, I think]) lends itself to this idea.
The HoA gunslinger receives +1 grit every even level (2nd, 4th, 6th, etc), and get access to new deeds at every odd level (3rd, 5th, 7th, etc), so I felt their progression fit more in line with spellcasters in terms of how they acquired their abilities. This is outside their abilities like Sixth Sense (at 2nd), or Cold Stare (4th), and I think it allows them to definitely feel an improvement and increase in versatility level to level (2nd level gunslingers, for example, can now spend up to 3 points before needing to recover grit).
3: Grit should do something on its own.
Grit feels a lot like another variation of the ki pool/arcane pool to me, and I think that, like the rest of these pools off of which it seems to be modeled, it should do something on its own. Monk ki pool grants an extra attack, extra speed, or AC. Ninja ki pool grants an extra attack, extra speed, or stealth. The Arcane pool gives you an enhancement bonus on attacks (or magical weapon effects). Grit...is specifically dedicated to deeds. Perhaps it gives you an extra attack (if you can make one). Perhaps it gives you dex to damage. Maybe it grants you speed (a mobile gunslinger is a very fun idea). Maybe any of these things, similar to how the ki pool can grant multiple different bonuses.
There are several abilities which rely on the amount of Grit currently in your pool. For example, shotgun nightmare adds +1d6 bonus damage on melee-attacks with a shotgun for every 2 grit you have. Cold Stare (4th level feature) allows you to add your current Grit to your Intimidate checks. I think adding more static abilities could very much tip the scale in the 'slinger's favor, especially if we gave bonuses to AC and/or speed improvements. They're already a very mobile class thanks to many of their deeds being standard-actions, and abilities such as Dive for Cover and Rolling Shot; both of which combo very nicely with items such as boots of striding and springing or the ever-popular boots of speed.
Just a thought, and my 2 cp.
Love the class, keep up the good work, and I hope Paizo takes note of your talent.-The Beast
Thank you, that's much appreciated. Please feel free to discuss these things with me some more. If I overlooked something about our conversation, please feel free to jump right back in and point it out. ^-^
EDIT: I do want to say that desperado is my favorite ability overall. It gives me a vision of the Gun Kata in the movie Equilibrium, and I intend to use it as such. And I do love the alteration you made to it; really shows the mechanics of the different guns.
Oh yes, that was a fun movie. Desperado can indeed be used to represent such an ability. It can also be used to represent turning and shooting in different directions, such as with old westerns, or even the spin and shoot techniques used in movies such as the Boondock Saints.
Two Gunslingers adjacent gunslingers using the ability in the same round could even be described as going "back-to-back", and shooting up a room; since there's nothing mechanically opposing such a description.
Also, a quick question. I'm building a playtest 'slinger, and I'm wondering if weapon special abilities apply to damage dealt by burst fire and desperado? As written, they do not. But it would make sense (at least in my mind) if they did. You are firing several shots from your guns. It seems that magical damage would apply.
I ask because he is currently built with a +1 shock revolver and a separate +1 revolver, and he has desperado.
Technically, no for damaging effects, since it specifies the damage it deals. This was primarily for balance reasons. I could however see allowing you to deal nonlethal damage if you have the merciful enchantment since the ability specifies that it deals weapon-damage (IE - bludgeoning/piercing/nonlethal if applicable), and not just untyped damage.
Personal Playtest Results
I tried out a 1st level Gunslinger with some friends of mine in tabletop yesterday. I had her begin with a musket, purchased 1 revolver with her starting gold, wore studded leather armor, and began with with the Deadeye Shot deed and the Rapid Firing deed (to allow her to reload the musket as a swift action). She was human, and I chose Point Blank Shot and Precise Shot for her 1st level feats.
The idea of the build was to remain mobile and make powerful Armor ignoring shots from long distances (a sniper, basically). She had the best hit-rate in the game, but she was also in a party with a archery fighter and a hammer & board paladin (basically tank-paladin with a shield), and a bard, and both out-damaged her, but missed more often. About mid-way into one of the longest battles, she overtook the paladin because he began using his actions for total-defense while standing in tight corridors and let my gunslinger fire from behind him (preventing enemies from getting to my gunslinger; so he was awesome at his job).
The archer benefited more from the bard's inspire courage, since he was firing 2 shots per round (Human Fighter, Point Blank + Rapid Shot + Precise Shot) and thus he got the +1 damage on each attack, and he hit most enemies at least once per round (2 attack rolls) and Deadeye Shot didn't add much against the goblins we were fighting (it loses a lot against enemies who don't rely on high armor/natural armor/shield for their AC; whereas goblins sport a nice AC 13 with nothing but their dex & size).
Because of our teamwork, we were cutting through the adventure pretty fast, and we encountered an "epic" encounter of us vs a grizzly bear (optional encounter). The sniper shined the most in this battle because of the bear's AC 16 (+1 dex, -1 size, +6 natural), because she could snipe him at an effective AC 10, while the archer hit him roughly 40% of the time per shot; so in this fight the archer dealt about 5.5 damage per round and she dealt about 7 per round; but occasionally she'd roll pretty good on the 2d6, and occasionally the archer would hit with both shots for 2d8+2 (10.5).
The grizzly certainly would have killed us, except for the bard's animal companion (not technically an animal companion, just a purchased riding dog trained for combat) and the paladin's high AC (the bear actually didn't hit him during the fight, since he mostly intercepted the bear and used a total defense a lot.
We succeeded at the game with minimum trouble; and the gunslinger seemed to hold her own without drastically overtaking anyone. At this point, I was trying to milk the long-ranged touch attacks and mobile shooting; so I didn't have anything to actually spend grit on yet (only had Deadeye shot + Rapid Firing, and I only reloaded 1/round); but at 3rd level I'm going to try and pickup either Called Shot, Trick Shot, or Sniper Shot; which would give me fun things to spend my grit on.
We'll see how it goes. ^-^
|
|
Ok, I tried out the level 5 pre-gen you created and it gave my party a run for their money. The goal of creating a mobile skirmisher with this class was achieved. Revolvers and the rapid reload really helped out, and I could have TPK'd the party with desperado, but I pulled back on the damage rather than ruin a campaign game. The only way the party held up was by ample uses of the cleric's channel energy and healing. Rolling shot was great. Were I to recreate the character, I would remove TWF and given the character some melee abilities as a back-up for when the revolver ran out of ammo. I was much more pleased with this version of the GS than with the beta version. It made the class playable!
Also the heavy repeating crossbow is terrible.
I feel the need to add a caveat. As a primary weapon it is terrible, but since Inquisitors gain proficiency with all crossbows, I found using a heavy repeating crossbow as an opening volley to be exceptionally effective. So.. bad with all classes but Inquisitor :3
It gives me a vision of the Gun Kata in the movie Equilibrium, and I intend to use it as such.
The opening scene of Equilibrium is him using desperado, haha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzKBC3agDRA 3:30 into it. He even uses the full-round action since he used his standard to break through the door. He needs to wait for his next turn to start.Rapid Firing deed (to allow her to reload the musket as a swift action).
I think you meant the Lock and Load deed.
Ok, I tried out the level 5 pre-gen you created and it gave my party a run for their money. The goal of creating a mobile skirmisher with this class was achieved. Revolvers and the rapid reload really helped out, and I could have TPK'd the party with desperado, but I pulled back on the damage rather than ruin a campaign game. The only way the party held up was by ample uses of the cleric's channel energy and healing. Rolling shot was great. Were I to recreate the character, I would remove TWF and given the character some melee abilities as a back-up for when the revolver ran out of ammo. I was much more pleased with this version of the GS than with the beta version. It made the class playable!
Haha, well that WAS built to be a PC I'd use so the melee was overlooked since Rolling Shot could be used to escape threatened squares, and of course thered be a full party so other melee chars.
if you look above Ashiel altered the damage of Desperado down to 2d6 and made it a full round action. Likely would have saved your PCs at least a small bit of pain haha.
I feel the need to add a caveat. As a primary weapon it is terrible, but since Inquisitors gain proficiency with all crossbows, I found using a heavy repeating crossbow as an opening volley to be exceptionally effective. So.. bad with all classes but Inquisitor :3Also the heavy repeating crossbow is terrible.
Yeah, but I'd like to try an avoid that. If a weapon is only worth something to 1 class in the entire world, then the weapon isn't worth anything. The vast majority of the characters in the world are assumed to be NPC classed, and then if you count PC classed characters, the inquisitor is 1 out of what, 18 base classes counting the APG?
I'd like guns to be valid options for PCs that aren't gunslingers. If a fighter, ranger, or paladin wants to burn an EWP feat and rapid reload to wield guns, then I think they should be entitled to. Meanwhile, the gunslinger is more about using guns in unique ways, preforming daring trick-stuns, and trick-shots with a gun; giving them a specific style and flair to the class that would set them apart both visually and mechanically from warrior wielding a gun.
It gives me a vision of the Gun Kata in the movie Equilibrium, and I intend to use it as such.
The opening scene of Equilibrium is him using desperado, haha.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzKBC3agDRA 3:30 into it. He even uses the full-round action since he used his standard to break through the door. He needs to wait for his next turn to start.I think you meant the Lock and Load deed.Rapid Firing deed (to allow her to reload the musket as a swift action).
I did mean Lock and Load. Oh boy, how embarassing. ^.^;;
3) The third, and probably my least favorite, is the very vague mechanic that basically says be a daredevil and take unneeded risks. Sorry, it may just be me, but I really dislike mechanics that encourage PCs to be reckless. Reckless and brave are two very, very different things. As written, the current mechanic is far too reliant on GM fiat to decide whether something was a daring act, and it encourages the gunslinger to take risks where other alternatives may be present. Every gamer knows someone who would think this means gunslingers should really try to jump a chasm when there's already a bridge there.
I agree with a lot of what you wrote, but this part stands out as particularly important. Pathfinder is not a game oriented toward improvisation in the rules! It's a game that writes down all of the rules in books, clarifies them in an FAQ, and has discussion boards to help get the rules for a particular situation "right". I'm perfectly happy with stunt rules & bonuses in certain other game systems, but Pathfinder is not the place for it.
Daring Act as written will be abused, will cause arguments and bad feelings, and does not fit into Pathfinder!
Some good responses to my suggestions
In response to: 2+1/2 level for grit.
I see the point you're trying to make, and it does make sense from a mechanical level (as you've stated, you love mechanics, and I'm glad for that. It makes things easier to balance), however I do think it kind of fails on a thematic level (only my opinion). It's just an interesting point that everyone else gets to use a stat for their pool, but not the gunslinger. He's stuck with a base bonus of 2.In response to: Base ability for grit.
I think we misunderstood each other. I don't mean a static, passive ability. I meant something closer to: "A gunslinger can spend one grit point to do one of these things: grant himself an extra attack at his highest base attack bonus, add his dexterity modifier to damage dealt with his firearms this round, or add +20 feet to his movement speed this round."
Evidently, adding the extra attack could seriously imbalance it, since this is a full BAB class.
This is compounded when I consider my playtest I conducted last night. I did an "arena of doom" styled test with a level 7 HoA gunslinger. I had him use a single revolver (+1 keen) for the majority of his attacks, with 5 quick-load cylinders and a secondary mwk revolver for when he used desperado. He used dead-eye shot, sniper shot, pistol whips, lock and load and eagle eyes as his deeds. I found myself using acrobatics most of the time to escape my enemies' reach before using a sniper/deadeye shot. I noted as I went that I wasn't really spending my grit on anything. Sniper shot cost 1 every round and dead-eye replaced 1, so I had a constant pool of 5, and I really felt like something basic (extra damage, mobility) would have helped me out and kept things a little more interesting.
~
As a side-note for some clean-up in the pdf, perform is spelled p-e-r-form, you have it spelled p-r-e-form throughout the document. Also, you should really think about putting a note in sniper shot that disallows it to stack with improved critical or keen, since it effectively gave me a threat range of 12-20 every round during my playtest (or not, maybe that's what you were going for. It definitely helped me out against the stegosaurus). And finally, I noticed that you don't specify whether burst fire or desperado provoke attacks of opportunity. One can assume so, since you're technically making ranged attacks, but you're not rolling an attack roll and they're extraordinary abilities, not attacks. You should just clarify, I think.
EDIT: Sniper shot and eagle eyes together give the revolver an effective base range of 150 feet, and the rifle a range of 420 feet. I think sniper shot needs another look, or should be upgraded to greater deed status.
~
And finally, considering what you noted about deadeye shot's damage not multiplying on a crit: Why not just make it precision damage. It seems much cleaner than saying "it's untyped damage that isn't multiplied on a crit." And wouldn't it be precision damage anyway? You're making a deadeye shot. You're not actually imparting extra force on the bullet or dealing magical damage or anything. You're just aiming a really well-placed shot. Unless my understanding is off, that's precision damage at it's most basic.
Thanks for your responses, and I hope this turns into something great. I'll definitely keep following this thread and responding to new developments.
-The Beast
Final Note: This is probably my favorite example of the Gun Kata/Desperado, at about 2:20. Puppy Shootout
|
I feel that what's already been said quite covers most of my points effectively, but I must reiterate a few.
The first is that Grit really ought to include some component wherein a character's natural talent is considered. Whether it's a pool that's 1/2 Character Level (minimum 1) + Wisdom Modifier like the Magus's Arcane Pool and the Monk's Ki Pool or 2 + (Level * 2) + Wisdom Modifier like a Barbarian's Rage and Bard's Perform. Even spell casters enjoy extra spells from higher ability scores. That said, given that there is a refresh mechanic, I think that the Magus's pool size would be most appropriate. Furthermore, this is your class, so while this is my opinion, I can respect why you wouldn't choose to follow it.
The second of the points is regarding the range of the firearms. While they're in the right ballpark for me, I find some of them too long and some far too short. If I were to suggest a range correction, I would suggest using the ranges listed in the firearms section of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting book. If you did, the pistol and revolver would have a range increment of 60 feet, the musket would have a low but tolerable 90 feet, the rifle would have a gorgeous 150 feet, and the scattergun would have a range of 30 feet (which makes sense because, really, shotguns don't have that much spray; they're not blunderbusses).
The third is my own point, and one without much importance. So far all of the guns have had a crap tier version of themselves in your gunslinger writeup save for the scattergun. I think it would make sense to include a blunderbuss which would have, according to the writeup in PCS, a base damage of 2d6 and a range 2/3 of the scattergun's range, same as a short-scattergun. This, though, is really just a matter of choices. I would like to see a terrible, single-shot version of it, but it's far from essential.
The fourth is, again, a point of my own. If you want to have people cry foul regarding the historical accuracy of a spring-fed bolt action clip for the rifle, you could tweak the fluff slightly so that it could either be a spring-fed clip or a revolving action. It could be phrased, for example, like this: "and the ability to accept multiple rounds through a spring-loaded clip or revolving cylinder." I only suggest this because I foresee a spring-fed clip being a point that people will whine about well after mechanical problems are actually fixed. If it helps your decision at all, the Colt revolving rifle predates spring-fed clips by quite a few decades. This way you can have rifles with multiple-shot actions without having to worry too much.
These are things that, in my opinion, demand not correction, because there is nothing wrong with them as they are, but certainly some polishing. I can appreciate reasons why, with each of them, you might not choose to make corrections. I only hope that you'll consider them when making your next wave of corrections to this awesome class.
Some good responses to my suggestionsIn response to: 2+1/2 level for grit.
I see the point you're trying to make, and it does make sense from a mechanical level (as you've stated, you love mechanics, and I'm glad for that. It makes things easier to balance), however I do think it kind of fails on a thematic level (only my opinion). It's just an interesting point that everyone else gets to use a stat for their pool, but not the gunslinger. He's stuck with a base bonus of 2.
Well, I explained most of the thought process behind it in my last post, but X + 1/2 level might not be a bad idea. My only concern is you could hit up to about 20 grit at that point, though that might not be unbalanced. Worse case scenario is you could pull marked for death two turns in a row, or pop a 40d6 headshot (equivalent to a disintegrate or an average of 140 damage) if you bottomed from cap to crud in one round.
While I'm hesitant to alter it, I would definitely say trying it with variants such as Charisma Mod + 1/2 level sounds perfectly valid, and I'd say that if you want to try it out and give some more feedback, I'd be perfectly happy to hear about it. ^-^
In response to: Base ability for grit.
I think we misunderstood each other. I don't mean a static, passive ability. I meant something closer to: "A gunslinger can spend one grit point to do one of these things: grant himself an extra attack at his highest base attack bonus, add his dexterity modifier to damage dealt with his firearms this round, or add +20 feet to his movement speed this round."
My only worry with adding something like that would be that it would take the gunslinger up and over the Fighter in terms of power. Fighters add a lot of static damage to bows due to their high ability scores, whereas gunslingers rely on bonus damage dice and/or deadly aim and weapon enhancements. If you could pump your Dexterity and add it to damage for even 1 round, you could dish out some serious hurt at a low cost. By 20th level, it would be trivial for a gunslinger to be sporting a +10-12 Dexterity, which would mean he'd get +10/+10 hit/damage from his ability scores. This would give him an attack routine that looked something like this:
+33/+33/+33/+28/+23/+18 if using Rapid Shot + Haste, at 1d8+15 damage per hit, 2d8+30 with Double Action (Manyshot copycat) or 3d8+45 damage on a critical hit, and with Improved Critical, he would have a 25% critical hit chance, so just burning 1 grit for +Dex to damage for 1 round would result in an average damage of about 175.5 damage if all hits landed with 1 critical being confirmed; or about 195 if also using Two Weapon Fighting.
Whereas, currently, the gunslinger would have about the same damage bonus, but would be hitting for about 80 less damage, assuming the same hits and critical chances; bringing them to about 95 to 115 on a full-attack, which is much more reasonable I think.
+20ft speed is also pretty amazing, since that's +8 to Acrobatics for the purposes of jumping, allows +10ft more movement while using Rolling Shot, which would allow them to move up to 30ft without provoking attacks; which seems almost like overkill since there are plenty of cheap magic items to pimp your 'slinger with in this manner (boots of striding & springing for example, and or even fly).
The extra attack is probably the mildest of the three, and that'd be really nice for those fishing for criticals (which a crit-build would be legitimate, I think; though I'd probably go for rifles + sniper shot + improved critical if I was critical fishing).
Evidently, adding the extra attack could seriously imbalance it, since this is a full BAB class.
This is compounded when I consider my playtest I conducted last night. I did an "arena of doom" styled test with a level 7 HoA gunslinger. I had him use a single revolver (+1 keen) for the majority of his attacks, with 5 quick-load cylinders and a secondary mwk revolver for when he used desperado. He used dead-eye shot, sniper shot, pistol whips, lock and load and eagle eyes as his deeds. I found myself using acrobatics most of the time to escape my enemies' reach before using a sniper/deadeye shot. I noted as I went that I wasn't really spending my grit on anything. Sniper shot cost 1 every round and dead-eye replaced 1, so I had a constant pool of 5, and I really felt like something basic (extra damage, mobility) would have helped me out and kept things a little more interesting.
First (and please don't think me nitpicky), keen can only be applied to melee weapons; so you'd need to be 8th level minimum to even qualify, and you'd need 9th level to actually take the feat (unless you were a multiclass Gunslinger/Fighter).
Deadeye shot is a simple but effective, especially when combined with Sniper Shot. At that point, your maximum range Deadeye Shot range is probably longer than the battlefield, and I find it's exceptionally nice with a musket / rifle for long range hurt; especially if you're fishing for critical hits (at 20th level, a sniper build should be able to support a 2d6+5+10d6 (47 average) damage with a 40% chance to threaten a critical hit (12-20/x3 with Imp. Critical + Sniper Shot), which brings them to an average of 6d6+15+10d6 or (71 damage) without a loss of grit). While the Fighter deals 4d8+20+20+20+40 or 118 average on a critical hit, the Fighter should only have a 10% chance of pulling that off, though he auto-confirms the critical (though using Deadeye shot is pretty much auto-confirming, which is why you'd use it this way).
Alternatively, with a rifle, you could get a damage by fishing for critical hits with a full-attack and a rifle, but in which case you will need to threaten and confirm vs their full AC, which makes it less reliable on latter attacks and brings your damage per hit down to about 2d6+5 (12 dmg) or 6d6+15 on a critical (31 dmg), so you'd need to land about 3 critical hits to make it worth it; though with a burst or bane weapon it might be a little more appealing (burst for +3d10 or bane for +6).
Also, you chose a very strait-forward build. It's a simple, effective build, and relies very little on grit consumption. This is ideal for those who really don't want to expend their grit and instead focus more on simply attacking repeatedly (which is a legitimate tactic), while a gunslinger who takes more dramatic deeds will find themselves consuming more grit and using more dramatic combat styles.
For example, Deadeye Shot, Sniper Shot, Pistol Whip, and Eagle Eyes are definitely strait-forward abilities. They're simple, they're ideal for picking off direct targets, and in an open 4 walls combat scenario, they're pretty darn good.
Meanwhile, a gunslinger that chooses Rolling Shot, Called Shot, Deadeye Shot, and Desperado is going to be a very, very mobile gunslinger that takes advantage of as much cover as she can get, moves when shot at, dives out of combat, takes a single accurate shot when she can, and then fills everything in the room full of lead after she's built up some grit; and then she begins dodging around and building grit.
Meanwhile still, a gunslinger that chooses Rolling Shot, Rapid Firing, Double Action, and Wounding Shot, who also takes Two Weapon Fighting, will instead throw tons of lead into the air with full attacks, use Rolling Shot to setup her location and build grit, and burn grit to inflict ability damage or to ignore the -2 penalty from rapid shot; putting her at about +8/+8/+8/+2 for about 1d8 damage per hit with a pair of masterwork revolvers before applying Point-Blank or Deadly Aim; and could spend 2 grit per attack to inflict Strength, Dexterity, or Constitution damage to her target as part of the attack. Recommended equipment would be flaming, holy or even merciful guns, or anything that adds plenty of bonus damage (such as bane bullets) to pile hurt onto your enemies. (Merciful is nice for bringing 'em back alive! ^_^ )
So how the gunslinger plays is very much dependent on how you wish to play her. A rifle-bearing sniper is strait-forward and effective. A tavern-diving quick-draw who uses their surroundings against their opponents is very interactive and effective.
And finally, considering what you noted about deadeye shot's damage not multiplying on a crit: Why not just make it precision damage. It seems much cleaner than saying "it's untyped damage that isn't multiplied on a crit." And wouldn't it be precision damage anyway? You're making a deadeye shot. You're not actually imparting extra force on the bullet or dealing magical damage or anything. You're just aiming a really well-placed shot. Unless my understanding is off, that's precision damage at it's most basic.
Yeah, I actually set it to Precision damage last night. I still dislike the wording of the critical hit exceptions, but I do think Deadeye shot pretty much screams precision damage. You're 100% spot on.
Also, I cleaned up the Perform as well. Embarrassing typo, that.
The second of the points is regarding the range of the firearms. While they're in the right ballpark for me, I find some of them too long and some far too short. If I were to suggest a range correction, I would suggest using the ranges listed in the firearms section of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting book. If you did, the pistol and revolver would have a range increment of 60 feet, the musket would have a low but tolerable 90 feet, the rifle would have a gorgeous 150 feet, and the scattergun would have a range of 30 feet (which makes sense because, really, shotguns don't have that much spray; they're not blunderbusses).
Sounds pretty good for me. Setting them to 60 ft, 90ft, and 120ft wouldn't hurt my feelings on the matter; so if everyone thinks that's a good plan, I'd go with it.
Adding a single shot blunderbuss would be easy as well. Upping the scattergun ranges would be easy as well, but in a lot of games (such as adventure paths), there's a limit to how much space is actually available or needed as a ranged combatant, and I aiming (from a game perspective) to have the shotguns being the weapon favored by the gunslingers who were flirting with melee-ranged combat frequently. At 50-60ft, you can avoid melee fairly well in many cases if your opponent cannot effectively charge you (Nimble Moves is golden for this), but 15ft and 10ft means to get that fat 9.5 base weapon damage, you'd need to be up close. However, I could totally see increasing it to 30ft / 15ft for the scattergun + short-scattergun respectively.
I'm thinking there could be a 20ft single-shot version in the middle; perhaps perfect for the blunderbuss. What do you guys think?
Blunderbuss sounds good to me. I actually love seeing lower-tech guns to give a good range of weapons. Maybe introduce basic pistols, muskets and blunderbusses in a few encounters, then later in the game they suddenly encounter a gunslinger who's flinging lead out of his revolvers like it's nobody's business (especially if he likes desperado). It would really give a shock moment, I think, of "wow. We ain't seen nothin' yet."
I'm also for supporting the change in weapon ranges. Scatterguns did seem a little short to me, as the term "scattergun" really is misleading. Yeah, shells release a burst of small pellet-fire, but it all still generally goes in one direction in a single loose clump until air resistance begins taking its toll.
~
Thanks for catching the keen bit, and laying out all the math defending your position. I'm not usually big on critical builds, so I'm not surprised I missed something like that.
~
Another note I thought of today. Combining sniper shot, eagle eyes and desperado can create some desperate situations with a couple revolvers. That's a 150 foot radius burst dealing between 2d6 and 22d6 damage. And if you did increase the range of the pistols by 10 feet, that would be a 180 foot radius burst. Not the intent, I think. If you specifically put down "50 feet for revolvers (or 60 with the change)" and "10 feet for short-scatterguns (or 20? with the change)" it would fix what could (potentially, you have trumped my worries with solid math before) be a very nasty problem pretty easily.
You give a specific sized burst in burst fire, and while I understand the change to "weapon range" in desperado was to differentiate the revolvers and the scatterguns, it may have created a monster, and simply grabbing a specified range for each, while taking up more space, clears up a potential problem.
My understanding is that you are shooting at everything within your base range. When your base range is almost 200 feet away, I think it gets a little ridiculous. You're shooting a max of 10 shots, and potentially (with such an exorbitant range) dozens (or even hundreds on a crowded battlefield. This isn't a rain of arrows) of enemies. The vision of using desperado in a crowded area, taking out dozens of mooks with one whirling attack is cool. The vision of using desperado in a relatively loose area where enemies are standing 20-30 feet apart and taking out the same number doesn't really strike me as the same concept, and doesn't seem nearly as cool.
Keep up the good work,
-The Beast
Blunderbuss sounds good to me. I actually love seeing lower-tech guns to give a good range of weapons. Maybe introduce basic pistols, muskets and blunderbusses in a few encounters, then later in the game they suddenly encounter a gunslinger who's flinging lead out of his revolvers like it's nobody's business (especially if he likes desperado). It would really give a shock moment, I think, of "wow. We ain't seen nothin' yet."
I'm also for supporting the change in weapon ranges. Scatterguns did seem a little short to me, as the term "scattergun" really is misleading. Yeah, shells release a burst of small pellet-fire, but it all still generally goes in one direction in a single loose clump until air resistance begins taking its toll.
Indeed. I will probably be increasing their range to 30 ft and 15 feet respectively. It would probably also make the primary scattergun more appealing than the short-scattergun (which can be dual-wielded and hidden easier), since it would be literally double the range.
Thanks for catching the keen bit, and laying out all the math defending your position. I'm not usually big on critical builds, so I'm not surprised I missed something like that.
Critical builds are interesting, but most of them aren't as reliable as solid static damage, and most fell out of use after 3.5 was produced. Back in 3E, critical builds were viable since Keen + Improved Critical stacked, allowing you to get critical hit chances of around 12-20 with scimitars and the like easily, and even as far as 10-20 with the Weapon Master prestige class.
Sean K. Reynolds has a pretty solid explanation as to why this was A-OK on his blog site (last time I checked anyway), but essentially it really wasn't unbalanced.
The biggest problem with crit-centric builds today is that it's pretty difficult to get them to work reliably. In 3E critical builds relied on getting a critical chance around 45-55%, and often dual-wielding (more hits = more crits); but since they nerfed Improved Critical + Keen (effectively making Improved Critical a joke since a keen weapon is only a +1 enhancement and doesn't require feat expenditure) it has become very, very difficult to build someone around critical hits (since you really only reach about a 25% chance at best).
Sniper Shot basically allows you to hit up to a 40% critical chance, but guns are (intentionally) limited in how much static damage they can stack, which means that while I wrote them to get criticals often and for heavy multipliers, you'll never reach the sheer damage power of a Fighter, and a Fighter's Critical is far more devastating (but they have a lower critical %, so it's a tradeoff).
However, thanks to Sniper Shot, you can attempt a critical build (since it intentionally doesn't ban the stacking of Improved Critical) and try for burst damage weapons (burst weapons have been widely considered horrible waste of money and effort, but on critical builds they're not terrible); which can help keep your damage up on full-attacks, but in a different way than Fighters.
Ideally, a high level crit-fisher gunslinger would probably be sporting a revolver as their favorite toy, dual wielding, with Improved Critical (Revolver), and burning grit for Sniper Shot, allowing them to threaten a critical on a roll of 12-20/x3; which their damage is only 1d8+5 (assuming +5 weapon) so each critical would be 3d8+15; which is less average damage than an equal level Fighter per-shot from a non-critting bow. However, if you also have something like flaming burst on the weapon, each critical deals an extra 3d10 damage; which brings the average from 28.5 to 45 on a critical hit, which is closer to the Fighter's average damage (though admittedly you have to spend more and energy resistance can hose you badly); but some people really like critical hits so this will get you there.
Another note I thought of today. Combining sniper shot, eagle eyes and desperado can create some desperate situations with a couple revolvers. That's a 150 foot radius burst dealing between 2d6 and 22d6 damage. And if you did increase the range of the pistols by 10 feet, that would be a 180 foot radius burst. Not the intent, I think. If you specifically put down "50 feet for revolvers (or 60 with the change)" and "10 feet for short-scatterguns (or 20? with the change)" it would fix what could (potentially, you have trumped my worries with solid math before) be a very nasty problem pretty easily.
This could lead to some rather odd occurrences, since that is a very long burst radius indeed. This would basically allow you to hit pretty much every enemy in sight (almost like a long-distance Whirlwind Attack), for up to 22d6 points of damage at 20th level. As far as balance goes, it's pretty mild (22d6 = 77 average damage, Reflex halves) but some might have trouble swallowing the visual aspect of it; which is understandable; though at this level the gunslinger's damage from Desperado will be less impressive, so they may actually need a lot more than 50-60 feet to keep this being a viable tactic. In short, if it becomes far too dangerous to her person, the gunslinger will actively avoid the range of Desperado.
As level rises, mobility rises as well, you see. Many high level creatures, PCs, and NPCs have very impressive movement capabilities (from flying, hovering, jumping, and just plain moving very fast), the Gunslinger's Desperado is about hitting a lot of enemies for burst damage. While at low to mid levels the Gunslinger his hitting small groups of enemies with Desperado, mid to high level Gunslingers would be capable of cutting bullets through a battalion of low-level mooks if they had Sniper Shot + Eagle Eye + Desperado.
I'd also wonder how many locations that the gunslinger would actually get to capitalize on her full-range potential. I think the most extreme possibility would to actually be in an open field surrounded by an army of 1st level mooks, and then to pop an eagle-eyed sniper-shot desperado and dump a solid amount of grit into it, and watch a couple hundred guys hit the ground.
I suppose my question is, is it unbalanced, or merely unrealistic? If it doesn't help kill dragons faster, and only means mild to medium damage against multiple foes at higher levels, should we limit it based on realism or allow the option of long-range multi-target attacks, and merely forgive them for being able to do something odd (and probably an 11/10 on the "Oh wow, did you see that!?" o' meter).
*is taking notes*
Sniper Gunslinger Playtest Part 2
So we had another game today with the PCs who are gaining a level roughly each session (very long sessions, lots of action, etc) and so I got to test out the sniper playtest gunslinger at 2nd and then leveled to 3rd at the end of the session; and here's some more playtest info.
My PC tabletop PC has the following stats for the playtest:
Hp: 19.5 (2d10+4), AC 17 (+3 studded leather, +4 dex), Fort +2, Ref +7, Will +0, Str 12, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 10, Cha 7;
Melee spiked gauntlet +3 (1d4+1), Ranged musket +6 (2d6/18-20/x3);
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot.
Her primary "competitor" was the Core Fighter:
Hp: 17.5 (2d10+2), AC 18 (+6 armor, +2 dex), Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +1,
Str 16, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 7;
Melee glaive +5 (1d10+4/x3), Ranged +7 or +5/+5 (1d8+3/x3);
Feats - Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot, Weapon Focus (Longbow).
And by competitor, I mean traveling cohort and fellow awesome DPSer. :3
So anyway, the party continues on their quest against the goblins through the mountain forests, and ends up getting into a scrap after being ambushed by goblins. As a slightly humorous bit, several of the goblins were wielding pistols as simple weapons (25 gp and all), while others were wielding shortbows and some were tanking with dogslicers & heavy wooden shields.
Heavily outnumbered, the paladin and bard took to meleeing (along with the bard's pet). The goblins got the jump on us and shot a few times at the Paladin, and my PC. Paladin didn't get hurt, Gunslinger took 3 dmg since her flat-footed AC was 13.
The goblins are taking cover behind trees, firing from around them, so the archer charges into combat while drawing his glaive as part of the action (thanks to having a +1 or higher BAB) and cuts down a ranged-goblin immediately. Ranged goblins with guns spend a round reloading and taking a 5ft step, archer goblins shoot a few of us for 1d4 damage and saves vs filth fever due to the condition of the arrows.
Gunslinger's turn comes around, and she pops a Deadeye Shot for 2d6+1d6 damage and kills one of the goblin warriors. After the Fighter got the goblins to break formation and run away from him, he swapped to his composite longbow and killed another.
Next round, the archer was firing two shots per round to my single 2d6+1d6 shot. We were keeping around the same damage output (he had about 7.5 per shot over 2 shots, and I had about 10.5 over 1 shot); but we did appreciate the fact he could down 1 goblin and then shoot at another goblin with his 2nd hit; while my burst damage was lost on anything without many HPs (like the 6 hp goblin warriors).
On a side note, something just feels awesome about rolling a few d6s. While statistically my friend's archer was outpacing my damage on most rounds, grabbing 3d6 and rolling a pair of 6s and a 4 felt really cool; just because it feels like you're unleashing hell on the enemy (though I did roll a pair of 2s and a 1 on a later round; but for the most part luck was kind to my tonight).
The highlight of my sniper's night was when she hit a 18 and then confirmed the hit, dealing a whopping 7d6 damage which resulted in a 31 (6.5 over average 24). That 6hp goblin didn't know what hit him. The Paladin remarked about such power, and then as if fated, the archer scored a critical on the next round, and rolled a 32 (counting bardsong, he also rolled 6.5 over average 25.5), which seemed almost too funny to be true.
Either way, my gunslinger was definitely shining tonight. She rarely missed due to her Deadeye Shot, and she could generally take down about 1 goblin per round; and we eventually reached the end of the adventure which involved a lot of goblins and a few PC classed goblins. My gunslinger was tasked with trying to snipe their bard to death so he would stop giving all the CR 1/3 goblin warriors +1 to hit and damage ('cause that junk is baaaaad); while our Paladin tanked by drawing cover fire. The Fighter started taking out the druid (lightly armored thing fell to his archery fast), while our own bard scared an ox into trampling through a large group of goblins before bursting into Bardsong.
Thanks to the Ox and the fact we snuck up on them and got off opening surprise round attacks, we really suffered little in the way of hurt, and finished the adventure quite handily. I believe our next adventure will be on a boat, but we'll see.
Commentary: 2nd level is definitely going to be the level I'll feel the absolute most beastly at. She's wielding a musket (2d6) with Deadly Aim (+1d6 precision) so she's got a nice hefty 3d6 at this level, which seems really impressive when I'm rolling the d6s on the table. A few lucky rolls resulted in damage between 10-14 most of the time, which was pretty nice.
Admittedly, by the time I'll see my next damage spike (4th level, at 2d6+2d6), the archer will assuredly be sporting Weapon Focus + Specialization, pumping his Hit & Damage to 1d8+5 or 1d8+7 with Deadly Aim, so we'll see how that goes.
Now she'll be 3rd level next session, so I need to decide between Called Shot, Trick Shot, or Silver Bullet. I'm leaning towards Trick Shot, since it would let me fire around cover, but Called Shot could let me dump some of my grit into some deathblows or help disarm; so it's a very tough decision. Trick Shot I could use with Deadeye Shot, which would let me juggle grit easily, whereas Called Shot would be powerful bursts at a much lower accuracy.
I will probably try Called Shot, to test the damage dealing potential.
We'll see how it goes.
They probably are, and thinking, "wow I'm glad we set up a special set of forums for a homebrew class playtest".
This is kind of unfairly painting them in a corner.
What if everyone playtests this and loves it, thinks this is the way to go, but piazo decides it isn't and publishes something different?
There will be resentment that all that work and time to refine the class was wasted, and through no fault of Paizo's.
You've come up with great suggestions they can use, but spending time playtesting an entire class the "devs" did not come up with is futile.
They're asking for feedback, not for people to write classes for them.
Sorry if this comes off as hostile, just my 2 cp.
If you're not really sorry, don't say so. I'm tired of people being d**ks in this forum. We're just trying to improve the class and offering some suggestions.
Sorry if this comes off as hostile, just my 2 cp.
Reporting on the playtest of a changed class is not reporting on a playtest of the base class. If you want to change the class, that's the houserules forum. If you want to explain why the class, as it exists, has problems and explain, that is this forum.
Reporting on the playtest of a changed class is not reporting on a playtest of the base class. If you want to change the class, that's the houserules forum. If you want to explain why the class, as it exists, has problems and explain, that is this forum.If you're not really sorry, don't say so. I'm tired of people being d**ks in this forum. We're just trying to improve the class and offering some suggestions.
Sorry if this comes off as hostile, just my 2 cp.
Ill have to agree, changing the class right now, and playing it with the change and reporting how cool it is doesn't help any.
If you play with the RAW 'slinger, find issues and then make a suggestion 'it'd be nice if it worked this way' then that is different, but dont play a different version and then report it as a play test.
|
|
Reporting on the playtest of a changed class is not reporting on a playtest of the base class. If you want to change the class, that's the houserules forum. If you want to explain why the class, as it exists, has problems and explain, that is this forum.If you're not really sorry, don't say so. I'm tired of people being d**ks in this forum. We're just trying to improve the class and offering some suggestions.
Sorry if this comes off as hostile, just my 2 cp.Ill have to agree, changing the class right now, and playing it with the change and reporting how cool it is doesn't help any.
If you play with the RAW 'slinger, find issues and then make a suggestion 'it'd be nice if it worked this way' then that is different, but dont play a different version and then report it as a play test.
If you want to play the semantics game, "I'd like it to work like Ashiel's class." Is everyone fine with that now?
BTW, I don't think anyone has reported this variant in the actual playtest results forum, this is the discussion forum. We're discussing it and other abilities that should be incorporated.
They're asking for feedback, not for people to write classes for them.
I'm inclined to disagree honestly. Either way, as I said before, unless Paizo really pulls something wacky and nice with the Gunslinger, me and my DM will be completely ignoring Paizo's version.
|
Man, this thread got rude quick. A few points:
1. This homebrew class is full of great ideas that Paizo could use or not at their discretion.
2. You guys aren't the Paizo police. If they'd like to eliminate threads which make some homebrew changes to their class they'll do it.
3. You are also not the disappointment police. If some people are disappointed by how the final class turns out that's their issue, not yours.
Kindly remember that this forum is a place where anyone can post as long as they follow the rules. There's no profanity, no racial insensitivity, no advocation of illegal activities.
Jeez guys. Stuff like this is why people complain about the tone during playtests.
Man, this thread got rude quick. A few points:
1. This homebrew class is full of great ideas that Paizo could use or not at their discretion.
2. You guys aren't the Paizo police. If they'd like to eliminate threads which make some homebrew changes to their class they'll do it.
3. You are also not the disappointment police. If some people are disappointed by how the final class turns out that's their issue, not yours.
Kindly remember that this forum is a place where anyone can post as long as they follow the rules. There's no profanity, no racial insensitivity, no advocation of illegal activities.
Jeez guys. Stuff like this is why people complain about the tone during playtests.
I'm not trying to be rude, its just so far different from the rules right now. It's jumping ahead too far.
It's basically a different game system it's so different. She's on Delta version and we are all still dealing with alpha.Not that all the ideas arent cool and fun and interesting, its just not anything like the rules right now.