READER: before you tell me that the firearm rules arent up for playtest, read my thread. This is primarily to show the differences between the new firearm rules, and the old ones, to help identify problems with the rules and find ways that the Gunslinger can work around the ruleset it is shackled to. I do suggest that if the reason they arent up for playtest is becuase it is too late to alter them as printed for the Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Inner Sea World Guide , that the Designers at least consider offering alternate rules in Ultimate Combat, which we are play-testing now.
3.5
Pistol: 1400gp Dmg:1d6 Crit:x2 Range:60ft Reload:MoveAction
Musket: 1800gp Dmg:1d8 Crit:x3 Range:90ft Reload:FullRound
Bullets: 1gp for 10bullets, no mention of black powder
optional: misfire rules, exploding dice
No rapid reload feat without house rule
Playtest
Pistol: 1000gp Dmg:1d8 Crit:x4 Range:20ft Reload:Standard
Musket: 1500gp Dmg:1d12 Crit:x4 Range:40ft Reload:FullRound
Bullets: 1gp per bullet
Black Powder: 10gp per shot
Misfire Mandatory, rapid reload reduces to Move/Standard
CHANGES:
-made rapid reload usable with firearms(at first i though, YAY!)
but then
-Greatly increased reload times (it only takes a single move action to reload a single shot pistol in 3.5. Now, it takes a Standard. why would you do that? Even with rapid reload, your rate of fire is far below what it was with the previous ruleset, and rapid reload is mandatory here, or the class is unplayable! This is a feat tax! Damage per round relies on actually being able to attack!)
-The new rules slightly increased average base damage (1-2pts, only matters when you critical, really, and since your reload times are crap, and your damage output is crap, this is insignificant)
-slightly reduced weapon cost (not enough to be significant)
and then they
-increased price per shot more than x11 (what!? Firearms were already cost prohibitive, and now instead of just paying 1/10gp per shot, im paying 11gp per shot. Why would i do that? Even from a setting standpoint, it would be cheaper to hire a dozen or more hirelings with bows than to fire my gun ONCE.)
-make you carry explosives (you guys made a deliberate effort to NOT do this to the alchemist, and also made a deliberate effort to cut the cost-of-entry barrier to that class. Now im paying 10gp per shot to be a walking powder-keg. I dont understand why you would do the opposite here.)
and then they
-made misfire mandatory (what!? why! There is no misfire on an alchemists bomb, a ninjas poison, or chance that a crossbow or bow will just break during regular use! BUT WORSE! If it misfires again before i can fix it, it explodes, and many dm's will likely rule that this detonates the walking powderkeg that is my character. This makes every gun virtually a CURSED ITEM. Backbiter Spear much?)
-Reduced range drastically (which rules out sniping)
so they could
-made them touch attacks (which would be cool, but it ruins deadly aim, which is the major source of ranged damage now, other than the specialization, and the fighter's weapon training.)
-eliminates exploding dice optional rule (this is good house keeping)
so they could
-increased critical multiplier to x4 (which sounds nice, but in pathfinder, increased critical multipliers aren't worth nearly as much as critical threat ranges,specially with the critical feats, and a higher multiplier does very little for average damage output. Thats why everyone uses scimitars and no one uses scythes. Whats worse, the Gunslinger refuels grit on a critical, and tries to be a controller, which is synergistic with the critical feats, so you would think he would focus on a weapon with a higher critical threat than multiplier.)
As written, the firearm rules are just horrible, and playtesting the Gunslinger with these rules is difficult mostly because of the flaws of the rules as written.
HOWEVER SINCE THEY ARENT FOR PLAYTEST, here are my suggestions on a few ways that the Gunslinger, and any other firearm using archetypes can work around the flaws of the rules:
-gunslingers shouldnt have to deal with misfire at all. (They should get an ability similar to poison use so that any firearm they use has no risk of misfire. Maybe restrict it to firearms they are familiar with, or masterwork firearms only.)
-gunslingers should be able to produce their own black powder (Maybe just a craft alchemy check? Or craft gunsmithing? Or something to the effect of assuming that he has the "material components" of his not-as-good-as-magic-missile ability to fire a gun? This would help deal with the cost-per-shot. It should also be explicitly stated that black powder is like an alchemists bombs, and inert when not loaded in a firearm. I dont care about realism here, i care about playability.)
-damage per round should be addressed
(There are two basic ways to do this: increase damage output to compensate for low rate of fire, using a feat or class ability to do so, or reduce reload times to give a higher rate of fire.
There is no reason that Gun training couldnt be rewritten to have a higher damage yield, to compensate with the loss of deadly aim.
Alternately, you just grant rapid reload to the gunslinger, with an addendum that reduces his reload times even further, or increases the number of slots of capacity filled with each action, like if a single move action could reload two slots of capacity.
A third option is to give the gunslinger a feat similar to power attack, but instead of reducing BAB to increase damage, he could reduce crit multiplier to increase damage, or crit threat. This stretches out of precedent however.)
None of what ive mentioned deals with the problems inherent to the gunslinger class (low grit, poor deeds) which likely, should be its own class and not an alternate fighter.
This thread only illustrates problems that arise due to the rules themselves, and suggests a few work-around that would be needed for any class that focused on firearms.
So thats it. I look forward to discussion.
I'm also rooting through my 3.5 materials to see how it was done elsewhere.
Basically, across most iterations of the weapons, they're expensive heavy crossbows that requires feats and expensive ammo. Weapons themselves, I'm keen on dropping the damage die a level and adding one; 1d6 becomes 2d4. I'm also keen on exploding dice. I'm crunching numbers now, but that bump in damage could offset reload times.
I'm also for gunslinger attacks that effectively consume ammo for special shots and abilities; flavor it as special blends of powder, ways to pack the weapons, etc. With all of the talk about ranger builds as opposed to fighter builds, I'm looking at the spells rangers get and seeing what could be done to put special attacks on par with spells of similar levels.
Basically, across most iterations of the weapons, they're expensive heavy crossbows that requires feats and expensive ammo. Weapons themselves, I'm keen on dropping the damage die a level and adding one; 1d6 becomes 2d4. I'm also keen on exploding dice. I'm crunching numbers now, but that bump in damage could offset reload times.
All this is beside the point, since we cant hope for a change in the actual firearm rules, and what the playtest is going for is a "class side" fix for the crappy firearm rules. Still, i dont mind discussing your house rule.
I use This Website for calculating average damage
Average damage on a 1d6 weapon with a x4 crit is 3.824
Average damage on a 2d4 weapon with a x4 crit is 5.462
So thats an increase, per shot, of barely 2 points? Bringing Deadly Aim back into the mix alone would do more than that, and scale with level. It would cost some to hit, though. Id favor something like letting the Gunslinger get his Dex to damage on the first shot of the round.
Exploding dice are ok, but also highly conditional and do wonky things to probability, not to mention how much extra time it takes to roll all that damage, and how unlikely you are to get it when you need it. I despise them.
I'm also for gunslinger attacks that effectively consume ammo for special shots and abilities; flavor it as special blends of powder, ways to pack the weapons, etc. With all of the talk about ranger builds as opposed to fighter builds, I'm looking at the spells rangers get and seeing what could be done to put special attacks on par with spells of similar levels.
This is more cinematic than anything else, and would probably have more of a place in a prestige class than in the 20 level class. That said, i don't so much mind the status effects the gunslinger can toss around, which is part of why i favor widening the crit threat range to allow for the use of more critical hit feats.
3.824 is the average damage of both a 1d6 x4 weapon AND a 1d6 18-20x2 weapon, but the second would allow for using the critical hit feats much much more often.
One of the biggest things that bother me about the playtest is that i feel mistakes were made that have been corrected elsewhere.
The alchemist doesnt have to carry explosives or worry about his bombs detonating in his bag, or hand. Why do gunslingers have to worry about misfire or explosion? Why do i need a sackful of black powder!?
For years, people saw crossbows as useless, due to the high reload time. The Crossbow Mastery feat is the fix paizo came up with for this: letting people full attack and not need to spend actions to reload.
My houserule with the 3.5 pathfinder firearms has been:
Firearms work EXACTLY LIKE CROSSBOWS, and any feat that would work with a crossbow, work with an equivalent firearm.
Light crossbows = pistols, or any one handed firearm.
heavy crossbows = rifles, or any two handed firearm.
Voila, firearms are at least as good as horrible crossbows. :]
I abhor the current firearms rules especially the touch attack part since this makes guns the best choice against 90% of all monsters at short range and doesn't make any sense in a historical perspective.
IMO I think they should just remove the touch attack and misfire rules and divide the cost of guns by ten. Then they would be just fine and reasonably balanced against other weapons.
If they do have to keep some special rules, change the touch AC thing to an attack against flat-footed AC within short range, making guns a great weapon for rogues (Pirates) and allowing creatures with uncanny dodge the ability to "dodge bullets". This also fixes the whole deadly aim issue with guns at short range. If the misfire rules are absolutely necessary then the gunslinger at least should ignore them.
I also find it silly that the deflect arrows and snatch arrows feats work against guns.
IMO I think they should just remove the touch attack and misfire rules and divide the cost of guns by ten. Then they would be just fine and reasonably balanced against other weapons.
Really, that would make pistols expensive light crossbows~ While I agree the price is insane, we still need to justify the added cost, as well as the added cost of the ammo & powder.
If they do have to keep some special rules, change the touch AC thing to an attack against flat-footed AC within short range, making guns a great weapon for rogues (Pirates) and allowing creatures with uncanny dodge the ability to "dodge bullets". This also fixes the whole deadly aim issue with guns at short range. If the misfire rules are absolutely necessary then the gunslinger at least should ignore them.
I was kind of scratching my head on that. FF makes more sense, and what I used in a write-up, as opposed to touch AC. Yea, at that point you're looking at the "hit", but does it damage? Good armor says no, it glances and that's that.
I do like the misfire rules, also something along the lines of what I had in a writeup. There's this anal need to be historical, fine, firearms weren't very reliable historically. Weapons misfired. I think they need to expand the pool of effects should a weapon misfire, not just blow up and destroy the gun.
I also find it silly that the deflect arrows and snatch arrows feats work against guns.
Yea...I'd say no to that too. I wrote up a couple spells for that reason, with the expectation that bullets move differently enough that they're harder to interact with. At least they should operate in a reduced capacity in regards to firearms.
I abhor the current firearms rules especially the touch attack part since this makes guns the best choice against 90% of all monsters at short range and doesn't make any sense in a historical perspective.
Neither Bows, Nor crossbows work in any similarity to historically accurate, and the game punishes you for using a spear, which was THE most common weapon throughout history.
I think with the low damage output, and inability to fire more than once per round, compared to how ARCHERY DOMINATES with its full attack DPS, that even with the touch attacks, many many many things are better against monsters at short range. Besides, you better hope that shot kills it, because Werewolves "aint no joke".
Realism may be important to some, but this is a game, and the objective of a game you cant win is FUN. If its not fun, then its not working.
IMO I think they should just remove the touch attack and misfire rules and divide the cost of guns by ten. Then they would be just fine and reasonably balanced against other weapons.
I wouldnt mind misfire if it wasnt a tax on the action economy made by a weapon that is already the HIGHEST action tax i can think of, in the game. There are many spells that require full round casting, but not many of them have as little pay off as a single firearm shot.
If nothing else, cost of ammunition should be reduced, somehow. Since we cant alter the cost as written, i think that players should be able to produce their own ammunition, and possibly purchase and repair broken firearms at a discount.
Firearms are very expensive, and i think they should include optional pricing charts that show pricing based on how common they are in the area.
If they do have to keep some special rules, change the touch AC thing to an attack against flat-footed AC within short range, making guns a great weapon for rogues (Pirates) and allowing creatures with uncanny dodge the ability to "dodge bullets". This also fixes the whole deadly aim issue with guns at short range. If the misfire rules are absolutely necessary then the gunslinger at least should ignore them.
That would make them THE best weapon for rogues, and every rogue from now on , proficient or not, would open combat with a gunshot for guaranteed SA damage. But again, FIREARMS ARENT OPEN FOR PLAYTEST, so the classes that use them have to patch the problems present in the rules.
I also find it silly that the deflect arrows and snatch arrows feats work against guns.
this is silly. D20 Modern had ballistic damage, and treated firearms as separate from other missile weapons. Pathfinder should do the same. Sine they updated Rapid Reload, maybe they will update these feats as well?
You can't really playtest the gunslinger class without talking about the firearms rules. I find it a bad move from the devs not to allow playtesting of the firearms rules as part of the gunslinger playtest.
I agree that the historical aspect isn't as important as balance, but the weapons should at least make sense in how they work mechanically within the game.
You can't really playtest the gunslinger class without talking about the firearms rules. I find it a bad move from the devs not to allow playtesting of the firearms rules as part of the gunslinger playtest.
Very true. I believe that the new firearm rules were conceived separately from the gunslinger class, and probably before they planned to make one. Most likely, they arent up for playtest or discussion because they have already been printed in the Inner Sea World guide.
I dont think this should prohibit them from updating or revising them in Ultimate combat however, and really wish they were open for playtest.