|
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
15 1st level warriors versus a T-Rex...(AC 21, touch 7)
With bows and swords they have very little chance of hitting Mr. Rex. about 15% (given BAB and a +2 stat +1 for weapon focus [+4 total attack bonus])
Those same guys with guns hit poor ole' Mr. Rex 80% of the time. Just because they have guns. WTF?
Even if they aren't proficient they still hit 60% of the time, with a weapon they aren't even proficient with. If they weren't proficient with the bows/swords that chance goes down to 5%. Now is that fair, is that balanced. The swords and bows are doing 1d8 for a longbow, 1d8+STR for a longsword, and the musket deals 1d12. So lets see...
15% for 5-7 points of damage
80% for 6 damage.
The gun-wielders kill their dino, the other guys end up as dino-chow. And why? Because guns for some magical, physics defying reason simply pass right through the dino's thick nearly impervious hide.
Guns that work this way would overrun Golarion in a matter of months, with magic you can easily learn the screts of their creation, and the raw materials to make them don't cost thousands of gold. Katapesh, Cheliax, Andoran, Absalom, and every other metropolis/large kingdom would begin producing guns as fast as they could. Guns as touch attacks is both unbalanced and unrealistic. (yes I know I said unrealistic, deal)
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
15 1st level warriors versus a T-Rex...(AC 21, touch 7)
With bows and swords they have very little chance of hitting Mr. Rex. about 15% (given BAB and a +2 stat +1 for weapon focus [+4 total attack bonus])
Those same guys with guns hit poor ole' Mr. Rex 80% of the time. Just because they have guns. WTF?
Even if they aren't proficient they still hit 60% of the time, with a weapon they aren't even proficient with. If they weren't proficient with the bows/swords that chance goes down to 5%. Now is that fair, is that balanced. The swords and bows are doing 1d8 for a longbow, 1d8+STR for a longsword, and the musket deals 1d12. So lets see...
15% for 5-7 points of damage
80% for 6 damage.The gun-wielders kill their dino, the other guys end up as dino-chow. And why? Because guns for some magical, physics defying reason simply pass right through the dino's thick nearly impervious hide.
Guns that work this way would overrun Golarion in a matter of months, with magic you can easily learn the screts of their creation, and the raw materials to make them don't cost thousands of gold. Katapesh, Cheliax, Andoran, Absalom, and every other metropolis/large kingdom would begin producing guns as fast as they could. Guns as touch attacks is both unbalanced and unrealistic. (yes I know I said unrealistic, deal)
Unrealistic? this how guns really worked, IRL. Less training needed more lethality.
Is an english longbowmen better trained than my mom with a .38? yes. but 400 moms with 38s are going to clean the battle field up quicker than three english longbowmen.That's how guns work IRL.
Sure you can get better trained with a gun, civilian, military and police training exist. that would be like being a gunslinger.
but the truth of the matter is the layman with a weapon is more dangerous than a trained melee warrior. That is exactly why the Samurai became extinct in japan, they were replaced by mooks with muskets.
What happened to all the dangerous predators or yesteryear? Hunted to extinction... by none other than idiots with guns. Not trained skilled snipers, but random civilians with enough money to buy a gun.
If guns and dinos existed at the same time, yes all the dinos would die.
Look at what has happened to bears and wolves, big scary animals that would likely tear me apart if I tried to kill them with a knife, heck let me get my 30.30....oops now it's a rug.
Ever hear the term "brought a knife to a gun fight"? it means the fight is unbalanced.... because guns are better!
You have to be trolling.
1. No coherent party would ever consist of 15 separate characters, let alone 15 separate Gunslingers.
2. What the hell is the Rex doing as the gunslingers shoot him to death? One attack from him is a guaranteed kill on whoever he bites, and considering that they have to be within their gun's range increment to his Touch AC, they'd have to stay outside of his massive reach to avoid an AoO.
3. Your scenario completely ignores action economy. Of course stacking 15 different characters against one creature is gonna kill him. This is the same reason you don't throw a lone BBEG against a party of 4 people, even.
|
|
Yeah this will get killed momentarily. I'm sure the developers are working on some mechanical fix to adjust this so try to be patient.
My biggest concern is what you said at the end:
It think firearms as presented change Golarian and even make things that have happened in its past nonsensical. This is the problem with introducing technology in a magical world. Didn't someone already ban airships for this very reason? And Lawful Evil Paladins for similar thematic concerns? I wish the guns mentioned in the original CS were errated out like Queen Abograil being a child and LE Paladins...Ahh well.
Guns that work this way would overrun Golarion in a matter of months, with magic you can easily learn the secrets of their creation, and the raw materials to make them don't cost thousands of gold. Katapesh, Cheliax, Andoran, Absalom, and every other metropolis/large kingdom would begin producing guns as fast as they could.
I would hope so, If the Gunslinger class could spend grit to make touch attacks that would be fine, but guns in the hands of anyone on the planet and touch attacks is just wrong. And something that I'm frankly shocked to see from Paizo as all of their stuff up until this has been very well designed.
I would hope so, If the Gunslinger class could spend grit to make touch attacks that would be fine, but guns in the hands of anyone on the planet and touch attacks is just wrong. And something that I'm frankly shocked to see from Paizo as all of their stuff up until this has been very well designed.
We get it. You think guns are dumb. What do you want?
A rewrite of a published book? Not happening. We your complaints. I might as well moan about the moon not being green. Its not going to matter.
Move along. Nothing to see here.
|
|
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
15 1st level warriors versus a T-Rex...(AC 21, touch 7)
With bows and swords they have very little chance of hitting Mr. Rex. about 15% (given BAB and a +2 stat +1 for weapon focus [+4 total attack bonus])
Those same guys with guns hit poor ole' Mr. Rex 80% of the time. Just because they have guns. WTF?
Even if they aren't proficient they still hit 60% of the time, with a weapon they aren't even proficient with. If they weren't proficient with the bows/swords that chance goes down to 5%. Now is that fair, is that balanced. The swords and bows are doing 1d8 for a longbow, 1d8+STR for a longsword, and the musket deals 1d12. So lets see...
15% for 5-7 points of damage
80% for 6 damage.The gun-wielders kill their dino, the other guys end up as dino-chow. And why? Because guns for some magical, physics defying reason simply pass right through the dino's thick nearly impervious hide.
Guns that work this way would overrun Golarion in a matter of months, with magic you can easily learn the screts of their creation, and the raw materials to make them don't cost thousands of gold. Katapesh, Cheliax, Andoran, Absalom, and every other metropolis/large kingdom would begin producing guns as fast as they could. Guns as touch attacks is both unbalanced and unrealistic. (yes I know I said unrealistic, deal)
Unrealistic? this how guns really worked, IRL. Less training needed more lethality.
Is an english longbowmen better trained than my mom with a .38? yes. but 400 moms with 38s are going to clean the battle field up quicker than three english longbowmen.That's how guns work IRL.
Sure you can get better trained with a gun, civilian, military and police training exist. that would be like being a gunslinger.
but the truth of the matter is the layman with a weapon is more dangerous than a trained melee warrior. That is...
Go watch 'The Last Samurai' again guys with bows are just as effective as guys with guns. And your IRL stuff just doesn't hold water, I'm talking about how this unbalances the GAME, I don't care how guns work in real life, in real life armor doesn't make you harder to hit, it just makes you harder to hurt.
|
Overdark plenty of people agree with you, I am sure. I ranted on this attacking touch AC madness and the damage to versimilitude, among other things, within one day of the first playtest.
However, it doesn't look likely to change so I simply don't post here or talk about it anymore- we may disagree with it, but lets let the people who are still interested in the gunslinger have their fun and not rain on their parade eh?
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
Dude! Really?!
I've read your points, and it's not the points I object to. It is the lack of respect people had to each others while making there points that shut down the old thread.
I didn't want to shut down the thread...I don't like shutting down threads or discussions.
But baiting and personal attacks have no place within these forums.
This thread is not starting out on the right foot, but I'm not going to shut it down...yet.
Keep it civil and friendly. Remember we are all on the same side. Ditch the rampant hyperbole. Stick to plausible examples that could really come up in a game (not 15 PCs vs. a T-Rex is not going to cut it). Remember that the gunslinger is not the only class that makes attacks against touch AC. Do all those things and you will be heading in the right direction, and I will not shut anything down and I will read, enjoy, and be enlightened by you posts.
Don't do these things and I will get my boom (read: lock) stick. It's just that simple.
Mechanically, I don't agree that guns as they've been presented so far are all that unbalancing. You hit more often, approaching always, with a gun, but damage per hit is much lower than with a bow. Average damage works out fine, even generally favoring bows (sometimes heavily). People have gone over this in much more detail than I'm going to bother with here though, so lets leave it at that.
Now then, historically, this is precisely why guns changed warfare forever. As soon as they were commonly available, heavy armor became virtually irrelevant (which had the added effect of bringing light weapons like rapiers back into vogue). So while attacks vs. touch AC makes it seem like these things are unreasonably accurate compared to their historical counterparts, the net effect: negating the advantages of armor, is achieved in a simple, elegant fashion.
Further, guns are MUCH easier to use than bows, which had a huge effect on historical warfare as well. No longer did armies have to arduously train longbow-men; they just handed guns to the militia and dominated the field. Not too different form your commoners with muskets example...
Attacks vs. touch AC makes perfect historical sense IMO, and does so without introducing a weapon that is clearly superior to the standard alternative for ranged combat (composite longbow). Better capability of hitting heavily armored foes and ease of use (Guns) vs. higher average damage capacity vs. all foes and much higher vs. low armor foes, with much better range (Bows). Sounds fine to me.
Anything less than currently presented neuters guns from a historical perspective and makes them totally unrealistic, not to mention non-competitive.
|
|
You have to be trolling.
1. No coherent party would ever consist of 15 separate characters, let alone 15 separate Gunslingers.
2. What the hell is the Rex doing as the gunslingers shoot him to death? One attack from him is a guaranteed kill on whoever he bites, and considering that they have to be within their gun's range increment to his Touch AC, they'd have to stay outside of his massive reach to avoid an AoO.
3. Your scenario completely ignores action economy. Of course stacking 15 different characters against one creature is gonna kill him. This is the same reason you don't throw a lone BBEG against a party of 4 people, even.
I didn't say 15 gunslingers i said 15 warriors. Guys with BAB +1 and no special abilities, like most of the guys in Alkenstar. And the point of the example was to illustrate that 15 crappy 1st level warriors with bows have little chance to even hit the dino. The guys with guns do, simply because they have guns.
And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.
You have to be trolling.
1. No coherent party would ever consist of 15 separate characters, let alone 15 separate Gunslingers.
2. What the hell is the Rex doing as the gunslingers shoot him to death? One attack from him is a guaranteed kill on whoever he bites, and considering that they have to be within their gun's range increment to his Touch AC, they'd have to stay outside of his massive reach to avoid an AoO.
3. Your scenario completely ignores action economy. Of course stacking 15 different characters against one creature is gonna kill him. This is the same reason you don't throw a lone BBEG against a party of 4 people, even.
+1
Other things like move rate and range and reach. Leaves out the fact that first level warriors with guns would not have the grit to shoot at the t-rex for touch ac at anything less than 20 feet and at that range they are in reach distance of the t rex, pull the trigger aao +13 bab much dead, it's +5 initiative gives it a very good chance at the first action two gone at a +22 damage is enough to flat out kill a 1st level warrior with no need to roll damage. Next he fails to point out that the average warrior seeing two of his friends eaten in seconds most of them would defecate themselves and run screaming away from this 40 foot tall monstrosity.Anyone can take almost any rule in this game and blow it out of proportion and claim that it is over powered when when actually used in game it really does not do any thing all that special in the hands of a single character.
Dude! Really?!
Heh, Awsome.
But really at this point I have to ask.
Overdark, what are you trying to do here? The rule is not going to change.
You have stated your point about 27465 times now.
Some people have said they agree with you, most have said they don't. but in the end it doesn't matter anyway.
So really, what are you looking for here?
And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.
Lol wut? Stephen Radney-MacFarland isn't?
Obvious blind troll is obvious.
No name calling, please.
|
|
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
Dude! Really?!
I've read your points, and it's not the points I object to. It is the lack of respect people had to each others while making there points that shut down the old thread.
I didn't want to shut down the thread...I don't like shutting down threads or discussions.
But baiting and personal attacks have no place within these forums.
This thread is not starting out on the right foot, but I'm not going to shut it down...yet.
Keep it civil and friendly. Remember we are all on the same side. Ditch the rampant hyperbole. Stick to plausible examples that could really come up in a game (not 15 PCs vs. a T-Rex is not going to cut it). Remember that the gunslinger is not the only class that makes attacks against touch AC. Do all those things and you will be heading in the right direction, and I will not shut anything down and I will read, enjoy, and be enlightened by you posts.
Don't do these things and I will get my boom (read: lock) stick. It's just that simple.
Ok lets see, who else gets touch attacks?
Spellcasters? Theirs are limited by the number of spells they get per day. The guy with a gun can make potentially unlimited touch attacks. So that seems a little one sided to me.Who else gets full BAB and gets ranged touch attacks like this?
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
Human Fighter Archer Level 10
str 16
Dex 22
Con 12
Int 10
Wis 12
Chr 7
AC 27 (dex 6, dodge 1, defection 2, armor 6, natural 2) Touch 19 (dex 6, dodge 1, deflection 2)
Feats: H:WF Long Bow 1:Deadly Aim F1:Point Blank Shot F2:Precise shot 3:Rapid Shot F4:WS Long Bow 5:Dodge F6:Many Shot 7:Mobility F8:Improved Critical longBow 9:GWF Long Bow F10: Shot on the Run
Class feature: Hawk Eye +15 range, Trick Shot Disarm and Sunder, Expert Archer +2 to hit +2 damage
Magic Items: Mighty Comp Bow +2, Belt of Physical might (str/Dex), Mitheral Chain Shirt +2, Ring Protection +2, Amulet Natural armor +2, cloak of resistance +2, Efficient Quiver (50000gp roughly)
BAB 10
Longbow +22/+17 (1D8 +9) x3 20 Range 125/250/375/500/625
Longbow Rapid Many Shot +20/+20/+15 (1D8 +9) x3 20 Range 125/250/375/500/625
Longbow Rapid Many Shot Deadly Aim +17/+17/+12 (1D8 +15) x3 20 Range 125/250/375/500/625
Human Gun Slinger Level 10
str 10
Dex 22
Con 12
Int 10
Wis 14
Chr 9
AC 29 (dex 6, dodge 1, defection 2, armor 6, shield 2, natural 2)
Feats H:WF Musket 1:Deadly Aim 3:Point Blank shot G4: Precise shot 5:Deft Shootist 7:Rapid Reload G8:Vital Strike 9: Improved critical
Class feature: Gunsmith musket, Grit 2, Deads, Gun Training
Magic Items: Musket +2, Belt of incredible Dex , Mitheral Chain Shirt +2, Ring Protection +2, Amulet Natural armor +2, cloak of resistance +2, Ring of Force Shield, Far Reaching Site, Handy Haver sack (50000gp roughly)
BAB 10
Musket Vital Strike: +19 (2D12 +8) x4 20 Range 40/80/120/160/200
Musket Vital Strike Deadly Aim: +16 (2D12 +14) x4 20 Range 40/80/120/160/200
Couple of quick builds so may not be fully optimized and I may have screwed up in few places. Maybe these will help.
The Gunslinger gets a single attack every other round but uses vital strike and might as well use Deadly as he can't miss. So 2D12 +14 every other round.
The archer isn't hitting as well but is firing 3 shots a round. Odds are he will land one shot each round with many shot apply precision damage possibly. Out damaging the gunslinger. As well the range 200 max vs 625, the archer get off a lot more chances to do damage if great range is present
Seems balanced to me at a glance.
Seems balanced to me at a glance.
See here.
|
|
Lol wut? Stephen Radney-MacFarland isn't?And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.
He certainly is, but he made no actual comment pertaining to the issue, until recently.
And if the rest of you have an issue with my thread just please go away, and don't post on it. I have the same rights as you to be able to post my concerns with this particular game mechanic. Calling me a troll or other name calling doesn't affect me. I was trying to use this forum like I thought it was originally intended, to connect with the Paizo staff not some faceless avatar half-way around the world who wants to point out how stupid I am because I don't live my life on some message board and read 1000 pages of said boards every day.
|
|
Lol wut? Stephen Radney-MacFarland isn't?And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.
This.
You've been called a troll by at least a dozen different people at this point.
It's not what you are saying, it's how you are saying it and more importantly how you treat those that disagree with you. You have repeatedly failed to respond to requests to present actual, 100% fully-developed requests for 100% fully-stated, 100% fully-equal examples proving your point.
Of course a pack of level one warriors will take down a t-rex with a bunch of guns - at a cost of roughly 20,000 gold to equip them. What you have failed to account for thanks to your extremely narrow focus and stubborn unwillingness to make actually equivalent examples is the same thing happens if they use a bunch of acid flacks or alchemist fires, and it costs an order of magnitude less to do it.
You need to calm down, walk away from this topic for a few days, and put together a single, fully-thought out argument with multiple fully-developed examples supporting your point of view. When people respond with critiques, answer them instead of dismissing their point outright. Who knows - you may actually change things this way.
Or you can keep on doing what you've been doing, get yet another thread locked, and eventually earn yourself a ban.
not some faceless avatar half-way around the world who wants to point out how stupid I am because I don't live my life on some message board and read 1000 pages of said boards every day.
Really? Calling me 'stupid... because... [I] read 000 pages of said boards every day?
Really? I have shown you evidence, all you have done is insult me.
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
I'm also genuinely not try to be offensive, but you have demonstrated some genuine trouble with the math associated with attacks and hit rates. It's the math, not our intuitions, that will determine whether the higher hit rate balances the lower damage.
If you still believe that guns are overpowered in actual play, I would recommend you consider tweaking voska's build or submitting a complete build of your own that demonstrates where having a gun allows the character to do much more than other characters of the same level. If there is no such build, then guns are not really overpowered regardless of what they may seem like at first glance.As to the OP scenario, if we have 22,500 gp to spend on equipment, aren't there better ways for a bunch of warriors to take out a T-rex than guns?
|
|
And if the rest of you have an issue with my thread just please go away, and don't post on it. I have the same rights as you to be able to post my concerns with this particular game mechanic. Calling me a troll or other name calling doesn't affect me. I was trying to use this forum like I thought it was originally intended, to connect with the Paizo staff not some faceless avatar half-way around the world who wants to point out how stupid I am because I don't live my life on some message board and read 1000 pages of said boards every day.
OH BIG LULZ
BIG BIG LULZ
Seems balanced to me at a glance.See here.
One problem with your build, your gunslinger is too encumbered to move with just the gun, breast plate, and clothing. You end up at 48 lbs and your max is 47 lbs. You literally can not move.
|
|
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.I'm also genuinely not try to be offensive, but you have demonstrated some genuine trouble with the math associated with attacks and hit rates. It's the math, not our intuitions, that will determine whether the higher hit rate balances the lower damage.
If you still believe that guns are overpowered in actual play, I would recommend you consider tweaking voska's build or submitting a complete build of your own that demonstrates where having a gun allows the character to do much more than other characters of the same level. If there is no such build, then guns are not really overpowered regardless of what they may seem like at first glance.As to the OP scenario, if we have 22,500 gp to spend on equipment, aren't there better ways for a bunch of warriors to take out a T-rex than guns?
Yes there are, and yes the 22,500 gp is unrealistic. Im trying to understand how just because they shoot lead balls thats somehow 80% more likely to hurt the t-rex than an arrow shot by the same guy. Guns dominate the world because they're easy to use (like a crossbow) faster to load than a crossbow, not because they are more accurate/deadly than a crossbow.
But I give up you guys win, I have no idea what I'm talking about. And like you said their not gonna change the way guns work, cause I guess thats in the new Inner Sea guide. I thought all the new gun stuff was gonna be in Ultimate Combat. Oh well, good gaming everyone! (that last was actually sincere)
One problem with your build, your gunslinger is too encumbered to move with just the gun, breast plate, and clothing. You end up at 48 lbs and your max is 47 lbs. You literally can not move.Seems balanced to me at a glance.See here.
Negative there ghost rider. 4+30+2=36?
I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
Dude! Really?!
I've read your points, and it's not the points I object to. It is the lack of respect people had to each others while making there points that shut down the old thread.
I didn't want to shut down the thread...I don't like shutting down threads or discussions.
But baiting and personal attacks have no place within these forums.
This thread is not starting out on the right foot, but I'm not going to shut it down...yet.
Keep it civil and friendly. Remember we are all on the same side. Ditch the rampant hyperbole. Stick to plausible examples that could really come up in a game (not 15 PCs vs. a T-Rex is not going to cut it). Remember that the gunslinger is not the only class that makes attacks against touch AC. Do all those things and you will be heading in the right direction, and I will not shut anything down and I will read, enjoy, and be enlightened by you posts.
Don't do these things and I will get my boom (read: lock) stick. It's just that simple.
Ok lets see, who else gets touch attacks?
Spellcasters? Theirs are limited by the number of spells they get per day. The guy with a gun can make potentially unlimited touch attacks. So that seems a little one sided to me.Who else gets full BAB and gets ranged touch attacks like this?
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
Yes, guns are different, and the gunslinger class is high reward and high risk. Guns lack the range of other touch attack users (spellcasters, alchemists, high-level fighters who take brilliant energy weapons), they are limited in other ways with substantial costs involved to increase their range and upkeep of their signature abilities (in itemization, in feats, and, for the gunslinger, in grit).
The data we are seeing from the playtests is that the class in its newest form is pretty well balanced (there are some tweaks to be made...that's why we playtest) and guns at their baseline seem to work pretty well for our purposes. For every one of your post on the theoretics, I have a counter post that comes from playtests that wonders if some aspect of guns and the gunslinger are not doing enough to achieve the balance needed for the class. Heck, there are a lot of folks that wonder if guns at their baseline are really worth the danger.
I like that...that's exactly the kind of question we want people to ask when they decide to pick up a gun in Pathfinder. To us that's a feature, not a bug. We wanted guns to be interesting, unpredictable, and different.
I always weigh actual playtest results over theoretical discussion, but I do read all the theoretical discussions and keep them in mind while developing.
In short, we are not getting rid of the touch attack function of guns. We are going to balance the costs of actions and abilities of the gunslinger with that in mind, and we have made fixes and are going to continue to do fixes that achieve the right balance for the final class.
If you do not want guns and gunslingers in your game, I understand. I know a lot of people who don't want this kind of technology in their fantasy. When Paizo decided to do a gunslinger class and put guns in the campaign setting this attitude was well know to us. But there are people who do want these things in their game, and frankly we are going to provide them along with a bunch of other new options in Ultimate Combat.
|
|
not some faceless avatar half-way around the world who wants to point out how stupid I am because I don't live my life on some message board and read 1000 pages of said boards every day.Really? Calling me 'stupid... because... [I] read 000 pages of said boards every day?
Really? I have shown you evidence, all you have done is insult me.
I didn't call you stupid, did you actually read what you quoted there?
Im trying to understand how just because they shoot lead balls thats somehow 80% more likely to hurt the t-rex than an arrow shot by the same guy.
I'm not. The fluff arguments don't interest me.
Now, your arguments about balance and guns being overpowered interest me, but those arguments need numbers in order to be effective. When we crunched the numbers you provided, guns didn't win. If you have another build to try to demonstrate that guns are overpowered, I would love to see it and help calculate the DPR to see if you're right.
What I find ridiculous is that a gun at close range is more effective against a commoner with 14 Dex in plain clothes than a fighter with 12 Dex in plate-armor. What does this represent? Is dodging the best defense against close-ish range gunfire?
The gun rules in the old golarian book were fine, as were other gun rules I've seen in the past for 3.5. that targeted regular AC. This touch attack thing is not just controversial with some, it is poorly thought-out and unrealistic (why would armor have less effect at close range? Why would Dex have any effect, especially at close-range?)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A commoner with 14 Dexterity is harder to hit than a fighter with 13 Dexterity wearing magical plate-mail... sure.
|
|
Yes, guns are different, and the gunslinger class is high reward and high risk. Guns lack the range of other touch attack users (spellcasters, alchemists, high-level fighters who take brilliant energy weapons), they are limited in other ways with substantial costs involved to increase their range and upkeep of their signature abilities (in itemization, in feats, and, for the gunslinger, in grit).
The data we are seeing from the playtests is that the class in its newest form is pretty well balanced (there are some tweaks to be made...that's why we playtest) and guns at their baseline seem to work pretty well for our purposes. For every one of your post on the theoretics, I have a counter post that comes from playtests that wonders if some aspect of guns and the gunslinger are not doing enough to achieve the balance needed for the class. Heck, there are a lot of folks that wonder if guns at their baseline are really worth the danger.
I like that...that's exactly the kind of question we want people to ask when they decide to pick up a gun in Pathfinder. To us that's a feature, not a bug. We wanted guns to be interesting, unpredictable, and different.
I always weigh actual playtest results over theoretical discussion, but I do read all the theoretical discussions and keep them in mind while developing.
In short, we are not getting rid of the touch attack function of guns. We are going to balance the costs of actions and abilities of the gunslinger with that in mind, and we have made fixes and are going to continue to do fixes that achieve the right balance for the final class.
If you do not want guns and gunslingers in your game, I understand. I know a lot of people who don't want this kind of technology in their fantasy. When Paizo decided to do a gunslinger class and put guns in the campaign setting this attitude was well know to us. But there are people who do want these things in their game, and frankly we are going to provide them along with a bunch of other new options in Ultimate Combat.
At last, thanks for that Stephen. Guns and other stuff like that doesn't bother me, the mechanics is what I'm having trouble with. Like the inclusion of Ninjas and Samurai, when the Tian Xia book seems like a better place for them. But I digress, If the playtest data is giving you what you want then I guess that somehow I'm missing the big balancing factor somewhere. But good luck and continued success.
|
|
What I find ridiculous is that a gun at close range is more effective against a commoner with 14 Dex in plain clothes than a fighter with 12 Dex in plate-armor. What does this represent? Is dodging the best defense against close-ish range gunfire?
The gun rules in the old golarian book were fine, as were other gun rules I've seen in the past for 3.5. that targeted regular AC. This touch attack thing is not just controversial with some, it is poorly thought-out and unrealistic (why would armor have less effect at close range? Why would Dex have any effect, especially at close-range?)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A commoner with 14 Dexterity is harder to hit than a fighter with 13 Dexterity wearing magical plate-mail... sure.
EXACTLY!! I don't get it myself, but eveidently the cost of guns and ammo and the low damage that guns do, somehow balances this out. I guess.
Yes, guns are different, and the gunslinger class is high reward and high risk. Guns lack the range of other touch attack users (spellcasters, alchemists, high-level fighters who take brilliant energy weapons), they are limited in other ways with substantial costs involved to increase their...I guess the developers didn't like me pointing out how silly their guns are...
One last example...I don't expect Stephen to let this live either...
Dude! Really?!
I've read your points, and it's not the points I object to. It is the lack of respect people had to each others while making there points that shut down the old thread.
I didn't want to shut down the thread...I don't like shutting down threads or discussions.
But baiting and personal attacks have no place within these forums.
This thread is not starting out on the right foot, but I'm not going to shut it down...yet.
Keep it civil and friendly. Remember we are all on the same side. Ditch the rampant hyperbole. Stick to plausible examples that could really come up in a game (not 15 PCs vs. a T-Rex is not going to cut it). Remember that the gunslinger is not the only class that makes attacks against touch AC. Do all those things and you will be heading in the right direction, and I will not shut anything down and I will read, enjoy, and be enlightened by you posts.
Don't do these things and I will get my boom (read: lock) stick. It's just that simple.
Ok lets see, who else gets touch attacks?
Spellcasters? Theirs are limited by the number of spells they get per day. The guy with a gun can make potentially unlimited touch attacks. So that seems a little one sided to me.Who else gets full BAB and gets ranged touch attacks like this?
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
+1
And we appreciate being a part of this process even though we can get testy at times.
What I find ridiculous is that a gun at close range is more effective against a commoner with 14 Dex in plain clothes than a fighter with 12 Dex in plate-armor. What does this represent? Is dodging the best defense against close-ish range gunfire?
The gun rules in the old golarian book were fine, as were other gun rules I've seen in the past for 3.5. that targeted regular AC. This touch attack thing is not just controversial with some, it is poorly thought-out and unrealistic (why would armor have less effect at close range? Why would Dex have any effect, especially at close-range?)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A commoner with 14 Dexterity is harder to hit than a fighter with 13 Dexterity wearing magical plate-mail... sure.
Actually yes, most police officers are taught to take a half step to the left or the right just before going into a situation where there will be gunfire. Why? It reduces the chance that you will be fatally wounded. Dodging Gunfire should be better than absorbing it.
I don't see how having to position myself to take advantage of using touch ac with a gun is any different than a rogue positioning him self to take advantage of his target being flat-footed.
It takes a bit of tactical know how to do this with out getting thrashed in melee.
.
..
...
....
.....
Stephen mon,
Ya be awesome.
By default.
'tis truth!
::
Overdark mon,
Ya be awesome.
By default.
'tis truth!
::
Reader of this.
Ya be awesome.
By default.
'tis truth!
I didn't say 15 gunslingers i said 15 warriors. Guys with BAB +1 and no special abilities, like most of the guys in Alkenstar. And the point of the example was to illustrate that 15 crappy 1st level warriors with bows have little chance to even hit the dino. The guys with guns do, simply because they have guns.
But you are ignoring facts that don't support your argument.
First, cost. You can't afford guns and ammo at level 1 NPC or PC usually.Second, don't forgot the blow-up chance for each shot. One is bound to happen if you have 15 shooters according to the odds. Second, 15 NPC with same wealth as your gun using ones will better bowmen than you give them credit.
Remember the cost of equipment.
To your argument of other touch attack users:
Since cantrips are at will, you have infinite uses of them. Yes, that is only 1d3 acid or cold (acid splash, ray of frost) cantrip as a ranged touch, but it has no misfire, no reload, and no cost.
And I'm not trolling, I'm trying to understand how people can think this is balanced. Mostly I was hoping for a comment from an actual Paizo staffer but that seems unlikely now.
Stop ignoring facts and others will likely stop thinking you are are doing it on purpose. People are irrational. And in their moments of rationality, they focus on facits that look off. When you don't ackowledge their points, they assume you are just making trouble instead of having a discussion, hence the T word.
Ackowledge both sides of an arguement more often than not: helps prove the correctness of your side. Saying, "yes, I admit..blah blah but still fact reminds..." is better than what you doing currently.
Ok lets see, who else gets touch attacks?
Spellcasters? Theirs are limited by the number of spells they get per day. The guy with a gun can make potentially unlimited touch attacks. So that seems a little one sided to me.Who else gets full BAB and gets ranged touch attacks like this?
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
Ok, I'm risking foot-in-mouth here, because I'm not sure about current prices in round 2. But 15 1st level warriors with pistols/muskets (1,000 gp each) can make unlimited shots at touch AC for 11 gp per shot. Each of them shooting 10 times would cost 16,650 gp to outfit them with guns, shot, and powder. They shoot 150 times, and out of those shots, there will be several misfires.
Alternately, you get 15 1st level adepts, each with a partially charged (10 charges) wand of scorching ray for 900 gp each that hit vs touch AC for 4d6 each.
Or 15 1st level Wizards, each with a fully charged wand of Magic Missile that auto-hit for 1d4+1, no roll required for 750gp each.
I fail to see how these situations are significantly different. If you're willing to spend a pile of gold on a 1st level NPC to give them an effective attack, you can do it already.
|
|
What I find ridiculous is that a gun at close range is more effective against a commoner with 14 Dex in plain clothes than a fighter with 12 Dex in plate-armor. What does this represent? Is dodging the best defense against close-ish range gunfire?
The gun rules in the old golarian book were fine, as were other gun rules I've seen in the past for 3.5. that targeted regular AC. This touch attack thing is not just controversial with some, it is poorly thought-out and unrealistic (why would armor have less effect at close range? Why would Dex have any effect, especially at close-range?)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
A commoner with 14 Dexterity is harder to hit than a fighter with 13 Dexterity wearing magical plate-mail... sure.Actually yes, most police officers are taught to take a half step to the left or the right just before going into a situation where there will be gunfire. Why? It reduces the chance that you will be fatally wounded. Dodging Gunfire should be better than absorbing it.
I don't see how having to position myself to take advantage of using touch ac with a gun is any different than a rogue positioning him self to take advantage of his target being flat-footed.
It takes a bit of tactical know how to do this with out getting thrashed in melee.
When you miss a guy in armor just because you didn't 'hit' his AC that doesn't mean you completely missed making contact with him its just that his armor deflected the blow, now if you didn't even hit his touch AC then yeah you just completely missed. With guns its like he's not even wearing that wonderful armor that deflects magic swords and arrow but can't stop a little lead ball. At all.
After reading everything, I lost my train of thought.
But let's say this, Last Samurai is a movie, History says muskets spelled the end of the samurai.
The Indians Of The U.S. did amazingly well against early guns, but once rapid fire came about (winchester lever actions and six shooters) the days of the bow were done. The only fight the Indians won against american cavalry after that was the battle of little big horn where they (the indians) had better weapons than the cavalry (single shot rifles v. the indians lever action winchesters)
Any day of the week I can get commoners to hold a rifle in mass formation and shoot them at a single or a few trained bowmen and win. Sure the Bow is good, in the hands of an expert, but I will always out man you, because barely trained people can operate a gun.
That all being said.
Im really just missing the free pistol whip (no grit cost) and my commando crawl in my gunslinger.
I'd like a few other things, but I have to have those things.
My favorite classes have become gunslinger, magus and alchemist. Looking for a prestige class (or even archetype) that crosses a magus or alchemist with a gunslinger would just be candy! (gun-mage obviously)
The alchemist would be the best synergy.
With out the pistol whip for free/ 1 grit for knock down, there will be all sorts of cheese with armored spikes and cestus to overcome this which i dont like, so it should just be in the class.
Also Id like to see the option for a musket or other long-gun to beused with a bayonet as a "double weapon" (like an orc double axe) if the character has TWF.
The last thing is commando/rogue crawl.
another option is to bring signature deed down to maybe 5th or 7th level? but then really the pistol whip would become too powerful (as it would always have option for knock down)
but all in all have had great fun with this character.
So far I have used gunslinger dodge (already buffed with spider climb) to step onto an adjacent saccophus (whatever you call the giant croc) run up his back and touch Ac him to death with my pistols while standing on his back, rode on the back of the samurai's horse attacking touch AC and point blank range, and even used leaping shot to dive through the air to attack two different flying apes and get into the range of their touch AC, where they were flying off the edge of a ziggurat, a ring of feather fall came in nice and handy for that.
these are things I just would never have done really with any other character. And they have all been a blast.
Just a little tweaking and my prestige class out in time for me to play in carrion crown and Im happy.
Until I see an unbalanced build, I can't agree that guns are unbalanced.
|
|
Ok lets see, who else gets touch attacks?
Spellcasters? Theirs are limited by the number of spells they get per day. The guy with a gun can make potentially unlimited touch attacks. So that seems a little one sided to me.Who else gets full BAB and gets ranged touch attacks like this?
I'm not trying to be offensive here, this just doesn't make sense to me and even with the (perceived) low damage, the higher hit rate seems like it would compensate for that easily.
Ok, I'm risking foot-in-mouth here, because I'm not sure about current prices in round 2. But 15 1st level warriors with pistols/muskets (1,000 gp each) can make unlimited shots at touch AC for 11 gp per shot. Each of them shooting 10 times would cost 16,650 gp to outfit them with guns, shot, and powder. They shoot 150 times, and out of those shots, there will be several misfires.
Alternately, you get 15 1st level adepts, each with a partially charged (10 charges) wand of scorching ray for 900 gp each that hit vs touch AC for 4d6 each.
Or 15 1st level Wizards, each with a fully charged wand of Magic Missile that auto-hit for 1d4+1, no roll required for 750gp each.
I fail to see how these situations are significantly different. If you're willing to spend a pile of gold on a 1st level NPC to give them an effective attack, you can do it already.
It wouldn't be spending thousands of gold, guns don't really cost that much. The prices in the playtest are inflated due to 'rarity' in actuallity someone (likely Katapesh or Qadira) would begin making guns and selling them for much less since a warrior with a rifle is superior to a warrior with a bow or crossbow. The touch mechanic ensures this and guns would overwhelm Golarion in short order.
When you miss a guy in armor just because you didn't 'hit' his AC that doesn't mean you completely missed making contact with him its just that his armor deflected the blow, now if you didn't even hit his touch AC then yeah you just completely missed. With guns its like he's not even wearing that wonderful armor that deflects magic swords and arrow but can't stop a little lead ball. At all.
Armor Class from the PH I
Your Armor Class (AC) represents how hard it is for opponents to land a solid, damaging blow on you. It’s the attack roll result that an opponent needs to achieve to hit you.So not necessarily. You might just miss because you swung too wide, or shot too wide, or he jumped, or a million other fluff effects.
Why you missed is fluff, not hard ruled, laid down law.
It wouldn't be spending thousands of gold, guns don't really cost that much. The prices in the playtest are inflated due to 'rarity' in actuallity someone (likely Katapesh or Qadira) would begin making guns and selling them for much less since a warrior with a rifle is superior to a warrior with a bow or crossbow. The touch mechanic ensures this and guns would overwhelm Golarion in short order.
Except it wouldn't and they won't:
"Come buy my new invention! The Gun! It's slower -- unless you specialize, it'll blow up on you, unless you specialize, it'll do less damage, even if you specialize, and is only special in the very shortest of ranges... heck it doesn't even shoot as far as the sling! And for today only I'm offering them at 50% off! That's right folks! Buy this incredible dangerous weapon (to the person using it) for only 1,500 gp! WHAT A BARGAIN!"
After all it only took how long for the gun to actually develop into the weapon it is today? 400+ years?
When you can spend less for the bow and use it faster and easier without it blowing up on you and you can get it magicked up just as easily?
Why develop the firearm at all when with a little training you can get the same effect only better with wands in the majority of the world?