Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I ran a 15th level (for me the game begins at 10th level and ends around 18th level) playtest last night.
I've got lots of thoughts after playing through the game, and I will post separate threads for each issue.
Straight Gunslinger Damage Too High? Nope, about right.
Using a Musket with the Signature Deed of Lightning Reload Deed, you reload as a free action and can take full attack actions.
So, either the damage is too low (if you can't use SigDeed w/ Lightning) or is about right at 80% of "top" Archer builds with a Longbow.
I will grant you that these two builds are the best builds you can make out of Pathfinder material, at least using 25 point buy and Core p399 wealth by level at 15th level.
If you find a flow with my builds/math/rules, please let me know. If you want the Portfolio (HL) for these it is HERE
- Highly Optimized 15th level Archer (Point Blank Master) with +5 Composite Longbow STR +8 (Dex 22/Str 26) Build:
25 point buy Fighter 9/Rgr 6 Archer (Human +2 STR; 4th Ability to DEX/8th/12th to STR; STR 15, DEX 15, CON 16, INT 12, WIS 11, CHA 8)
Ranger 1 (Human Feat: Point Blank Shot; Precise Shot; ACF: Sable Company Marine; FE: Undead; Traits: Alkenstar Defender/Killer)
Ranger 2 (Bonus Feat: Rapid Shot)
Ranger 3 (Bonus Feat: Endurance; Deadly Aim)
Ranger 4 (AC: Hippogriff)
Ranger 5 (Weapon Focus Longbow; FE: Constructs)
Ranger 6 (Bonus Feat: Improved Precise Shot)
Fighter 1 (Bonus Feat: ***Far Shot***; ***Boon Animal Companion***)
Fighter 2 (Bonus Feat: Improved Critical Longbow)
Fighter 3 (Critical Focus)
Fighter 4 (Bonus Feat: Weapon Spec Longbow)
Fighter 5 (Bleeding Critical; Weapon Training Bows)
Fighter 6 (Bonus Feat: Point Blank Master Longbow)
Fighter 7 (***Sable Company Marine***)
Fighter 8 (Bonus Feat Greater Weapon Focus Longbow)
Fighter 9 (Manyshot)240,000 gp (+5 Darkwood Composite STR +8 Longbow; Arrows: 200, Cold Iron/Silversheen 50 ea, Blunt 60; +3 Elven Chain; AoNArmor+1; BoStr/Dex+6; BrGrArchery; Efficient Quiver; GoNight; HHH; DustyRose->Wayfinder; Cracked Pale Green; ManualInsightStr+1; RoProt+1)
HP 139 AC 28
<= 30' Deadly Aim/Many Shot/Rapid Shot/WF/WS/GWF/IC/IPS/CF/BC/Bracers Archery <= 30' vs AC 30 (CR 15 suggestion Bestiary p291)
Math:+27(+1arrow)/+27/+22/+17 1d8+28 19-20 X3 (on Critical +5 atk/+3 dmg/+2d6 Bleed)
.90*((4.5+19+1+8)+(4.5+19+1+8))+.1*.95*(2*(4.5+19+1+8)+3)+.90*(4.5+19+1+8)+ .1*.95*(2*(4.5+19+1+8)+3)+.65*(4.5+19+1+8)+.1*.90*(2*(4.5+19+1+8)+3)+.40*(4 .5+19+1+8)+.1*.65*(2*(4.5+19+1+8)+3)+(.90*.1*.95+.90*.1*.95+.65*.1*.90+.40* .1*.65)*7
147.1235 DPR - Highly Optimized 15th level Straight Gunslinger (SIgnature Dead Lightning Reload Deed/Musket; Dex 28) with +5 Musket (40' Range)
Build:
25 point buy 15 levels of Gunslinger (Human +2 DEX; 4th/8th/12th Ability to DEX; STR 13, DEX 17, CON 12, INT 12, WIS 10, CHA 10)
Gunslinger 1 (Human Feat: Point Blank Shot; Precise Shot; Free Musket; Traits: Alkenstar Defender/Killer)
Gunslinger 3 (Rapid Reload Musket)
Gunslinger 4 (Bonus Feat: Lightning Reload Deed)
Gunslinger 5 (Rapid Shot)
Gunslinger 7 (Deadly Aim)
Gunslinger 8 (Bonus Feat: Weapon Focus Musket)
Gunslinger 9 (Improved Critical Musket)
Gunslinger 11 (Improved Precise Shot)
Gunslinger 12 (Bonus Feat: Signature Deed -> Lightning Reload Deed)
Gunslinger 13 (Critical Focus)
Gunslinger 15 (Bleeding Critical)240,000 gp (+5 Musket; 200 Powder/Bullets; AoNArmor+3; BoDex+6; Winged Boots; BoArmor+6; CoResis+4; GoNight; HHH; HoWis+4; DustyRose->Wayfinder; Cracked Pale Green; RoProt+3)
HP 117 AC 32
<= 30' Deadly Aim/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/CF/BC/PaleGreenIoun vs AC 30 (CR 15 suggestion Bestiary p291)
Math:+27/+27/+22/+17 1d12+23 19-20 X4 (on Critical +5 atk/+4 dmg/+2d6 Bleed)
.90*(6.5+14+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+1+8)+4)+.90*(6.5+14+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+ 14+1+8)+4)+.65*(6.5+14+1+8)+.1*.90*(3*(6.5+14+1+8)+4)+.40*(6.5+14+1+8)+.1*. 65*(3*(6.5+14+1+8)+4)+(.90*.1*.95+.90*.1*.95+.65*.1*.90+.40*.1*.65)*7
117.776 DPR>40' & <=80' Deadeye/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/CF/BC/PaleGreenIoun vs Touch AC 12 (CR 15 average )
Math:+29/+29/+24/+19 1d12+14 19-20 X4 (on Critical +5 atk/+4 dmg/+2d6 Bleed)
.95*(6.5+14)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14)+4)+.95*(6.5+14)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14)+4)+.95*( 6.5+14)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14)+4)+(.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95) *7
79.61950 DPR - Compare +5 Weapon vs +4 Cunning weapon:
Math:.85*(6.5+13+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+13+1+8)+4)+.85*(6.5+13+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+ 13+1+8)+4)+.60*(6.5+13+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+13+1+8)+4)+.35*(6.5+13+1+8)+.1*. 70*(3*(6.5+13+1+8)+4)+(.85*.1*.95+.85*.1*.95+.60*.1*.95+.35*.1*.70)*7
DPR change is {negative} -8.77750 DPR (Deadly Aim) and +0 DPR (Deadeye; Already confirm at 95%) - Single Attack (If you can't free action reload) is only 35.3375 DPR (Deadly Aim <= 30') and 26.32925 DPR (Deadeye >40' <= 80')
Math:.90*(6.5+14+1+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+1+8)+4)+(.90*.1*.95)*7
.95*(6.5+14)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14)+4)+(.95*.1*.95)*7
Can't use deadly aim in the first range increment(ranged touch attack)please recalculate.
I believe touch attacks occur with the gunslinger within it's intial range and outside of its 40' range is where deadly aim would come into play.
I will ask why you decided to forego the Weapon Specialization feats. I asked on a thread if they get these feats and the majority said yes they do, being a fighter alternate class.
Edit: Beat to the punch by Dragonsong. :)
I believe touch attacks occur with the gunslinger within it's intial range and outside of its 40' range is where deadly aim would come into play.
I will ask why you decided to forego the Weapon Specialization feats. I asked on a thread if they get these feats and the majority said yes they do, being a fighter alternate class.
Edit: Beat to the punch by Dragonsong. :)
Sorry But you know after having to point that out in almost every built/test posted is a pretty clear indication that something about deadly aim and gunslingers be resolved. Either make the guns not do attacks off touch AC or allow it to work regardless as it seems to be tripping everybody up.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Interesting stats from the playtest.
It had a Cleric (also in the .por file), the Gunslinger, and two PCs build Ninjas.
The Gunslinger:
- He used about 450 gp of bullets/powder.
- He went first IIRC every init due to +11 to Init
- The one time he used Deadeye, the monster took a total of 8 damage after DR 15
- He Crit 4 times
- His maximum damage (with 2 Crits in one Full Attack) was 224
- His second highest was 177 (single Crit)
- His non-Deadeye hits were all 102 to 124 on no misses
- He missed 4 times the whole night
The Ninjas maximum damage in a round was 92; They said they wished they could do Gunslinger damage.
I run all Monsters in my home games at Maximum HP, and I often over power the CR to compensate for my typical players (highly optimized.)
The Monsters fought:
- CR 19 Devil, Immolation 396 HP (B2 p87) ---- Defeated by using a Luck Blade's Wish for Heightened Suggestion to basically change sides and help the party; I allowed it. Would have been a TPK otherwise
- Two (2) CR 14 Master Monk's 165 HP ea (GMG p275) ---- Defeated in 4 rounds; trivial encounter
- Three (3) CR 7 Remorhaz 135 HP ea (B p233) ---- Absolutely no challenge to the PC; Defeated in 3 rounds
- CR 14 Night Wing 255 HP (B2 p203) ---- Moderate challenge; Defeated in 4 rounds
- CR 19 Adamantine Golem HP 340 (B2 p134) ---- Very Difficult challenge; Defeated in 11 rounds IIRC; Sundered one Ninja weapon 1st round; Sundered Gunslinger's Musket in 6th round (he then withdrew from combat); Cleric casted Heal twice; Cleric/Ninja unconscious multiple times; last Ninja killed with Invis/Sneak Attack; While the Golem was at less than 0 HP, they didn't have the Adamantine Vorpal Sword to kill it, so they Plane Shift away
As an additional point, the builds have *** around some feats. Those feats are junk feats, I need something else, but nothing helped the build.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Can't use deadly aim in the first range increment(ranged touch attack)please recalculate.
I don't understand, please help expand on your comment?
Some points I didn't make clear:
- Deadly Aim and Deadeye are mutually exclusive abilities.
- All his Deadly Aim shots were made either in the first 30' and used Point Blank Shot +1 atk/dmg or were made in second range increment 40' to 80' and took an additional -2 to hit
- Deadeye was never used < 40' and was only used in the 50 to 75' ranges
- He found the touch attack was just about a "never miss" but DR killed his effective damage, so Deadly Aim was a better choice
You mean make it all touch AC or none at all? From what I've read, it seems everyone hates the touch AC angle. I, personally, like it.
Of course if you are not within your first range inc., then you get the benefits of deadly aim(if you have it)and that makes for some real nice damage. Granted it's another -2 to hit(or -1 if you have Far Shot feat) but to me, that's a non-issue.
Also, James, your point buy is way off. The gunslinger looks to be a 14 point buy. The Ranger looks to be a 21 point buy. I didn't add any of the level ability points. Just the racial you get from 1st level.
Can't use deadly aim in the first range increment(ranged touch attack)please recalculate.I don't understand, please help expand on your comment?
Some points I didn't make clear:
- Deadly Aim and Deadeye are mutually exclusive abilities.
- All his Deadly Aim shots were made either in the first 30' and used Point Blank Shot +1 atk/dmg or were made in second range increment 40' to 80' and took an additional -2 to hit
- Deadeye was never used < 40' and was only used in the 50 to 75' ranges
- He found the touch attack was just about a "never miss" but DR killed his effective damage, so Deadly Aim was a better choice
According to the developer you cannot use deadly aim on any gunshot that resolves using touch AC. In short your damage calculations are wrong.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I will ask why you decided to forego the Weapon Specialization feats
I used a very strict RAW interpretation.
Since the class is called Gunslinger and not Fighter (Gunslinger), I excluded WS from the list of allowed feats.I'll compute up a build using WF/WS Musket tomorrow in place of Critical Focus and Bleeding Critical (which together do very little for the DPR)
If you read Deadly Aim, it says it does not apply to touch attacks.
Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all ranged attack rolls to gain a +2 bonus on all ranged damage rolls. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every +4 thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2. You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
A musket's attack is a touch attack within their first range increment. So deadly aim wouldn't be a factor. But it would factor in beyond the 40' range because then you have to hit a regular AC.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
According to the developer you cannot use deadly aim on any gunshot that resolves using touch AC. In short your damage calculations are wrong.
Let me try again.
I never used Deadeye with Deadly Aim (BTW it is absolutely clear in the feat that it can't be used together, so it is irrelevant what the Dev says; but nice to see he agrees with RAW.)
So, again, My damage calcs are not wrong because I used Deadly Aim with a Touch attack because I never used Deadly Aim with a Touch attack.
Did I put a typo in the first post?
I used a very strict RAW interpretation.
Since the class is called Gunslinger and not Fighter (Gunslinger), I excluded WS from the list of allowed feats.I'll compute up a build using WF/WS Musket tomorrow in place of Critical Focus and Bleeding Critical (which together do very little for the DPR)
Ah, I see. That's cool then.
Oh, okay. You went with Deadeye for the long range touch AC. I gotcha. Just looked up deadeye. But you could use deadly aim if you decided to forego Deadeye. But then you're stuck with having to hit a higher AC. Cool.
According to the developer you cannot use deadly aim on any gunshot that resolves using touch AC. In short your damage calculations are wrong.Let me try again.
I never used Deadeye with Deadly Aim (BTW it is absolutely clear in the feat that it can't be used together, so it is irrelevant what the Dev says; but nice to see he agrees with RAW.)
So, again, My damage calcs are not wrong because I used Deadly Aim with a Touch attack because I never used Deadly Aim with a Touch attack.
Did I put a typo in the first post?
No James the first range increment is always resolved as a touch attack Deadeye lets the second one resolve as a ranged touch attack. So the math is wrong. There are numerous posts in these topics about this.
A musket's attack is a touch attack within their first range increment.That rule (forcing Muskets to Touch <= 40') is what was missed by me, my PC's, and somehow on these threads. I'll redo calcs, but considering he rarely ever missed, I suspect DPR will be little changed.
As hes losing, what, 8-10 damage for deadly aim per shot I'm guessing it will.
So you basically have to decide what to do beyond the 40'. Do I attempt to go with more damage or a pretty much automatic hit?
I think the gunslinger is cool. And I've never played a pc with a gun. Guns just seem strange to me in DnD, but I like this alt class.
Another issue with most is that the gunslinger doesn't equal to the archer. If a gunslinger was equivalent to an archer, why would anyone ever play an archer again? There are those that play crossbowmen. And they will NEVER equal to an archer. I don't see rampant threads on them about how they don't measure up. I just don't get it.
Guns do more base damage, have a larger multiplier, and the ability to hit touch AC. If you decide to get a gunslinger out of his first range increment, take on the full AC, have the deadly aim feat, and possibly far shot, the only difference is a -1 to hit. That seems pretty minimal to me. But that's just me. To each his own.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
As hes losing, what, 8-10 damage for deadly aim per shot I'm guessing it will.
I'm sorry it took so long for me to understand your point, I somehow missed all discussion of the Musket forcing touch attacks in the first range increment on these threads and in the rules. I was aware of the other incompatibility, and I mistakenly confused your assertion with that issue.
Alright, here we have the updated calculations.
Fixed Gunslinger Calcs (including Musket forced Touch AC):
- >40' & <=80 ' Deadly Aim/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/CF/BC/PaleGreenIoun vs AC 30 (CR 15 suggestion Bestiary p291)
Math:+24/+24/+19/+16 1d12+22 19-20 X4 (on Critical +5 atk/+4 dmg/+2d6 Bleed)
.75*(6.5+14+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+8)+4)+.75*(6.5+14+8)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+8)+ 4)+.50*(6.5+14+8)+.1*.75*(3*(6.5+14+8)+4)+.25*(6.5+14+8)+.1*.50*(3*(6.5+14+ 8)+4)+(.75*.1*.95+.75*.1*.95+.50*.1*.75+.25*.1*.50)*7
93.665 DPR (a changed of -24.111 DPR losing -3 atk/-1 dmg) - <=30 ' Deadeye/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/CF/BC/PaleGreenIoun vs Touch AC 12 (CR 15 average )
Math:+31/+31/+26/+21 1d12+15 19-20 X4 (on Critical +5 atk/+4 dmg/+2d6 Bleed)
.95*(6.5+14+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+1)+4)+.95*(6.5+14+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+1)+ 4)+.95*(6.5+14+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+14+1)+4)+(.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95 +.95*.1*.95)*7
83.3245 DPR (a change of +3.705 DPR from gaining Point Blank Shot and losing a range penalty) - Next two built with Weapon Spec/Greater Weapon Focus, but HeroLab complains they are invalid
- >40' & <=80 ' Deadly Aim/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/WS/GWF/PaleGreenIoun vs AC 30 (CR 15 suggestion Bestiary p291)
Math:+25/+25/+20/+15 1d12+24 19-20 X4 (on Critical +1 atk/+4 dmg)
.80*(6.5+16+8)+.1*.85*(3*(6.5+16+8)+4)+.80*(6.5+16+8)+.1*.85*(3*(6.5+16+8)+ 4)+.55*(6.5+16+8)+.1*.60*(3*(6.5+16+8)+4)+.30*(6.5+16+8)+.1*.35*(3*(6.5+16+ 8)+4)
100.0325 DPR (an increase of +6.3675 over Critical Focus/Bleeding Critical) - <=30 ' Deadeye/Rapid Shot/IC/IPS/WS/GWF/PaleGreenIoun vs Touch AC 12 (CR 15 average )
Math:+34/+34/+29/+24 1d12+17 19-20 X4 (on Critical +1 atk/+4 dmg)
.95*(6.5+16+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+16+1)+4)+.95*(6.5+16+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+16+1)+ 4)+.95*(6.5+16+1)+.1*.95*(3*(6.5+16+1)+4)+(.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95+.95*.1*.95 +.95*.1*.95)*7
90.7345 DPR (an increase of +7.41 over Critical Focus/Bleeding Critical)
|
Do a comparison between the 2 if it's against something with DR 10/- let's say, since Touch Attacks go through DR.
Huh? How do you arrive at touch attacks ignore DR?
Touch attacks apply DR as normal for the type of attack.
Since a musket or pistol does B&P, it will ignore any DR that is /Bludgeoning or /Piercing, if the gun and/or bullet are magic, it will ignore any DR that is /magic, etc., but otherwise, DR is applied normally.
Overall, both the archer and the gunslinger can ignore the same range of DR, as normal arrows are P, but blunt arrows are B, and arrows and bullets can both be made from the same special materials.
Overall, though, most special material ammunition will have a higher overall cost for bullets than arrows, since arrows are in quivers of 20, or bulk packs of 50; while bullets are currently sold individually.
Material Arrows Bullets
Normal 20/1 GP 1/1 GP
Blunt 20/2 GP 1/1 GP
Cold Iron 20/2 GP 1/2 GP
Silvered 20/41 GP 1/3 GP
Adamantine 20/1201 GP 1/61 GP
+1 Magic 50/2302.5 GP 1/2301 GP
+2 Magic 50/8302.5 GP 1/8301 GP (+1 Ghost Touch, for example)
I could be wrong on the cost for magic arrows, or the quantity enchanted... However, if I am not, the cost for magic bullets, for enhancements that don't transfer from the weapon (like Ghost Touch) runs waaaaay too high for a single use item.
If the game trully started at 10 (or 11 I guess) Gunslinger damage would be ok. The problem is the whole first half of the game where the gunslinger does not have signature deed lightning reload.
I assume the Deadly Aim and DR on touch attack issues will be fixed in the next iteration of the playtest, but reload times will stil kill gunslinger dpr before they get signature deed.
I'm sorry it took so long for me to understand your point, I somehow missed all discussion of the Musket forcing touch attacks in the first range increment on these threads and in the rules. I was aware of the other incompatibility, and I mistakenly confused your assertion with that issue.
I am sorry we were talking past each other. As I stated way up thread this is an issue that appears to be tripping A LOT of folks doing the playtest up. This guns work one way at one range increment and another way the rest of the time seems to be a additional layer of unneeded crunch that only causes headaches and slowdowns to the pace of the game. Imagine the game derail if these conversations had to occur at the table.
|
Back to the topic at hand, we're looking at a DPR of 147 for a straight-up archer versus 83-100 for an archer.
While I'm not one to judge classes based solely on DPR, a 32-42% reduction in damage for a fighting class (with little in the way of skills to contribute out of combat) is a pretty big handicap.
|
"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. "
Whenever damage reduction completely negates the damage from an attack, it also negates most special effects that accompany the attack, such as injury poison, a monk's stunning, and injury-based disease. Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. Nor does it affect poisons or diseases delivered by inhalation, ingestion, or contact.
Read the whole paragraph. If the damage from the touch attack is negated completely, the actual "touch" is not negated. So say you had a Flaming Pistol, If the 1d8 from the gun is reduced to zero, the 1d6 of fire is not ignored, because the touch hit. Touch attacks do NOT bypass DR.
Yes, that bears repeating. That they don't bypass DR.
Back to the topic at hand, we're looking at a DPR of 147 for a straight-up archer versus 83-100 for an archer.
While I'm not one to judge classes based solely on DPR, a 32-42% reduction in damage for a fighting class (with little in the way of skills to contribute out of combat) is a pretty big handicap.
This get s a Big old +1000
Mc-large huge issue as there is little in the way of other contributions the class provides.
against something with DR 10/- let's say, since Touch Attacks go through DR.
I'm not aware of that rule, can you cite the source?
p.561 of Core under Damage Reduction:
"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. "
I've mentioned this in a few threads before, but I've yet to hear any Dev chime in on the functionality here.
Wow, I don't like that wording. DR does not negate damage done with firearm attacks, even those made against touch AC.
Oh noes, exception-based-design rears it's ugly head once again...
Quoted for truth!
@Stephen: does that mean that while "that ship has sailed" on ranged touch it may be returning to harbor before the next round of playtests?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Wow, I don't like that wording. DR does not negate damage done with firearm attacks, even those made against touch AC.p.561 of Core under Damage Reduction:
"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. "
Am I confused?
I thought E I's post (does *not*) was a rejection of the concept that Touch attacks ignore DR.
What is wrong with that wording? That DR is not negated by touch attacks? There doesn't need to be a line added to firearms to allow DR to work. On the contrary, there would need to be a line if we needed firearms to avoid DR, as the general rule would be that the touch attack still processes DR?
|
|
Oh noes, exception-based-design rears it's ugly head once again...Quoted for truth!
@Stephen: does that mean that while "that ship has sailed" on ranged touch it may be returning to harbor before the next round of playtests?
The Inner Sea Campaign Setting has sailed with that Touch AC thing I think.... it's due to come out next month so I'm pretty sure it has sailed (however, I'm one of the few who wouldn't mind if they stop the presses and changed that, if the said presses have not started pressing...)
Local DMs in my area have stated they'll never use the Touch AC though... and one even mentioned "no guns, period"
I really hope that Ultimate Combat removes that Touch AC thing. AC 8 Iron Golems, anyone?
|
|
Wow, I don't like that wording. DR does not negate damage done with firearm attacks, even those made against touch AC.p.561 of Core under Damage Reduction:
"Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains. "
Am I confused?
I thought E I's post (does *not*) was a rejection of the concept that Touch attacks ignore DR.
What is wrong with that wording? That DR is not negated by touch attacks? There doesn't need to be a line added to firearms to allow DR to work. On the contrary, there would need to be a line if we needed firearms to avoid DR, as the general rule would be that the touch attack still processes DR?
Adding a line won't fix it. You can't build a new mechanic into an existing set of rules that are so established, period! The simplest, most honest to God easy answer would be to keep guns as they were in the PFCS and make any alterations on the side of the Gunslinger class. Yes! it's ok that regular folks with the Exotic Firearms proficiency suck compared to an archer! However, true gunslingers should shine via class feature. I'll stop saying "pickles, anyone?" 'cause it's getting a bit old, but this is an example on how you can get the gunslinger to be on par with a fighter without going in circles around the actual pistol/musket weapon description/mechanics.
If you ABSOLUTELY want guns to bypass something, then at least don't make it Touch AC, and make it work like the Brilliant Energy weapon property (which, may I add, is a +4 weapon property... so making "guns Touch AC" is arguably the equivalent of giving a +5 or +6 weapon to a 1st level character)
My two coppers.
If you ABSOLUTELY want guns to bypass something, then at least don't make it Touch AC, and make it work like the Brilliant Energy weapon property (which, may I add, is a +4 weapon property... so making "guns Touch AC" is arguably the equivalent of giving a +5 or +6 weapon to a 1st level character)My two coppers.
What difference does Brillant energy do that touch doesn't? It still ignores AC/natural armor.
Besides making undead/constructs immune to guns...
I doubt a gay gunslinger's damage is much better.wtf?
I was confused too, until I looked at the thread title. Kinda a random comment though.
Anyways, it looks like DPR for a gunslinger is a good deal lower than that of a fighter, even after the gunslinger is high enough level to overcome the terrible loading times of his weapon, which is bad if the gunslinger is meant to be a fighter alternate class focused on doing damage. If they change the to its own class completely divorced from the fighter and make more deeds and abilities that do things other than deal straight damage would that fix the gunslinger? Thinks like the targeting or covering shot, only not automatic and not only working when the gunslinger misses?
|
|
If you ABSOLUTELY want guns to bypass something, then at least don't make it Touch AC, and make it work like the Brilliant Energy weapon property (which, may I add, is a +4 weapon property... so making "guns Touch AC" is arguably the equivalent of giving a +5 or +6 weapon to a 1st level character)My two coppers.
What difference does Brillant energy do that touch doesn't? It still ignores AC/natural armor.
Besides making undead/constructs immune to guns...
Read Brilliant Energy again -- it just goes through armor and shield, not natural armor. And yes, undead/construct exempt, which makes sense considering the reason why bullets are damaging (organs get pierced: no organs in the case of undead, and constructs are well, constructs... you can shoot at a car for a long time before the car stops functioning as a car) Still, the gun in the Pathfinder game should *still* do some damage to undead and constructs... I agree with you there.
For reference:
"A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter.
Armor and shield bonuses to AC (including any enhancement
bonuses to that armor) do not count against it because the
weapon passes through armor. (Dexterity, def lection, dodge,
natural armor, and other such bonuses still apply.) A brilliant
energy weapon cannot harm undead, constructs, and objects.
This property can only be applied to melee weapons, thrown
weapons, and ammunition."
So, *almost* like Brilliant Energy would be the way to go. Remove the line about not harming undead, constructs and objects and you're pretty bang on as to what a gunshot should be...
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Oh man, now I'm re-confused. Do firearms bypass DR? Just a yes or no, please.
Your post seem to be responding to my request for a rules quote that asserted that firearms touch attack avoided having to deal with DR by having the DR ignored.
The rules quote you posted asserted that touch attack still have DR, and if you deal 20 points of damage on a DR 15/magic target with a gun that isn't magic, then you only apply 5 even if it was a touch attack.
I'm trying to get a handle on why others seem to be reading your rules quote the opposite way.
"Damage Reduction does not negate touch attacks"
Translation:
Ignore the fact it is a touch attack, and process the DR as if it was any other standard attack.
Honestly it's pretty straight forward, according to Mr. Mcfarland's post Gun ignore DR. As he said "DR does NOT negate damage done with firearm attacks" the way to read the sentence is the "Damage reduction" is the subject and "does not negate" is the action it is taking. I can see how it would be confusing.
Paizo should have used the same wording that they used for the Pinpoint Targeting feat.
The target does not gain any armor, natural armor, or shield bonuses to its Armor Class.
It is pretty much the same as this whole "resolves against the target's Touch AC" business without making a whole lot of confusion if the attack is a touch attack or not.
Unless Paizo actually wants the firearm to be a touch attack within the first range increment. Honestly, I'm badly confused at this point.
|
|
Paizo should have used the same wording that they used for the Pinpoint Targeting feat.
The target does not gain any armor, natural armor, or shield bonuses to its Armor Class.It is pretty much the same as this whole "resolves against the target's Touch AC" business without making a whole lot of confusion if the attack is a touch attack or not.
Unless Paizo actually wants the firearm to be a touch attack within the first range increment. Honestly, I'm badly confused at this point.
...and this touch AC will continue to confuse for years and years to come... hopefully there's an errata for World Guide: Inner Sea OR Ultimate Combat devotes a page on guns with a "this new mechanic updates previously published information" statement...
|
|
Really, Really not that hard to understand, unless you want it to read in a direction that it doesn't. DR effects damage that comes in. Regardless of the delivery of the damage. But the DR does not "foil" the fact that you touched them in the delivery.
Poisoned (injury) longsword (1d8) Vs. DR 10/-
Attack does 8 damage. 10 of that is removed. The attack has no damage. The attack is negated. Poison does not occur, as it requires an injury.
Pistol, touch attack Vs. DR 10/-
Attack does 8 damage. 10 of that is removed. The touch attack still "hit" and is not negated.
Liches touch attack Vs. DR 10/-
Attack does 8 negative energy damage. None is removed. The touch attack still "hit" and is not negated.
Magus Poisoned (injury) shocking grasp Spellstrike Vs. DR 10/-
THIS IS WHAT THIS RULE IS FOR IMO.
CASE 1: magus attacks, does <10 damage. Attack negated, no spell.
CASE 2: magus attacks, does >10 damage. Attack success, spell goes off.
CASE 3: magus chooses to deliver the spell via touch attack. Attack hits, DR removes 0 damage. Attack success, spell goes off.
The only reason the line "Damage reduction does not negate touch attacks, energy damage dealt along with an attack, or energy drains." exists, is to prevent DR from making attacks that deal 0 damage unable to effect the target.
Imagine, without this line...
Mites are the worst thing to fight ever at low levels. (DR2!)
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Except for Stephen's wording above, which calls out specifically damage done with firearm attacks is not negated, not extra effects from the firearm, or spells delivered via the firearm.
I agree with your logic; it's much more sane than what was supposed. I know it's how it'll be houseruled in my games. I just wish they would be slightly more careful with their wording here.
...DR does not negate damage done with firearm attacks, even those made against touch AC.
I guess it is my dialect again, but the rules text you quoted agreed with Stephen. In other words, Touch attacks do not possess a special "I avoid DR" ability.
My whole understanding of the ability has been how Aggrenox explained with the one change:
CASE 3: magus chooses to deliver the spell via touch attack. Attack hits, DR removes 0 damage. Attack success, spell goes off.
You would only avoid the DR removing damage if the following were true:
1) It was an attack that DR works, such as a B/S/P attack.2) It was not a spell attack that says DR applies.
|
|
Benefit: You can choose to take a –1 penalty on all ranged attack rolls to gain a +2 bonus on all ranged damage rolls. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and every +4 thereafter, the penalty increases by –1 and the bonus to damage increases by +2. You must choose to use this feat before making an attack roll and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage.
I'm not sure that restriction would actually apply against bullets that resolve against a touch AC. The way I see it, there is a difference between a "touch attack" and an "attack against a touch AC." Touch attacks typically involve a whole different mechanic. The only thing they require is making contact, then the damage is is delivered by a secondary property of the attack, usually some kind of energy type (positive, negative, elemental, etc.), so the damage isn't the result of physical violation of the target's flesh by a weapon or the strength or velocity behind it. "Touch Attacks" are made against the target's Touch AC simply because armor doesn't help against energy.
Bullets, slugs, balls, whatever, follow a whole different rule. The reason they attack a Touch AC within the first range increment (or beyond that, if you're using the Far-Reaching Sight scope or Deadeye) is because of their sheer velocity - armor simply isn't effective against such a fast-moving projectile. As such, I doubt that restriction under Deadly Aim was ever intended to apply to gun ammo, which didn't exist in the game at the time that feat was created. It was intended to apply to ranged touch attacks like searing light or scorching ray.