.
Ok, so guns attack a creature Touch AC.
There should to be another defense that helps prevent this.
Just as magical creatures have more Spell Resistance vs spell. Why not this magical nature also translated into a natural defense vs being effected by guns.
....................................................................
Let Spell Resistance also act as a natural defense vs guns. The only difference instead of 1d20+ Caster level.... you use 1d20+ Character level.
If you beat the creatures SR, then you get to attack its Touch AC, with a gun.
If you do not beat the creatures SR, then you use the creatures normal AC, with a gun.
(roll once for every shot, just as you do for every spell)
.............
(ok had though up a new stat Gun Resistance, which could be added to hide, Half-plate, Full-plate armor and creatures. To do the listed above. The only problem, is then you have to go back and add that to all the Bestiary's. So i dropped that idea, as not needed. Then i though, well if a creature is magical enough to have spell resistance, then it is magical enough to be resistance to the effect of guns being able to hit ones Touch AC).
The touch attack is one of the only things that make Gunslingers viable lets not help out their problem
The touch attack is one of the only things that make Gunslingers viable lets not help out their problem
+1
And everything else as guns are a physical attack. Any method of preventing a gun from hitting would work just as well on a sword.
Guns are a physical attack, that does not work like a physical attack compared to all other physical attacks.
Guns work like spell, while not allowing any of the normal spell defenses creatures have developed vs spells.
There is already a mechanic for resisting physical attacks, DR.
Guns work almost like brilliant energy weapons, actually, which are most definitely physical attacks.
Guns work almost like brilliant energy weapons, actually, which are most definitely physical attacks.
Yes, but Brilliant energy is a Magic effect that cost +4 bonus... Which means when you add in the +1 magic weapon requirement.
All brilliant weapon would be (+5 total bonus magic weapons).
...............
Which lead back to my slightly changed saying =
Guns are a physical attack, that does not work like a physical attack compared to all other physical attacks. (Brilliant energy is a magic effect).
Guns work like magic, while not allowing any of the normal magic defenses creatures have developed vs magic.
Guns are relatively new to Galorian, creatures haven't had time to develop a defense against it.
Guns are relatively new to Galorian, creatures haven't had time to develop a defense against it.
Do you not mean, the creatures have not gone extinct yet. Dinosaurs have very low Touch AC, and no Damage Resistance (no spell resistance either).
...........
Ancient gold dragon = Has Touch AC 5, DR 15/magic..... but by the time you fight a dragon you would have a +1 magic gun. So again no DR.
The dragon does have SR 31 tho.... so my idea was use SR that is already listed for creatures. You shoot the gun, if you beat the SR, use the Touch AC 5, if you do not make the SR then use AC 39.
Unlike spells, the gun is not negated... it just uses the normal AC.
This would give magic creatures with SR, at least a saving throw effect vs the touch ac attack, buy making it a Normal AC attack.
Spell compendium, scintillating scales. Turns Nat AC into Deflection. All dragons should have it.
Oliver three questions:
1. How does this make the game better?
2. How does this make any sense?
3. How is the gun so "good" that it needs to suck more?
1) This give magic creatures a saving throw vs touch attacks. So that magical creatures can survive. As a DM, i care about game balance. Right now giving guns a Touch attack while not giving an defense vs it is unbalanced.
Guns do as much damage, as other melee weapons. The only limiting factor to guns is Price (which Pathfinder has made unreasonable), and rate of fire (which is solved with revolvers, and feats).
2) This makes as much since as giving a weapon a range touch attack effect in the first place. Magic creatures, throw there SR have a defense vs being Touch AC shot by changing the shot to normal AC shot. You can always beat the Normal AC, just like you do with any other normal weapon.
This still lets you get off Touch attack vs normal armor, normal animals, and any creature without SR.
3) The reason the gun (bad at this time) is because of price (again which pathfinder has made unreasonable), and rate of of fire ( which is solved with revolvers, and feats).
I do not want the gun to be bad, but i do not want it to be so good, that guns are the only weapon people care around, because they give such an advantage that there is no reason to care around anything else.
Fixing the gun does not mean, making it a super weapon. Fixing the gun, means fixing the problems that making the gun not function; work up to standard vs other melee/range weapon.
If they cut the price by a factor of 10, then people can afford multi-guns. This would allow players to do the same thing that was done in history.
Carry around 6-8 single shot guns, pull shot drop, up to the character max number of attack due to BAB.
Guns are not melee weapons (and this argument is really stupid -- bows do as much damage as melee weapons -- as do crossbows, slings and javelins). The major limiting factors to guns are:
1. Feats -- takes exotic weapon proficiency and rapid reload. There is a reason people don't use repeating crossbows.
2. Speed of fire -- Yeah this is the biggest one, as you can't really get many shots off until 11th level in a specific class.
3. Misfire -- you break your gun, not a problem with the bow, and then the gun can explode as well.
4. Lackadaisical damage -- Slings, javelins, thrown weapons and bows can all add in strength to the damage. The gun cannot and cannot use deadly aim in the first range increment too.
A gun is completely mundane -- just like alchemist fire. Are you going to require alchemist fire to roll SR? Are you going to have SR apply to magical weapons? What is the caster level of a gun? The idea doesn't even work on the system mechanics side, never mind fluff.
The gun is far from a super weapon -- in fact it is the single worse weapon in the game.
In fact I'll repeat that in big letters and bold because it is so stunningly true:
(this isn't because people can't hear, or to be rude -- it's just such a fundamentally flawed weapon that it bears shouting about)
oliver, before you do this unnessecary nerf to the one class weaker than monks, let me tell you something.
there already are existing defenses against guns.
damage reduction
any creature with the gift of flight
touch ac
the deflect arrows feat
weather effects
miss chances
cover/concealment
dropping prone and entering the fetal position
and a decent amount of low level spells i will not bother listing because it would make the list too massive. some of these are good against most attacks, but a select few were made to greatly frustrate ranged combatants
is this a sufficient list of defenses?
Edit; Abraham Spalding has some good points as well.
1) then fix the feat problem
2) will be fixed with better guns
3) Misfire is bad, kind of like requiring bow/crossbow string break or weapon break with every hit. That really should disappear from guns. No other weapon is forced with that requirement.
4) The Dead Aim feat does need an FAQ/Errant, so does not apply to spell but does applies to guns. If they have a damage problem, this needs to be addressed as a damage problem (touch attack will not fix this).
While guns are mundane weapon. Creature with SR are not mundane creatures, and i see no reason why that SR can not be used to help shield there AC vs guns (( and vs flask, as this game mechanic become more and more prevalent )).
Back in 2nd ed, Damage Resistance did not exist, but it evolved to serve a purpose. So to does SR need to be upgrade to provide resistance, vs physical touch attacks.
Actually damage resistance did exist in 2ed.
Also as the rules currently don't allow SR to apply to anything that isn't a spell or spell like ability I can't find a way to even start to think this makes any sense whatsoever.
Might as well say "Oh, they are not mundane creatures so their SR should work on all mundane attacks!"
It isn't what SR is, it isn't what SR is supposed to do, and it isn't needed.
While I agree the gun needs fixed this does not fix it -- we would be better off dropping the line that allows it to work as a touch weapon.
Honestly though -- as a GM I would rather see someone using a firearm because it is a touch weapon than using a composite mighty longbow and full attacking with rapid shot, manyshot, and deadly aim -- fewer shots means the fight lasts longer (same with reload).
Basically put as it currently stands -- there is no need for this to nerf guns even more.
They have a single benefit to use currently: They use touch ac in the first range increment. There is absolutely no reason to kick them in the junk when they already aren't worth anything to begin with.
QUOTE="Abraham spalding" Actually damage resistance did exist in 2ed. = vs magic energy attack. Not vs Physical attacks.
Also as the rules currently don't allow SR to apply to anything that isn't a spell or spell like ability I can't find a way to even start to think this makes any sense whatsoever. = True. But before guns, you did not have a melee or range weapon (not counting 1d6 flask, before alchemicalist), that allowed you to bypass normal AC while doing 4d8+ damage. They added a new game mechanic by adding Touch AC attack to weapon, SR now need to be updated to help balance this out.
Might as well say "Oh, they are not mundane creatures so their SR should work on all mundane attacks!" Not all mundane attack.... ALL mundane attacks that target there Touch AC. Normal attack that target the creatures flat-footed or normal ac work as normal. Touch AC attack would have to beat SR. This is to balance out the over use of allowing Touch attack by mundane weapons.
It isn't what SR is, it isn't what SR is supposed to do, and it isn't needed. = There i will agree that we disagree
While I agree the gun needs fixed this does not fix it -- we would be better off dropping the line that allows it to work as a touch weapon. = Agree this does not fix guns. Never said this fixed guns. This fixes the problem that guns causes to Touch AC. Other stuff needs to be done to fix guns....This is ment as a fix for a problem that guns causse magical creatures.
Honestly though -- as a GM I would rather see someone using a firearm because it is a touch weapon than using a composite mighty longbow and full attacking with rapid shot, manyshot, and deadly aim -- fewer shots means the fight lasts longer (same with reload). = I would rather see more people using Slings, blowguns, darks, sherkens, and guns. That is not a problem with guns... That is a problem with giving Bows an unfair advantage, to promote bow use.
Basically put as it currently stands -- there is no need for this to nerf guns even more. This is not to nerf guns, guns have lots of problems, those problem need to be fixed. This is to fix a problem that touch ac attack cause vs magical creatures, from mundane sources.
They have a single benefit to use currently: They use touch ac in the first range increment. There is absolutely no reason to kick them in the junk when they already aren't worth anything to begin with. = Guns need to be fixed. Allowed a badly design weapon to have the ability to do Touch attack, just because it is badly designed, does not fix the need to repair the damage that Touch attack cause magical creatures. Nor does allowing Touch AC fix the bad design that guns currently have/use.
You are incorrect on the first part -- werewolves for example had damage resistance -- not the term used but several other monsters did too -- they either didn't take damage except from certain weapons or reduced damage taken from others.
Guns do not do "4d8" damage -- guns with three feats do "4d8" damage -- and that is crap damage to do at 16th level. You should know that -- the damage of the other weapons at that point in the game is easily 3 to 4 times that. So having them do "4d8" damage after including at least 5 feats isn't amazing.
just like to throw in that alchemist bombs ignore SR and are touch attacks that do waaay more then the 1d10 musket. How many threads on here do you see calling them super OP?
Oliver must be greatly misguided in thinking that a mundane touch attack should require a spell resistance roll.
3 feats and 16 levels to do 4d8 damage once per 2 rounds. with a 20 foot range touch attack.
let me tell you how easy it is to negate the gun
there already are existing defenses against guns.
damage reduction
any creature with the gift of flight
touch ac
the deflect arrows feat
weather effects
miss chances
cover/concealment
dropping prone and entering the fetal position
and a decent amount of low level spells i will not bother listing because it would make the list too massive. some of these are good against most attacks, but a select few were made to greatly frustrate ranged combatants
is this a sufficient list of defenses?
there are already a bunch of spells that ignore spell resistance and are far nastier than a single 4d8 ranged touch attack and don't consume any feats unlike the touch attack. and don't cost a dime to cast either.
You are incorrect on the first part -- werewolves for example had damage resistance -- not the term used but several other monsters did too -- they either didn't take damage except from certain weapons or reduced damage taken from others.
Guns do not do "4d8" damage -- guns with three feats do "4d8" damage -- and that is crap damage to do at 16th level. You should know that -- the damage of the other weapons at that point in the game is easily 3 to 4 times that. So having them do "4d8" damage after including at least 5 feats isn't amazing.
...........
To = Shadow_of_death,
Before alchemist bombs came along... flask usually did 1d6 damage. Yes, this is another new class. This added bombs to the game. The adding of SR vs Physical Touch AC would also help vs alchemist bombs.
One or two minor things can be accepted as exception, but when they add new features that change how Armor works for most creatures. Then some balancing factor need to be added to the creatures. SR is already listed for most magical creatures and not mundane creatures. Having it change Touch AC back to Normal AC, would still let you hit normal AC for full damage.
So after you take 4 levels in gunslinger, and levels in rogue, and a bunch of feats, and spend a bunch of money you can finally do crap damage on a touch attack -- and that's not right.
But it is ok for someone to take levels in fighter and rogue and a bunch of feats, and spend a bunch of money to do even more damage on regular attacks -- that they can't miss on -- and that's ok?
I think your perceptions are not quite matching the math here, in even the least bit, and are lacking in logic.
After all there are feats that allow you to use any weapon to do a touch attack -- which will do more damage and match the gunslinger's capstone ability at much least cost and do much better in every way but you aren't railing away at it -- and that is core.
Oliver, must you really hate guns so much?
i listed a bunch of perfectly valid defenses against guns. you need not ignore me. and besides, magical creatures aren't known for thier innate resistance to physical attacks, they are known for thier innate resistance to magical spells. of which guns and alchemist bombs are not. dragons laugh at the silly little man with the thunderstick as all you need to do to negate a touch attack is to stay out of it's touch range. something that can easily be done by anyone with access to a flight speed.
EDIT; Abraham listed more good points.
if it isn't broken for the alchemist then don't fix it for the gunslinger
After all there are feats that allow you to use any weapon to do a touch attack -- which will do more damage and match the gunslinger's capstone ability at much least cost and do much better in every way but you aren't railing away at it -- and that is core.
Can you please point me to those feats?
After all there are feats that allow you to use any weapon to do a touch attack -- which will do more damage and match the gunslinger's capstone ability at much least cost and do much better in every way but you aren't railing away at it -- and that is core.Can you please point me to those feats?
Pinpoint Targeting, core rulebook.
EDIT: Ranged attack only.
Kierato is correct -- I had it partially confused with deadly stroke as well.
Oliver I don't disagree with the basic premise of where you are going -- the guns as presently shown don't really work for me either and the touch AC mechanic is a failure of design in my opinion.
However I do not think adding another special rule just for fire arms fixes this in anyway, adds more confusion and worry about how the rules work, doesn't have precedent, and honestly isn't of such worry to actually desire or need such a rule as you propose.
The gunslinger can possibly get off a touch attack with every attack of his full attack after level 11. However he is still out spending everyone else to do it, he's not actually doing any damage of worth (currently) and the firearms are crap for anyone else.
As such I feel anything like what you are proposing isn't needed.
.
Ok, so guns attack a creature Touch AC.
There should to be another defense that helps prevent this.Just as magical creatures have more Spell Resistance vs spell. Why not this magical nature also translated into a natural defense vs being effected by guns.
....................................................................
Let Spell Resistance also act as a natural defense vs guns. The only difference instead of 1d20+ Caster level.... you use 1d20+ Character level.
If you beat the creatures SR, then you get to attack its Touch AC, with a gun.
If you do not beat the creatures SR, then you use the creatures normal AC, with a gun.(roll once for every shot, just as you do for every spell)
.............
(ok had though up a new stat Gun Resistance, which could be added to hide, Half-plate, Full-plate armor and creatures. To do the listed above. The only problem, is then you have to go back and add that to all the Bestiary's. So i dropped that idea, as not needed. Then i though, well if a creature is magical enough to have spell resistance, then it is magical enough to be resistance to the effect of guns being able to hit ones Touch AC).
sooo youre saying we need to finf a way to make guns ans gunslingers more nerfed than they already are?
I like guns and was looking forward to having guns in Pathfinder.
I would like to see the gunslinger class.
They both need work to fix the problem with them.
................................
As a DM,
That being said, i have another problem.
DEAD Magic Creatures. Creatures that have no defense vs Touch Attacks.
DR works when ambushed, but not when you go after the creature.
DR 15/silver = with non-magic gun with silver bullets has = ZERO damage resistance.
DR 15/Cold-Iron = with non-magic gun with cold-iron bullets has = Zero damage resistance.
Dragons with 15/magic = with +1 magic gun with any bullets has = Zero damage resistance.
..................
If the past, these creatures could depend on being hard to hit, because you would target there normal AC. Now, that is no longer the case.
Now you have Dead Magic creatures.
..................
As a DM, which creatures i now throw at the party, will have to total change. No longer will you be seeing slow, huge creatures. Now you will come across fast, Dex based creatures. Defection will be the new magic item... Ring/bracer/vest etc.
Worst come to worst, you will see new re-skin creatures with Immunity to physical attack. Immunity to touch attack, Immunity to bullets, etc..... I DO NOT WANT TO HAVE TO GO THERE, I DO NOT WANT THIS. I hated seeing this happen to magic, this creature becoming immune to magic or that creature immune to all spell that grant SR. And yet, i watch just that same thing happen in 2nd ed, and 3rd ed.
.................
As a Player
Guns as presented in the Playtest, will be used by my character, regardless of class or race, after 10th level. They may not be my main weapon, but they will be one of the weapon that I now want to have (and i will have 4 guns +1 magic bonus) = 15% of total wealth. The advantage they give is vs some creatures is just to great to ignore. The disadvantage would be not much greater than using a non-bow range weapons.
ummm oh noe he did 24 damage to a freaking dragon at level 16. wait whats the problem?
Edit: you do know anyone with truestrike can do this too right?
Be very careful. In many cases where you're close enough to attack touch AC, you'll be in a creature's reach (large or larger with a reach weapon or gargantuan and up with normal reach).
|
I guess that somebody needs to roll a 3.5 Binder in Oliver's game, and have him cry when he spams Level/d6 at-will damage that comes from a Su source and laughs at Spell Resistance. And DR. And any other defenses short of AMF.
Yet, nobody runs around the Interwebz shouting that Binders are broken.
Maybe that'll put things in some perspective.
I guess that somebody needs to roll a 3.5 Binder in Oliver's game, and have him cry when he spams Level/d6 at-will damage that comes from a Su source and laughs at Spell Resistance. And DR. And any other defenses short of AMF.
Yet, nobody runs around the Interwebz shouting that Binders are broken.
Maybe that'll put things in some perspective.
Sorry, never bought or used 3rd ed Tome of Magic book.
Did not like the look of it at the book store, so passed on it.Took 15 minute of Search-Fu to figure out what you were talking about.
Seriously though, Oliver, check out the Gunslinger's damage output versus an archery focused fighter. Its rubbish.
Level 5 archer focused Fighter has: WF(longbow), Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Deadly Aim, Rapid Shot, Weapon Spec(Longbow) + another Feat if they are Human. Also, they have Weapon Training(bows) for an extra +1 to hit and damage with the Longbow. With 16 STR and DEX, totally reasonable stats, and a non magical +3 STR composite bow, their full attack routine is something like +7/+7 1d8+10/1d8+10 (average of 14.5 each) if inside 30 feet. Its +6/+6 for the same damage out to 110 feet. Note I'm not even using the Archer archetype to do this, its a Core only build.
Level 5 Pistol Gunslinger has: Rapid Reload, Quick Draw, Two Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (Pistol) + another Feat if they are Human (Point Blank Shot, presumably). He also gets Gun Training for a +1 to hit and +DEX to damage. It should be REALLY obvious just from here that the archer fighter is significantly better, but lets do the math anyway. With 18 DEX and four non magical pistols, the Pistol Gunslingers full attack is +7/+7 against touch attack up to 20 feet for 1d8+4/1d8+4 (average of 8.5 each) damage each. At 40 feet, that drops to +5/+5 against FULL AC for the same damage. The Pistol Gunslinger can also only Full Attack two rounds in a combat without taking a full round out with Rapid Reload to reload two pistols.
Basically, the Gunslinger does about 60% of the damage of an archery focused fighter (8.5 vs 14.5). It does its damage more consistently against targets with a low touch AC, but the archer does more damage against targets with just a flat low AC, or opponents such as high dex rogues or mage armored casters who have about the same normal AC as they have touch AC.
Also, Greater Vital Striking with a Pistol is still crap compared to full attacking with an archer focused fighter. 4d8+DEX+Magic bonus dice is crap compared to 2d8+STR+Weapon Spec+Weapon Training+Magic bonus dice/1d8+all of those bonuses again/1d8+all of those bonuses again/1d8+all of those bonuses again/1d8+all of those bonuses again. Seriously, Manyshot + Rapid shot puts 6d8 of arrows in the air, and deal the static damage bonuses and elemental enchantment damage bonuses FIVE TIMES.
Plus, in case it wasn't obvious before, the Feat Tax of Rapid Reload/Quick Draw/TWF and getting fewer bonus feats means the Gunslinger has to make some really tough choices in terms of feat selection, and give more other abilities up, if he does want to get the Vital Strike chain anyway.
I actually quite like the Gunslinger class, but he REALLY doesn't need to be made to do less damage.
Also, the point seems to be moot...page 6 of the Ultimate Combat Playtest states:
"While the gunslinger utilizes these rules, the following are
only included in the playtest so that you can play the gunslinger.
These rules are final and not open for playtest." (emphasis mine)
By the same token, those are rules printed in the Inner Sea campaign guide, due out next month, as opposed to rules for Ultimate Combat, due in August. Obviously there's an uproar over the rules as written, so assuming they're paying attention (and hey, its Paizo, they do!) they should realize that maybe those rules jive for Golarion but not so much PFRPG at large.
|
Be very careful. In many cases where you're close enough to attack touch AC, you'll be in a creature's reach (large or larger with a reach weapon or gargantuan and up with normal reach).
+1
Your ancient gold dragon, from your earlier example, is Guargantuan, so 20' is well within his threatened area, so firing your gun provokes an attack of opportunity, or costs you grit to not provoke.
Sure, if you somehow manage to survive and get within 20' of that dragon, you will hit on anything but a 1. Then again, it is possible to build a "normal" combatant to do the same against its normal AC by that same area.
Assuming your Gunslinger had a starting Dex of 16, Wis of 16, and Con of 14, spent his level boosts on Dex, and has a +6 Dex item, his effective Dex will be 27, for a +8 from Dex, +20 from level (assuming level 20 against a CR 20 creature), and +3 from his weapon, gives a +31 so a good chance against the normal AC.
Damage? 4d8+X bit, for a SINGLE shot. Assuming the rare bit possible crit, you can do 7d8+4x damage. Which almost certainly won't be enough to kill a 377 hit point dragon.
Now, let's be generous for your AC. 8 for Dex, 5 for +5 armor, 6 for it being breastplate, and somehow enchanted to allow your full Dex bonus (a fighter can do it, with armor training and Mithril, but Gunslingers don't get that bonus), Ring of Protection +5, Amulet of Natural Armor +5, for an AC of 39 right now, and I know it should be higher.
Dragon's attack bonus? +36 to +34 per attack. Let's say it is attacking your AC of 45; with an average of 50% hits. Let us further assume that you were lucky and got max hit points every level, and took the favored class bonus as hit points. That gives your Gunslinger 260 hit points.
Dragon damage for the full attack you are in 5' step range of?
Bite: 4d6+21=35, so 17 points of damage
2 claws: 2d8+14=23, so 23 points of damage from claws
2 wings: 2d6+7=14, so 14 points of damage from the wings
tail: 2d8+21=30, so 15 points from the tail
Total average damage, ignoring critical hits: 69 points of damage
Not bad, you might survive several rounds that way.
Until it starts flying beyond your touch attack range, and pulls out its 20d10 breath weapon, for an average damage of 110 points before save. DC 31 for the Reflex save, so you have a chance, with your Cloak of Resistance +5, + 8 from Dex and +12 from class, for a total of +25. Hmm, need a 6 or better, so 75% change of only taking 55 points of damage. So, stand off far enough to get full AC against the Gunslinger, whose weapon accuracy is also dropping by significant amounts, say 120' in the air, at the limit of the breath weapon, which has no limitations on its use, so he is taking 55 damage per round, with 1 in 4 rounds 110, so he is at the following amounts of amage:
55
110
165
275 (oops, dead!)
Meanwhile, at 11 GP per pop, the Gunslinger is trying to hit with his musket, since it is out of range of his pistol, at -4, so only +27 to hit, so less than 50% chance each round for your 4d12+15 (approximate) damage= 41 points, rare spurts to 7d12+60= 105 points of damage from a crit.
Who wins?
Almost certainly the dragon. Especially since it also has spells it can use, including Greater Teleport, Heal, Stoneskin, Haste, Cure Moderate Wounds, and Mage Armor (to boost its touch and normal AC).
Only 5 Greater Teleports, but 7 Heals. Ummm. Gunslinger dead. Multiple times, really. Touch AC ability negated or non-issue, really.
The Gunslinger is better off using his 1d12+15 attack on his iteratives, usually, using Signature Deed Lightning Reload. Still not as good as the archer, with similar damage, and more arrows (Manyshot), and ability to use better armor, have more feats, use Gravity Bow (if Ranger or UMD), etc.
Hehehe... the dragon at 120' is 20 feet outside of the maximum range of the pistol. Heck same is true at 105'.
Hehehe... the dragon at 120' is 20 feet outside of the maximum range of the pistol. Heck same is true at 105'.
An adult black dragon is CR 11 and has a base AC of 28. A pistol, by Pathfinder's rules, costs about 1,000 gp, so you could buy 50 flasks of alchemist fire with that, or 100 flasks of acid (but I'm using a black dragon as an example, so no acid here). So the problem you complain about is already there; you just don't know enough about the game to realize it.
A dragon can surround himself with a silent image that doesn't bother it because of its sensory abilities, but grants a 50% concealment bonus to anyone who doesn't come touch the fake wall and get a will save, meaning unless you're sportin' mass amounts of true sight, the dragon just owned your guns with a 1st level spell.
If you're within range of the dragon's touch AC, then you're also within range of the dragon's breath. Also within range of the dragon's 180 ft frightful presence which will panic everything below 5th level, which means the vast majority of the low-level, NPC classed, world.
This is assuming the dragon hasn't used protection from arrows, stoneskin, or displacement to laugh at your touch attacks, since you'll now need a +1 adamantine weapon to bug him, and still suffer a 50% miss chance. If you have the resources to overcome all that, congratulations, you're an adventurer and have wasted your money 'cause you could still have hit him harder and for more damage more easily with a bow.
Adult Black Dragon is CR 11.
It's an epic encounter for a group at level 8.
At level 8, an archery based Fighter can support the following attack routine with his bow: +16/+16/+16/+11, with a damage of 2d8+18/1d8+9/1d8+9/1d8+9 without Deadly Aim. Now if he uses Deadly Aim, his accuracy drops to +13/+13/+13/+8, but his damage rises to 2d8+50/1d8+25/1d8+25/1d8+25, so assuming you hit with only 1 of them, it could punch strait through the dragon's DR 10/adamantine stoneskin and deal more damage than the single gun would.
Also, the fighter can carry a few arrows of dragonbane at a cost of 160 gp each, which increase the attack and damage of his bow by +2/+2 and +2d6, making his attack routine something like this: +15/+15/+15/+10 and 2d8+54+2d6/1d8+27+2d6/1d8+27+2d6/1d8+27+2d6.
/case.