I also see no real reason why a gunslinger/fighter character build isn't a viable and allowable character. The whole idea of "alternate classes" being added on top of the already dubious archetypes doesn't sit very well with me. Should we be declaring that the Oracle is an "alternate cleric" now? What about the sorcerer being an "alternate wizard?" The Gunslinger is definitely a very specialized class, but it doesn't deserve to be this very weird half-class thing. Let it live as its own class. I don't see the issue.
If the gunslinger is an alternate fighter, where are the defensive capabilities? Light and medium armor, no shields. No mobility bonuses in armor. No bonus to AC when lightly armored or unarmored.
It's been alluded that the gunslinger is based off fighter because the dev's don't want you level dipping into gunslinger to get the guns and then multiclassing into fighter. So it's possible this is done deliberately.
All the classes are made (in their final form) with an effort toward trying to discourage multiclassing, by giving enough in a class to make you want to stick with it.
I would not let the gunsling go in to fighter.
Or Ninja go in to Rouge.
Or Samuria go in to Cavailer.
I would not let the gunsling go in to fighter.
Or Ninja go in to Rouge.
Or Samuria go in to Cavailer.
That's nice. I would. So, who should Paizo listen to?
That's nice. I would. So, who should Paizo listen to?I would not let the gunsling go in to fighter.
Or Ninja go in to Rouge.
Or Samuria go in to Cavailer.
The rules. Read the Advanced Player's Guide. If you start in an alternate class for a class, you can't stop. So that means once you take a level in a fighter that isn't a Polearm Fighter or Gunslinger, you can't ever take a level in those, and vice-versa. So same for Ninja and Samurai. They can't take levels in those other classes.
|
The rules. Read the Advanced Player's Guide. If you start in an alternate class for a class, you can't stop. So that means once you take a level in a fighter that isn't a Polearm Fighter or Gunslinger, you can't ever take a level in those, and vice-versa. So same for Ninja and Samurai. They can't take levels in those other classes.That's nice. I would. So, who should Paizo listen to?I would not let the gunsling go in to fighter.
Or Ninja go in to Rouge.
Or Samuria go in to Cavailer.
So, why is such a neutered version of a class considered to be a Fighter variant?
It gives up way too much to still be comparable to any of the fighter variants from the APG.
Consider:
Swap Fort for Reflex as the sole good save
Swap Brave for Brave and Tough, so you lose only part of the Fort save giveaway, but it still is only a partial recompense.
Give up over half your bonus feats for Deeds. Deeds that are of both more limited utility as the feats, but also of limited uses per day.
Give up using a composite longbow with free reload for a musket or pistol with slower than a crossbow reload speeds, and only limited ability to add to damage.
Now, if they were to be interested in actually making this class a Fighter variant, instead of a lamer-than-PHB3.0 Fighter, only useful for a 2 level dip, some things need to be improved.
1) This class is feat starved. Extremely feat starved, since so many feats are needed to make the class minimally viable. To be honest, even with full Fighter bonus feat progression, this class would be feat starved. Why crossbow users as primary weapon are rare, and pale beside the Fighter archer archetype.
2) Don't dump the Fort save, instead ADD the Refl good save, and leave Brave alone. Other classes (like the Ranger) do this, and it doesn't unbalance the game.
3) Either improve the Deeds, or increase the base amount of Grit, or both. Use stat mod +3 for Grit, like the Cleric's Channel Energy, but remove the recharge ability entirely. And make the Deeds worth spending Grit on, really. And have Deeds cost different amounts of Grit based on their utility, anywhere from 0-2 points. 0 for minor abilities, 2 for major things, like getting a free Reflex save reroll with a bonus.
Really, Gunslinger needs more love than it currently gets. Especially at low levels.
As with everything the designers have an idea of what they want something to be/do. They ask us for our ideas and feed back before they give us the final draft which will still be what they imagined. Their trying to please all the people all of the time.
What we have is the power to say how something works in our games not everyone-elses, so if you want to let gunslingers multiclass with fighter then go for it. If it doesnt work as you imagine it then just change back after all its your game the designers just do their best to give you great stuff to work with in the first place.
The issue though is that Paizo is making these rules, and as a playtest are not finalized yet. Why I started this thread is to point out that making the Gunslinger a subset of the Fighter causes a lot of problems because, if you follow the established rules, you can't rectify one big problem with the Gunslinger, namely being feat-starved.
In my mind, it makes more sense for the Gunslinger, as it currently stands, to be it's own base class. To anchor it to the Alchemist as some people have suggested, cuts you off from being able to do the whole guns and bombs character concept.
Perhaps the next playtest document will have solved a lot of the issues, but right now the Gunslinger is suffering in many ways, among them being a Fighter variant.
I agree +1, but all I was saying there was that some people were saying, 'Yes you can multi-class into a fighter.' But really you can't because you ARE a fighter.
I think that gunslingers should be a variant RANGER than a variant FIGHTER. As he is now, he´s not only a poor missile fighter he´s also a perfect loser as a solo character.
He should receive more ranks of abilities. He should be able to explore, ride, take cover, ambush, intimidate and gamble and with only two ranks he will become a new mobile and exotic wand for the team.
|
|
So, why is such a neutered version of a class considered to be a Fighter variant?
It gives up way too much to still be comparable to any of the fighter variants from the APG.
Consider:
Swap Fort for Reflex as the sole good save
Swap Brave for Brave and Tough, so you lose only part of the Fort save giveaway, but it still is only a partial recompense.
Give up over half your bonus feats for Deeds. Deeds that are of both more limited utility as the feats, but also of limited uses per day.
Give up using a composite longbow with free reload for a musket or pistol with slower than a crossbow reload speeds, and only limited ability to add to damage.
Agreed. To stay a Fighter variant, some things have to stay the same. the only thing that is the same as a fighter is BAB, which is also the same as the Ranger, Paladin, Cavalier.
Either improve the Deeds, or increase the base amount of Grit, or both. Use stat mod +3 for Grit, like the Cleric's...
Don't dump the Fort save, instead ADD the Reflex good save, and leave Brave alone. Other classes (like the Ranger) do this, and it doesn't unbalance the game. Another argument to base this on the Ranger instead.
Agreed. Grit (and Deeds) have to balance out the loss of Feats to the Gunslinger. They don't have to be better than Feats if they are specifically for the principal weapon of this class.