|
I understand the hate on class bloat and the reasons behind it, but hear me out.
1)The amount of space in ultimate combat is likely not going to be much changed if they decided to run Gunslinger as a base class. I can see it taking up MAYBE another page.
2)Basing the Gunslinger off the fighter accomplishes nothing. The ONLY class feature they maintain are the bonus feats, and even this was changed to every 4 levels instead of 2 in addition to adding grit feats.
3)You've already done a big no-no, in that you have changed the saves they get. That is a ground floor function of the class, no other archetype thus far does this, and IMO I don't think that is something an archetype SHOULD do.
4)Making it a fighter archetype prevents players from multiclassing into that class, while it does leave available the ability for the player to take the fighter specific feats such as weapon specialization which is neat, but it does not sell it to me.
6)It has been addressed already about their skills, in terms of not having fully appropriate ones at least. In addition I find it very difficult to believe that such a character as a master Gunslinger would only get 2+int skills per level. I just don't picture it.
5)Being linked to the fighter may not mechanically restrain you as much you might think, but it does nonetheless. You are looking at the class to be filling similar roles to the fighter, using MOST of the same ground floor architecture such as BAB, HD, and to an extent weapon proficiency, and saves. You are mentally holding a sheet of rice paper over the fighter on a lit table to try to compare power values. I believe that is a mistake.
For the above reason and more that I am not entirely able to put into words at this late hour I do NOT believe that you should continue your design down the path that assumes that the Gunslinger will remain an Archetype. I believe it would make for a much more robust playtest to uncouple these two in the fact that the class should blossom from its own soil, not like a child growing up attempting to emulate its cousins.
|
Agreed. I think it should be a new class built around the pickle mechanic. I'll probably be rewriting the class as such after it is finalized.
|
|
Agreed. I think it should be a new class built around the pickle mechanic. I'll probably be rewriting the class as such after it is finalized.
So what you're saying is that it should be based around the "Pickle Crunch." :D
Couldn't help it.
I believe the only reason for the gunslinger to be a fighter, is to keep you from multi classing into fighter.
Something the devs don't want.
It's also an alternate class and not an archetype and as such it's not a fighter type so much as it's 'instead of' a fighter.
Personally I really think there are much better reasons to base it off a Ranger or an alchemist.
But like i said, i think the slinger as written loaned itself to be dipped into, so the Devs wanted to block it by making it a fighter.
as the Devs work on this class it may meld into something completely different and the urge to go fighter after a level or two may disappear, thus removing the need to 'block' the multiclass into fighter, and there for remove it as being a fighter at all.
The swapping out of class abilities works so much easier with the ranger, and would give you the ability to a hi-ho silver companion (to carry all the guns and ammo you are going to need) not to mention a properly done grit mechanic will swap out nicely with the rangers lack luster spells.
Combat styles (sniper or pistoleer) and skills and saves are all right there set up for the slinger.
The alchemist just makes sense that he makes his own bullets and powder and can add effects to the guns in exchange for loosing extracts, so hes more of a tinkerer or gunmage without the magic (which is where i think an alkenstar alchemist would have gone, seeing as the magic part of his extracts would never work, he would have turned to substances and engineering.
|
I agree with all the above. After my first read of this class, I had to wonder what the purpose of making this an "altenate fighter" class was. It should stand alone, as it has already changed some of the basics of "fighter" (saves, bonus feat progression, etc.), so why hamper it more?
As a new base class, it could fill a niche, much like the cavalier, that the fighter alone doesn't. And the Grit mechanic makes it unique.
I agree with all the above. After my first read of this class, I had to wonder what the purpose of making this an "altenate fighter" class was. It should stand alone, as it has already changed some of the basics of "fighter" (saves, bonus feat progression, etc.), so why hamper it more?
As a new base class, it could fill a niche, much like the cavalier, that the fighter alone doesn't. And the Grit mechanic makes it unique.
WEll I dont know if the grit mechanic IS unique.
Ki points have been around for a while and WERE unqiue, but then in beta they brought in rage points, and everyone poo poo'd it, now we have magus with arcane point, ninja with CHR based Ki, Samurai with Resolve, and gunslinger with grit, all have uses/points to spend per day on different sets of abilites... the 'spend as you like' smorgasborg.
So grit is a unique name for the pathfinder points system which i just like to call "force points" (from star wars), i can do cool things with my 'X' pool.
Ever notice ALL the new classes have a point mechanic?
anyway, gunslinger just isn't ,and shouldn't be, a fighter.
Heck it'd make a better lightly armored cavalier than a fighter! even that is less of a stretch! (gunfighter showdown would work just like challenges, he would get a horse to carry all his weighty weapons and ammo, etc etc)
And for the money im still a giant fan of the gunslinger being a gritty, tough non magical alchemist with poisoned explosive bullets and grenade launchers to lob his bombs, even serums (mutagens) to enhance dex for better shooting etc etc. (heck throw a cowboy hat on the current iconic alchemist and tell me he wouldnt LOOK like a gunslinger??)
an alchemy gunner would be better suited to compete damage and effectiveness wise than the current fighter based gunslinger which we all know is lackluster.
Question is, with a revamped version, will the DEVs cling to the dream of making this a fighter variant?
I dont even really see how this character class needs the d10 hps (although I guess I can see full bab, but I could also see an arguement against full bab)
The samurai was based on the cavalier because it was an easy concept to trade out abilities.
The gunslinger as written basically IS a ground up build as it isnt based on the fighter in the slightest (even armor proficiencies are closer to ranger).
It's "we want the gunslinger to have access to specialization tree and we dont want it to multiclass into fighter as a default"
My answer to that is make the useful use of a gun too dependant to grit and deeds to the point where multiclassing into fighter would be a dumb idea, give it a class ability like samurai that gives it access to things like disruptive shot and specialization tree, and in the process you will make a character class cool enough to play and fix all the issues the current version has.
If it's good enough to not want to bump into fighter, then, it's good enough to stand on its own.
This would be a satisfying character to play, because they layman who tried to use guns would have them doing poopy damage and blowing up in their face... no other class has that distinction, every with the proficiency can use a weapon, anyone with a level in a spell casting class can cast a spell, but but, without being a gunslinger, the gun is more dangerous to you than the enemy, what a cool concept!
Numer one, make it so.
Ever notice ALL the new classes have a point mechanic?
Yes.
I couldn't had said it better than Pendagast has put it. He's nailed most of the issues that my group of friends have brought up.
I would like to reitterate the one thing though. At this moment, the only reason it is an alt class appears to be to keep it from becoming a splash class. Fighter X/ Gunslinger 1 would be a pretty common build, to offset the feat starvation. Otherwise, you only need Gunslinger for the free gear, profficiencies, and the grit pool (A friend playtested a slinger at 5th and found that he only ever used grit to keep his gun unjammed, so only the first level would really be needed.)
I believe the only reason for the gunslinger to be a fighter, is to keep you from multi classing into fighter.
Something the devs don't want.
Why not, I wonder?