|
I mentioned this in Ashiel's thread back in the first playtest, but I wanted to restate it here, because I still think it adds value to the class and solves a major problem - misfires.
I understand the need for guns in a medieval setting to have a misfire mechanic. It's a nod toward history and common sense, and I get that. It's also (I assume) being used as a bit of a balancing mechanic to explain why everyone doesn't put away their bow and pick up a gun instead, and that's fine, too.
The problem is, I just don't think that the class that is explicitly built around the use of firearms should have this terrible opportunity to not only completely suck for one round, but also damage their weapon. As other have pointed out time and again, this doesn't happen to (for example) the archer when he rolls poorly, although there is plenty of historical precedent for bad things happening to bowstrings. Various melee weapons have been known to break off at the haft, but there are no rolls that fighters can make that will ruin their weapons. This is a disparity that makes the Gunslinger class too unattractive to me, especially because it's unnecessary and easily avoided.
Gunslingers should have an almost mystical connection to their guns, and while this is portrayed increasingly well in the second playtest, there's still the problem of misfires. I suggest this:
Make the gunslinger's rest cycle similar to that of a caster (PFCR, pg 218, "Rest"). The gunslinger must get 8 hours of sleep, and spend 1 hour breaking down, cleaning, and oiling his guns. In return for this level of devotion to his craft, the gunslinger does not suffer from misfires until he rests again.
There! Done! Now we can stop building deeds centered around making misfires suck less (while still, by definition, sucking somewhat), and instead concentrate on making the gunslinger more bada**. For me, the whole rest issue is and has always been a Pretty Big Deal, and I like the idea of taking a mechanic previously employed only by casters and applying it to a martial class to remove a serious penalty.
If this is painting with too big a brush, make it a feat. That way, there's a Feat Tax associated with the ability, and there's still the inconvenience of the rest cycle. Is this a terrible idea for some reason I'm not seeing?
I like the idea of gun maintenance following the lead of spagyric devices in Davaced options:alchemist PDF, that could work, and so some reason if the guns dont get maintained, or there is excessive abuse (rain/water, snow/ice etc) then the misfires kick in.
|
I could not agree more. This was a problem in my latest playtest. In the upcoming level 11 version, the gun would have exploded in Roland's hand if I hadn't bought the Reliable property for the gun.
I think the developers are possibly right for making misfires a difficulty for the average user but the Gunslinger does not need such a terrible barrier between him and using the weapon the whole class is built around. If rolling poorly on the touch attack made a Scorching Ray bounce back into a Wizard's face, we'd see more people playing Fighters for sure. This class will not be, for me, playable with the current misfire mechanic.
I could not agree more. This was a problem in my latest playtest. In the upcoming level 11 version, the gun would have exploded in Roland's hand if I hadn't bought the Reliable property for the gun.
I think the developers are possibly right for making misfires a difficulty for the average user but the Gunslinger does not need such a terrible barrier between him and using the weapon the whole class is built around. If rolling poorly on the touch attack made a Scorching Ray bounce back into a Wizard's face, we'd see more people playing Fighters for sure. This class will not be, for me, playable with the current misfire mechanic.
I think another good deed would be "assembly line" which modifies the gun smithing to allow the gunslinger to make more ammo at a quicker pace, but anyone else trying to use the ammo runs a higher risk than normal on misfire (where as the gun slinger, if he has done his maintenance, which over laps in the same time as assembly line , which mirrors the wizards sleep and memorization, suffers no misfire at all, even for the assembly line ammo)
Misfire and expensive ammo is for chumps not professionals.,
|
|
I hate to shamelessly bump my own thread, but really? Are we going to spend more time and energy talking about a 20th level Gunslinger stunlocking 4 dragons than we are legitimite suggestions for improvement of the class? Really?
How about some people who think my idea is stupid. Where ya at, people? Let's get some discussion going. This potentially fixes a big problem with the class. Stunlocking 4 dragons is sort of theorycrafting masturbation.
So again, tell me why I'm wrong about the idea above. I won't even argue. I just want to see people talking.
I hate to shamelessly bump my own thread, but really? Are we going to spend more time and energy talking about a 20th level Gunslinger stunlocking 4 dragons than we are legitimite suggestions for improvement of the class? Really?
How about some people who think my idea is stupid. Where ya at, people? Let's get some discussion going. This potentially fixes a big problem with the class. Stunlocking 4 dragons is sort of theorycrafting masturbation.
So again, tell me why I'm wrong about the idea above. I won't even argue. I just want to see people talking.
Gunslingers do have a number of abilities that reduce the effect of misfires. I think your argument is that you don't want it to happen at all, which—to be frank—isn’t going to happen.
I think theat people are not as excited about this as they are the problems with stunning shot is because your main premise, the fact that gunslingers should not be *as* affected by misfires is already in the class. Stunning shot is an actual problem that we’ve already fixed in the final version of the class.
All that said, please don’t call someone else’s concerns “theorycraft masturbation,” even if it is a discussion that comes out of theoretics and not playtesting. That’s just bad form.
Thanks!
Realize that at level 1 the gunslinger can already keep from damaging his gun at all on a misfire:
Quick Clear (Ex): At 1st level, as a standard action,
the gunslinger can remove the broken condition from
a single firearm she is currently wielding, as long as
that condition was gained by a firearm misfire. The
gunslinger must have at least 1 grit point to perform this
deed. Alternatively, if the gunslinger spends 1 grit point
to perform this deed, she can perform quick clear as a
move-equivalent action instead of a standard action.
This way when they do have a misfire they can completely repair the gun with either a standard or move action. As such their equipment is only ever really damaged on a sunder attempt or if they fail a save throw on a 1.
Okay, fair enough. Thanks, SRM.
Also, sorry for my poor choice of words.
No problem, sir. I've been know for pithy and somewhat shocking word choices here and there. I'm not unsympathetic to that rhetorical tool, but I would like to keep these conversations as civil as possible. Thanks for understanding.
|
|
Realize that at level 1 the gunslinger can already keep from damaging his gun at all on a misfire:
This way when they do have a misfire they can completely repair the gun with either a standard or move action. As such their equipment is only ever really damaged on a sunder attempt or if they fail a save throw on a 1.Quick Clear (Ex): At 1st level, as a standard action,
the gunslinger can remove the broken condition from
a single firearm she is currently wielding, as long as
that condition was gained by a firearm misfire. The
gunslinger must have at least 1 grit point to perform this
deed. Alternatively, if the gunslinger spends 1 grit point
to perform this deed, she can perform quick clear as a
move-equivalent action instead of a standard action.
Point taken, Abe. I'm just going to houserule the misfire bit into my own game so that the class will actually see use. My players (and I) are a bit too savvy to choose a class where ineffectiveness in one round begets further ineffectiveness in another round almost by definition (the logic here being that due to the limited amount of grit a gunslinger has, the "Clear as Move Action" option will rarely be used, therefore two rounds are wasted: 1 to shoot and miss, 1 to clear the gun). I think the class is really cool and well written, but in my experience from the first round, misfires happen far too often. Missing the target is already not fun, I'm not sure why further "not fun" needs to be assesed to the player at that point.
I don't know, I'm just saying, I don't see value added by misfires for gunslingers. Maybe someone can point out to me where misfires add value to the class as a whole - even conceptually or thematically, anything - how do they make the class more fun to play? Would the class be way imbalanced against other classes if they didn't exist? Why don't bowstrings break on natural 1's? Crossbow's are mechanical, why don't they misfire or jam? I guess I just don't follow.
The Quick clear requires Grit, instead of being automatic. Even with that, the Gunslinger loses out on action economy: he is forced to spend an entire round fixing his weapon instead of attacking, or spend a grit to get only a single attack that round.
Really, with how limited Grit is, it feels like it should be doing more than just "keeping things par". To me, Grit use should do something that's over and above day-to-day maintenance.
I personally think that the gun mechanics are fine for the Emerging Guns era with misfires. That makes sense mechanically, and thematically for me.
I also think that it seriously cripples the "fun factor" of a class that needs to use the gun as his only feature. If he had spells, or some other "thing", then maybe he could afford this, but as it is.. the gun is his only shtick, and having the chance for it to fail on him is too "unfun".
I really like the idea that the Gunslinger can maintain his weapons nightly, and that allows him to ignore misfire chance. If he doesn't get that opportunity, or if he needs to pick up a different weapon for whatever reason, he suffers the penalty.
This could even work as a 1st level Deed designed for a more commonplace gun era, for people who prefer guns being more reliable (or at least the gunslinger having more reliability, without everyone having the reliability). Just one more reason for making selectable deeds. ;)
The Quick clear requires Grit, instead of being automatic.
To be clear it doesn't cost Grit, simply requires that you have some.
Also at lower levels you aren't going to get more than one shot usually anyways (though this changes by 3rd level) -- if it is something you are rather worried about change out to a pepperbox or double barrel as soon as you can. That way if one barrel jams you still have the other to use normally.
|
|
Gunslingers do have a number of abilities that reduce the effect of misfires. I think your argument is that you don't want it to happen at all, which—to be frank—isn’t going to happen.
What Gunslingers have are ways to eliminate the serious consequence of a misfire after the fact with an action and Grit cost. And the one that prevents the horrible consequence of a face full of shrapnel doesn't come until you're halfway through the class, probably more than halfway through an AP.
What we want is a way for Gunslingers to get in front of the issue and reduce the chance of them happening in the first place. And not one that costs a minimum of 6k gold. Also, the Steadfast property seems terribly overpriced.
This is a problem that literally no other class faces. Tell me what is so powerful about the Gunslinger that it needs this constant chance of utter failure. As I've said before, a schmuck with a gun should have a chance for misfire. A Gunslinger shouldn't.
To be clear it doesn't cost Grit, simply requires that you have some.
Not if you don't want to waste your standard action.
Also at lower levels you aren't going to get more than one shot usually anyways (though this changes by 3rd level) -- if it is something you are rather worried about change out to a pepperbox or double barrel as soon as you can. That way if one barrel jams you still have the other to use normally.
Does it work that way? I got the impression that a misfire damaged the gun, not just an individual barrel.
To be clear it doesn't cost Grit, simply requires that you have some.Not if you don't want to waste your standard action.
Also at lower levels you aren't going to get more than one shot usually anyways (though this changes by 3rd level) -- if it is something you are rather worried about change out to a pepperbox or double barrel as soon as you can. That way if one barrel jams you still have the other to use normally.Does it work that way? I got the impression that a misfire damaged the gun, not just an individual barrel.
Well if you don't want to waste your standard action yeah, but then again if you don't you can save the grit -- as I stated it doesn't have to cost grit -- it simply can.
On the second part that would be a good thing to clear up: Part of the reason to use pepperboxes and double barrels included the fact that if one barrel became fouled you could still use the other without issue.
I would suggest that if someone was playing with the critical fumble deck then firearms should be exempt from drawing from the deck since they already have misfire built in.
I would also point out that at higher level gunslingers can ignore misfires (at least the gun exploding) with grit as they go, which means they don't have to spend the grit until it becomes an issue (i.e. the gun is about to explode). This is also not a perfect stop gap, but it is there.
The Quick clear requires Grit, instead of being automatic.To be clear it doesn't cost Grit, simply requires that you have some.
Err.. you see the words you quoted right? I said the same thing you said "requires".
And if you didn't clip that sentence out of context, you'd see that I address it further in the very next sentence starting with "Even with that"...
The Quick clear requires Grit, instead of being automatic.To be clear it doesn't cost Grit, simply requires that you have some.Err.. you see the words you quoted right? I said the same thing you said "requires".
And if you didn't clip that sentence out of context, you'd see that I address it further in the very next sentence starting with "Even with that"...
I wasn't saying otherwise -- I was reiterating for the world at large that simply using the ability doesn't drain grit -- nothing else.
I wasn't saying otherwise -- I was reiterating for the world at large that simply using the ability doesn't drain grit -- nothing else.
Ah, it sounded like you were refuting my quote. Carry on then.
|
|
On the issue of historical accuracy, it was my understanding that when early muskets and pistols misfired, it was usually more that the gun didn't shoot at all, not that it exploded. If a Gunslinger using Rapid Reload can load the gun as a move action, it makes sense that he should be able to clear it as a move action as well. If that were the case, then using Grit should reduce that time further to only a swift action.
But, again, my main point is that the Gunslinger is not so powerful a class that it needs this kind of built in 5-10% utter failure rate. A level 6-10 Gunslinger who misfires with his first attack misses and then can't in good conscience keep firing because of the chance of utterly destroying his gun. Twice, I've come close to blowing up my gun in my playtests because I didn't stop when I ought. That's horrible. It's unconscionable. It isn't fun.
Someone please tell me why the class is so good that it needs misfires for balance. Because if it isn't for balance then it's an even worse idea. I get that Paizo wants built in negatives to discourage every class from picking up a a gun and leaving bows behind. I get that and for the most part support it. But the Gunslinger is built for picking up a gun and using it. There is no reason to discourage a Gunslinger from using the weapon his whole class is built around.
Look back at the first version of the Magus. The penalties for Spell Combat were so harsh that there was an uproar because the ability the class was practically built for was unusable for 10 levels. It was fixed and now the Magus is fun and maybe my favorite class in existence. Misfires need to be fixed as well.
Hey, level 2 is pretty much a dead level. Why not have Gunslinger's Loving Care as an ability there. Reduce the misfire chance on all firearms by 1 (minimum 0). This would make the simplest weapons misfire free and more complicated ones like the Pepperbox safer until they can scrape together the cash for Reliable.
|
|
Let me put this another way, Paizo.
Say you were going to design a ray specialist spell casting class (Which, by the way, I'd like to see). It could only cast rays and a couple utility spells but it got bonuses to the rays, more slots and maybe free metamagic or whatever.
But on the roll of a one, the magic sears the caster's fingers giving him -2 to hit and damage until he spends a standard action or a move action and some kind of extremely limited resource.
Would that kind of penalty even cross your mind? It's his schtick, why make it crap for him. I get that chumps need penalties, after all, that is why spectacular failures at UMD make a wand not work or explode in your hand, but never when a spellcaster is using a wand containing a spell he knows.
Would Paizo be a great company if 5-15% of the stuff it published was absolutely horrible? And you couldn't do anything as well as you used to until you fixed it? Would you use word processing software that at the very best ignored every 20th key stroke and then ignored 3 out of every 20 keystrokes until you gave it a moment to reboot?
To me the problem doesn't lie in the gunslinger. It lies in the arrow hose called archers in this game that have been broken since, well I dunno forever.
Handy haversacks to carry extra quivers of endless arrows, the ability to make arrows from any tree. If the dang guys just ran out of arrows or were limited, they would fall more into line with xbowmen and gunslingers. But the game/gamers allow arrow hoses.
This doesn't really happen at my table, arrows are a resource to be conserved, archers end up in melee combat, spell casters don't have just the right spell and swing their staff...in these instances they are just about the same as the gunslinger who is out of grit and throws his pistol at the monster and runs.
Alot of people don't think this is fun, I really think, since playing this game from basic in basic boxed and fresh off the press AD&D... this is the way the game was/is supposed to feel and be played.
Misfire gives a chance for something else to happen beside bullet hose.
I remember in AD&D ( I think it was an optional rule) for missing melee weapons to get damaged and receive a -1 to hit from being nicked when they hit the dungeon wall instead of the goblins head, until they were sharpened or repaired.
Required room to wield a weapon table, where the fighter had to whip out his dagger because he couldn't swing his two handed sword etc etc.
These situations didn't happen MUCH, but where part of the fun and excitingness of the game. "Oh crud what do I do now?" moments are fun.
I personally think it's odd the rules say advanced guns don't misfire, because they do (well it's really the ammo) duds, squib loads, cook offs, brass jamming the chamber etc etc.
My character just carries extra pistols, unless the combat is long and drawn out he doesn't really worry about misfires or reloading, but he does chew up some extra feats because of it.
But trying to compare any projectile weapon to the arrow hose in this game is either going to fail, or be better than it, in which people will cry and complain no matter which it is.
Personally, I think "gunslinger" should have been 'artillerist' been given bombs and certain discoveries like an alchemist, allowing for different builds and some back up stuff (blunderbuss shooting bombs at greater distance) and this way, if the gun jams he's got something else to do, or the class could just be a different kind of mad bomber or mortar sheller like an alchemist etc etc. Then there would be less focus on a character class that has "one weapon" that soaks up all his feats and features.
Even Archer characters CAN do something else, usually not every feat is in the bow, if he's a ranger he has other class features not aimed at arching, if he's a fighter he has armor training that lets him bounce armor all day in heavy armor like it was a t-shirt, and his weapon training 'forces' him to eventually be a little better at a weapon other than his bow, so he has something to fall back on.
Although alot of people are missing out n the fact that he's still a full BAB class that can use any melee weapon and will likely be just as good at swinging a sword if not better than the party cleric, he doesnt have the "other thing" he does like the other classes.
Gun v. spells and nothing v. channeling, for example.
Gun v. Archer and nothing v. (name any other ranger feature)
Gun v. Sneak attack and nothing v. (anything the rogue has to offer)
Gun v. Extracts and nothing v. bombs, mutagens, (you might say discoveries and deeds are equal,and I think they SHOULD be but arent)
the list goes on.
|
|
Human beings are not magical in nature. However, through the use of a class feature, the spellcasting classes can use magic. (!)
Traps are deadly to your average schlepp and hard to spot to boot. However, through the use of a class feature, Rogues are just flat out better at spotting them.
When moving around, PC's leave tracks, which can lead to them being followed and attacked at inopportune times. However, through the use of a class feature, Druids simply don't leave those pesky tracks. EVER.
Guns are tricky and tempermental. For most people, they don't always work properly, and sometimes flat out blow up! However, through the use of a class feature, Gunslingers...are subject to the exact same rules as everyone else, although they can avert the actual explosion by expending a standard action, or instead expending a valuable resource to use a move action. The guns still might not work right.
Side note: I'm sure this has been brought up already, but why does the text say that advanced firearms don't misfire, but the table gives a value for misfiring?
I agree it seems fair for guns to blow up for schmo but not for Mister Owl.
But the Dev's have pretty much said this isn't going to happen.
That being said, the gunslinger is still "missing something" as I said above and if you gave them that something, the misfire chance wouldnt be the death of the class.
|
I don't know, I'm just saying, I don't see value added by misfires for gunslingers. Maybe someone can point out to me where misfires add value to the class as a whole - even conceptually or thematically, anything - how do they make the class more fun to play? Would the class be way imbalanced against other classes if they didn't exist? Why don't bowstrings break on natural 1's? Crossbow's are mechanical, why don't they misfire or jam? I guess I just don't follow.
I agree with you on that one. I will also houserule it in the games I DM.
Other DMs I play with have just gone on and said flatly that there will be no guns in their campaigns...
I still think, somehow, for the sake of this class, that the Gunsmithing ability should allow for the crafting of a superior gun that will either never misfire, or can misfire a few times before you get the broken condition... so the "slapdash" gun you start with can and should misfire, but by the time you get to a Masterwork Gun, you shouldn't be misfiring (reaching the broken condition is never fun for ANY weapon user... it is something that happens only rarely in the PRPG game... imagine having a 50K gp magical sword +5 that gains the broken condition every time you roll a one!!! not fair that you should get that with the gunslinger... note that I said "with the gunslinger", not "with guns", so for the typical PC that just grabs a gun, sure, misfire is fine... but a gunslinger is a whole class devoted to guns... they should no longer have to deal with that the moment they move on from their initial "slap dash" junk gun...)
|
|
That would have to be one hell of a "something".
Not really. I was thinking about this and a reduction of 1 from the misfire rate really is all the class needs. It reduces the misfire rate of a pistol to 0 and only 1 with a paper cartridge, which can be further mitigated by Reliable. With this ability and Reliable, a Pepperbox doesn't misfire unless it is loaded with cartridges.
|
|
That would have to be one hell of a "something".Not really. I was thinking about this and a reduction of 1 from the misfire rate really is all the class needs. It reduces the misfire rate of a pistol to 0 and only 1 with a paper cartridge, which can be further mitigated by Reliable. With this ability and Reliable, a Pepperbox doesn't misfire unless it is loaded with cartridges.
On my earlier post, I had a much longer response writeen (thanks, postmonster!) that agreed with the "-1 to misfires" concept you threw out there. So yeah, that's also a good idea, and would work for my purposes. It's sort of a compromise between misfires never happening and having them happen at the frequency with which they do, and it's not just middle ground, but good middle ground. So, kudos on that idea.
I was taking Pendagast's comments as meaning "something (other than anything having to do with misfires)". I might have misinterpreted what he meant, and if so, my bad.
I really hope SRM re-examines this question at the base level. If eliminating misfires entirely isn't an option, then hopefully some reduction to the percentage of times that it occurs can be considered, just for the Gunslinger class. It's really a fun-killer, and I know that killing fun is not an element of great game design. Coincidentally, SRM, if you're reading this, you've already proved to me in spades that you're a great game designer, so please don't take that the wrong way. I'm just saying, this is an opportunity to, as Super Genius Games prefers to do, "err on the side of awesome".
I don't know, I'm just saying, I don't see value added by misfires for gunslingers. Maybe someone can point out to me where misfires add value to the class as a whole - even conceptually or thematically, anything - how do they make the class more fun to play? Would the class be way imbalanced against other classes if they didn't exist? Why don't bowstrings break on natural 1's? Crossbow's are mechanical, why don't they misfire or jam? I guess I just don't follow.I agree with you on that one. I will also houserule it in the games I DM.
Other DMs I play with have just gone on and said flatly that there will be no guns in their campaigns...
I still think, somehow, for the sake of this class, that the Gunsmithing ability should allow for the crafting of a superior gun that will either never misfire, or can misfire a few times before you get the broken condition... so the "slapdash" gun you start with can and should misfire, but by the time you get to a Masterwork Gun, you shouldn't be misfiring (reaching the broken condition is never fun for ANY weapon user... it is something that happens only rarely in the PRPG game... imagine having a 50K gp magical sword +5 that gains the broken condition every time you roll a one!!! not fair that you should get that with the gunslinger... note that I said "with the gunslinger", not "with guns", so for the typical PC that just grabs a gun, sure, misfire is fine... but a gunslinger is a whole class devoted to guns... they should no longer have to deal with that the moment they move on from their initial "slap dash" junk gun...)
this brings me back to 'discovery-esque' deeds for the gunslinger, innovations, up grades, major deeds, this is what the gunslinger is missing.
The alch's discoveries are based off alchemy, the gunslingers innovation could be based off gunsmithing.
