Firearms - Now 100% More Broken!


Product Discussion

151 to 200 of 562 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

leo1925 wrote:
Hey i don't like guns (and ninja for that matter) to be alongside with wizards, knights and dragons but you don't see me fighting against them and going in the rant that overdark seems to be going, also from what i have seen and thought, i don't see anything game-braking with early firearms (apart from waiting for a clarification on double barrel pistols), for advanced firearms i am not so sure since i haven't got the chance to test them yet.

I disagree with you about guns in fantasy BUT... Thats opinion and is one conversation, mechanics is another. I'm pretty sure we agree on that.

As to rules? I really hope that the double barrel is usable when you move but not every single attack. Advanced firearms are... well lets say this. I feel firearms are over priced gold wise BUT the difference in early and advanced firearms price is not enough for what you get, an extra 1k(revolver) for 5 range increments of touch attack? Thats pretty.. tiny for what you get. I'd think that Advanced firearms could go on either the wondrous items chart OR be more like 6k(revolver) and lower the price or early guns by 10% or so.

On top of that i feel that the price of ammo is pretty out of control considering the giant difference between Paper carts and arrows. Mostly because to use your full attack they are necessary and they have other downsides (misfire going up one.) I'm glad that one of the groups i play in doesn't track normal ammo which for them is normal arrows, normal bolts and paper carts/bullets/powder otherwise, I'd be broke.

I can understand why, fluff wise, they would make guns and ammo more expensive, making them feel more rare. But from a game play point of view it seems... unbalanced. Theres also the huge difference in bullets and powder vs paper carts i just don't see the extra money for paper... a paper cart is just a pullet and dose of powder wrapped in paper.

Anyways, if you ban advanced fire arms and only allow double barrel firing once a turn the gunslinger comes out just fine. At higher levels advanced firearms are less of an issue considering what high level fighters and wizards are capable.


SRT4W wrote:
leo1925 wrote:
Hey i don't like guns (and ninja for that matter) to be alongside with wizards, knights and dragons but you don't see me fighting against them and going in the rant that overdark seems to be going, also from what i have seen and thought, i don't see anything game-braking with early firearms (apart from waiting for a clarification on double barrel pistols), for advanced firearms i am not so sure since i haven't got the chance to test them yet.

I disagree with you about guns in fantasy BUT... Thats opinion and is one conversation, mechanics is another. I'm pretty sure we agree on that.

Of course we agree, because we like different things in our games that doesn't either of us the right to attack the thing just because one of us doesn't like it, i am not going to judge badly the mecahnics of one thing i don't like just because i don't like it.

I have made my own house rule until we get a FAQ/clarification on double barrel pistol, it's that:
my double barrel rule until we got a clarification:

if you chose to fire both barrels you simply double the damage die of the weapon just like having a built in vital strike without the silly restrictions of the feat (and of course it stacks with vital strike), no restrictions on when you can use it, everytime you fire you can chose to fire both of the barrels. Of course if you have a way to reload both barrels as a free action (for example by using paper carts and having rapid reload) you can have everyshot of yours with double the damage die.
I think that this rule does justice to the 700gp difference in it's price compared to a normal pistol and it doesn't break anything.

Now on the subject of advanced firearms, i will cross that bridge when and if i have to, if one player decides to play with firearms* i most probably won't allow him to either craft or buy advanced firearms until i have more time to think on the matter and/or read more people's experience on the subject.

*assuming i allow the guns existance, i really don't like guns, ninjas, samurais, psionics and such, i can hardly swallow the monk's existance. I don't know why, maybe because i just that i get funny (in a bad way) pictures in my head like that:

funny picture:

Atop the white walls of Minas Tirith 7 heroes await the arrival of the forces of evil Sauron their names are Aragorn, Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas, Jet Li, Scorpion and Cyclops.
I don't know about you but for me something just doesn't sit well in that picture.

Liberty's Edge

SRT4W wrote:

Yea... exactly. overdark has been crusading against gunslingers since the open play test. I really believe its something outside of actual game play. Hes been finding what ever he can to attack them and his posts as a whole are disjointed and non-cohesive.

I feel there is something he doesn't like that he isn't telling us like not liking guns in his fantasy. But instead of coming out and saying it he uses random "Facts" to support a blind hatred. The upside being:

A) Paizo didn't allow his prejudice to effect their design choices and did not let his rants ruin the class for everyone

and

B) Everytime he goes on a rant players come in say "You're wrong, here is proof" The downside of that is that he continues to rant incoherently about unimportant "Facts" that are not related to the initial problem.

I personally can not understand the blind hatred to the extent that he seems to have. I wish he could come out and say what his actual issue is rather than just keep making posts like he has been.

I thought I had stated this but evidently you didn't read that so one more time for the cheap seats...

1) I am fine with guns in my fantasy. (provided they aren't broken like PF guns)

2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)

3) The guns that Paizo had in the first campaign guide included revolvers and rifles so what happened to them? No special GM permission rules included.

4) If you don't think the touch attack mechanic is broken, fine. That doesn't make me wrong.

5) Evidently you didn't like my stats above, the archer does indeed get an additional +2 to attack from GWF and Point Blank Shot. Big dead the gunslinger still wins.

6) I didn't start this whole gunslinger thing again, I was just commenting on the no skill check for crafting firearms. Everyone else seemed to instead want to bring up other topics. I'm just willing to argue with these people.

7) The no skill checks involved for crafting firearms is just wrong. Disagree with that if you want, but its the only object you can craft in the game for taking a feat to bypass all craft checks.

8) @ Kirth: You can't take 10 on skill checks to craft items since if you fail you waste the materials. You can only take 10 if there in no penalty for failure involved, since taking 10 assumes you roll 1s and 2s during the taking 10.

9) The touch attack mechanic is wrong even in real life, Ned Kelley had armor (improvised even) that protected them from weapons more powerful than muskets and pistols. But this is a game not real life so thats my basis for wanting everything to be balanced within the game, and since its a game Paizo is going to expect players to play on their maps and tiles, where do you find any range beyond 100 or so feet. Go over their encounters find an encounter with something beyond medium range. Good luck.

If you want to continue this argument fine, I'm sick of it. So you guys have fun with that.

Liberty's Edge

leo1925 wrote:

Atop the white walls of Minas Tirith 7 heroes await the arrival of the forces of evil Sauron their names are Aragorn, Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas, Jet Li, Scorpion and Cyclops.

I don't know about you but for me something just doesn't sit well in that picture.

If the only version of 'fantasy' that you accept is LotR then I feel sorry for you.


overdark wrote:
SRT4W wrote:

Yea... exactly. overdark has been crusading against gunslingers since the open play test. I really believe its something outside of actual game play. Hes been finding what ever he can to attack them and his posts as a whole are disjointed and non-cohesive.

I feel there is something he doesn't like that he isn't telling us like not liking guns in his fantasy. But instead of coming out and saying it he uses random "Facts" to support a blind hatred. The upside being:

A) Paizo didn't allow his prejudice to effect their design choices and did not let his rants ruin the class for everyone

and

B) Everytime he goes on a rant players come in say "You're wrong, here is proof" The downside of that is that he continues to rant incoherently about unimportant "Facts" that are not related to the initial problem.

I personally can not understand the blind hatred to the extent that he seems to have. I wish he could come out and say what his actual issue is rather than just keep making posts like he has been.

I thought I had stated this but evidently you didn't read that so one more time for the cheap seats...

1) I am fine with guns in my fantasy. (provided they aren't broken like PF guns)

Again, how are they broken, you havn't stated this. At all.

Quote:
2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)

Then neither should fighters....

Quote:
3) The guns that Paizo had in the first campaign guide included revolvers and rifles so what happened to them? No special GM permission rules included.

GM permission is always needed. If you don't understand this then you know understand how the game works. Go back and start with the 1st ed AD&D books and learn the game. GMs world and they can do with it as the please, even if it is an AP. Thats why house rules and GM choices trump ALL else. As they should.

Quote:
4) If you don't think the touch attack mechanic is broken, fine. That doesn't make me wrong.

Yes it does. DPR shows that gunslingers are under other martial ranged classes/archetypes. If you are going to nerf the touch attacks then you need to give them something else to make up for it. As it is the damage that guns do is low, the touch attack makes it so that GSs are atleast close to the other archtypes.

Something being Broken is not about opinion it is fact. When class A can do 600 dpr and class B can do 200 then something is BROKEN. You don't liking the rule does not make it broken.

Quote:
5) Evidently you didn't like my stats above, the archer does indeed get an additional +2 to attack from GWF and Point Blank Shot. Big dead the gunslinger still wins.

Because you are the ONLY ONE TO COME OUT AND DISTORT THE FACTS TO SHOW THAT ARCHERS ARE BEHIND. You are the only one, period.

33 AC monster is a ~CR18. Your archer is getting +25, at lvl 18 you are getting +18 from BAB and atleast +5 from your dex.... what type of archer are you playing a Wizard archer?

Quote:
6) I didn't start this whole gunslinger thing again, I was just commenting on the no skill check for crafting firearms. Everyone else seemed to instead want to bring up other topics. I'm just willing to argue with these people.

Then why did you keep ranting mindlessly about ANYTHING you don't like about the GS class? On top of that the closest thing to a gun gameplay wise is what? A bow? A CR12 check? Yea, thats not even a check. Take 10 and you need a +2... which anyone that is lvl 2 or more and plans on making items will have.

Quote:
7) The no skill checks involved for...

Thinly veiled disguise for any attack you can make on guns and the GS class.


overdark wrote:
leo1925 wrote:

Atop the white walls of Minas Tirith 7 heroes await the arrival of the forces of evil Sauron their names are Aragorn, Gandalf, Gimli, Legolas, Jet Li, Scorpion and Cyclops.

I don't know about you but for me something just doesn't sit well in that picture.
If the only version of 'fantasy' that you accept is LotR then I feel sorry for you.

It's not what i accept, it's what i like.

And no LotR isn't the only version of fantasy i like, i like both the world of Elrik and Corum's fantasy world, i also like and prefer those more with an arthurian legends feel and i also like the Inheritance's fantasy world.

Oh by the way you can take 10 in crafting checks as long as nobody is threatening you during the time you craft. And during the take 10 it isn't assumed that you also rolled 1s and 2s, that's why taking 10 doesn't take more time.

Liberty's Edge

@SRT4W: When you distort things its ok then, huh?

The monster the archer and the gunslinger were fighting was just an iron golem from the bestiary 1. Not the other monster from a completely different post.

But this is the level of comprehension I've come to expect from these boards.

@leo1925: Yeah yer right about that, we don't do a lot of taking 10 or 20 in our game, so yeah you can take 10 (not 20) on checks like that.

See I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong. Too bad others aren't.

Liberty's Edge

SRT4W wrote:


Quote:
2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)
Then neither should fighters....

See argument like this are what I love about this place.

Grand Lodge

While we're all angsting about Guns, Skill checks and Misfire chance, can anyone spell out to me how I'm meant to use my skills to remove the broken condition from a firearm?

Playing as a level 1 Gunslinger with woeful reloading, I'm worried about how I'd fare against a large group of weak enemies. 5 goblins could down me as assuming 100% accuracy and killing damage with every blow, it'd take me a minimum of 10 rounds to kill them all with a musket master, while they'd get something like 25 attacks against me. Even a caster gets group spells that'd allow them to handle this encounter easily, but a gunslinger would need to forget their weapon and pull out a bow.


overdark wrote:


1) I am fine with guns in my fantasy. (provided they aren't broken like PF guns)

All you've done is claim this. Your example didn't suffice because there were problems with it.

Quote:


2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)

Then give it more tricks to make up for it. The class isn't out of balance, as the DPR Olympics and other calculations have shown, and classes that are 3/4 BAB have lots of features or spells or something to show for what they don't get. If the gunslinger were 3/4 BAB, I'd rather play a Magus.

Quote:


3) The guns that Paizo had in the first campaign guide included revolvers and rifles so what happened to them? No special GM permission rules included.

They also updated Rapid Reload, which was in the Core Book. Besides, it's a GMs decision anyway. Personally, I don't think anyone is that interested in guns to the point they show up in every game, which also tells me that they're not broken.

Quote:


4) If you don't think the touch attack mechanic is broken, fine. That doesn't make me wrong.

Actually, what we think isn't what we're showing you. What we're showing you is evidence that says they're not even slightly broken, no matter what our own opinion is.

YMMV, but if want proof of your opinion, there isn't any acceptable evidence.
Quote:


5) Evidently you didn't like my stats above, the archer does indeed get an additional +2 to attack from GWF and Point Blank Shot. Big dead the gunslinger still wins.

First, that wasn't the only issue with the build. Secondly, with the builds in other threads, archers are simply way better than the one you posted. Which means the gunslinger, when compared, doesn't win. That's what the big deal is.

Quote:


6) I didn't start this whole gunslinger thing again, I was just commenting on the no skill check for crafting firearms. Everyone else seemed to instead want to bring up other topics. I'm just willing to argue with these people.

And decided to communicate this in an instigating way, what with this thread title and all.

I have no horse in this race when it comes to crafting. We don't craft too much in our games; it takes too long. I was crafting with my gunslinger for weapons and ammo, because it was worth it, not because there was no DC (which wasn't clear to me at the time, being the play-test and all, I just made up DCs for it using similar things in the Core Book. Which, incidentally, is exactly what you can do for your games if you think it's necessary).

Quote:


7) The no skill checks involved for...

This is just rubbish. How about you take my first post to heart, and play a Gunslinger to see how it feels. If you're expecting uberbroken, you will be disappointed.


overdark wrote:

@SRT4W: When you distort things its ok then, huh?

The monster the archer and the gunslinger were fighting was just an iron golem from the bestiary 1. Not the other monster from a completely different post.

But this is the level of comprehension I've come to expect from these boards.

@leo1925: Yeah yer right about that, we don't do a lot of taking 10 or 20 in our game, so yeah you can take 10 (not 20) on checks like that.

See I'm willing to admit when I'm wrong. Too bad others aren't.

I have distorted nothing. You have come in here and made statements against conventional wisdom, made statements with no backing and expected everyone else to refute what you said. If you are going to make statements that go against the grain then it lies with you to prove them, NOT with everyone elseto prove that youa re wrong.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/constructs/golem/iron

An iron golem have a AC of 28 NOT 33, a touch of 8 NOT of 9. Your facts are, in fact, wrong. Again. I have said nothing that is incorrect, the only thing that is incorrect is your "facts" that come down to ignorant anecdotal evidence with no real backing. Your argument also is predicated on the fact that gunslingers and archers should ALWAYS be on even ground which they should not. Different classes are different and it seems people like you don't get that. You found something that the gunslinger is going to be better against as long as he is with in 20yards. After you leave that 20 yard range the archer is, again better. On top of that there are lots of monsters that the gunslinger does NOT shine against at all.

You also have a problem with Full BAB and 2 good saves with one class but not another with out explaining why and disliked my sarcastic response.

Though that does beg the question:

overdark wrote:
SRT4W wrote:


Quote:
2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)
Then neither should fighters....
See argument like this are what I love about this place.

What is your problem with my response? it fits with your theme of every person should be the same in every encounter. Clearly no one should ever have an advantage over another depending on the monster. 'Scuse me while i go hate on paladins fighter lichs......


Swivl wrote:
Stuff

Thank you, at least I no longer feel that I'm the only one. I don't understand his issue with people presenting FACTS and then him calling them OPINIONS. He seems to have an issue with actually reading the DPR threads and I am willing to bet it comes down to a thinly veiled excuse for trying to get Paizo to nerf guns so that no one wants to use them.

But that's my opinion.

If he had any actual facts or would make it so that the facts he posts are actually accurate and not turned aside by a simple SRD search then maybe it wouldn't be so bad but as it stands between his poor at best attitude and lack of factual evidence this seems more like a troll than anything.


Emmeline Kestler wrote:

While we're all angsting about Guns, Skill checks and Misfire chance, can anyone spell out to me how I'm meant to use my skills to remove the broken condition from a firearm?

Playing as a level 1 Gunslinger with woeful reloading, I'm worried about how I'd fare against a large group of weak enemies. 5 goblins could down me as assuming 100% accuracy and killing damage with every blow, it'd take me a minimum of 10 rounds to kill them all with a musket master, while they'd get something like 25 attacks against me. Even a caster gets group spells that'd allow them to handle this encounter easily, but a gunslinger would need to forget their weapon and pull out a bow.

At low levels pistols are better for this reason. Rapid reload and paper carts only get muskets down to a move action and at level 1 its pretty hard to afford paper carts. So rapid reload takes it down to standard action to reload but that really doesn't help your case.

To be honest, musket master really doesn't shine until 5th level where you can move action reload with normal ammo and paper carts make it a free action.


SRT4W wrote:
Though that does beg the question:
overdark wrote:
SRT4W wrote:
Quote:
2) I like the gunslinger. The class is fine (but shouldn't have full BAB and two good saves and d10 HD)
Then neither should fighters....
See argument like this are what I love about this place.
What is your problem with my response?

I'm guessing it's the fact that Fighters only have one good save, not two. Of course one could then simply point to Rangers & Paladins as full BAB, d10 HD classes with two good saves.


SRT4W wrote:
Evocation wizards are STILL doing more damage per round than the gunslinger or archer are doing, so rather than crusade against all ranged martial ranged being the same maybe you should take a look at a lvl 10 anything martial versus a lvl 10 Evo's fireball.

Um... I really want you to prove this. Mathematically and Mechanically it simply doesn't hold up at all from anything I've seen in pathfinder.

Realize I'm only calling you on it because I'm extremely curious how you came to this conclusion.


Abraham spalding wrote:
SRT4W wrote:
Evocation wizards are STILL doing more damage per round than the gunslinger or archer are doing, so rather than crusade against all ranged martial ranged being the same maybe you should take a look at a lvl 10 anything martial versus a lvl 10 Evo's fireball.

Um... I really want you to prove this. Mathematically and Mechanically it simply doesn't hold up at all from anything I've seen in pathfinder.

Realize I'm only calling you on it because I'm extremely curious how you came to this conclusion.

Not on a single target but no a multi target fight they will.

My point was that on certain fights evo wizards are going to do better than anyone else the same way that gunslingers will do better than anyone else on some and paladins will do better on certain fights than anyone else.

Probably should have written it out better. It seems that some people don't get that different classes are different and people seem to have issues with that.

And you are correct Zappo, fights are one good save, rangers and pallys are two. Either way the actual point stands.


Abraham spalding wrote:
SRT4W wrote:
Evocation wizards are STILL doing more damage per round than the gunslinger or archer are doing, so rather than crusade against all ranged martial ranged being the same maybe you should take a look at a lvl 10 anything martial versus a lvl 10 Evo's fireball.

Um... I really want you to prove this. Mathematically and Mechanically it simply doesn't hold up at all from anything I've seen in pathfinder.

Realize I'm only calling you on it because I'm extremely curious how you came to this conclusion.

He may be referencing Ravingdork's big blaster sorcerer build here.


Cibulan wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
SRT4W wrote:
Evocation wizards are STILL doing more damage per round than the gunslinger or archer are doing, so rather than crusade against all ranged martial ranged being the same maybe you should take a look at a lvl 10 anything martial versus a lvl 10 Evo's fireball.

Um... I really want you to prove this. Mathematically and Mechanically it simply doesn't hold up at all from anything I've seen in pathfinder.

Realize I'm only calling you on it because I'm extremely curious how you came to this conclusion.

He may be referencing Ravingdork's big blaster sorcerer build here.

HA! Thats it! I had gone looking for it. Again, against a single target its not going to shine, but against a room of them it will. Different situations different people shine... the fact that some people don't get "Different classes are different" Is rather... upsetting.


SRT4W wrote:
Cibulan wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
SRT4W wrote:
Evocation wizards are STILL doing more damage per round than the gunslinger or archer are doing, so rather than crusade against all ranged martial ranged being the same maybe you should take a look at a lvl 10 anything martial versus a lvl 10 Evo's fireball.

Um... I really want you to prove this. Mathematically and Mechanically it simply doesn't hold up at all from anything I've seen in pathfinder.

Realize I'm only calling you on it because I'm extremely curious how you came to this conclusion.

He may be referencing Ravingdork's big blaster sorcerer build here.
HA! Thats it! I had gone looking for it. Again, against a single target its not going to shine, but against a room of them it will. Different situations different people shine... the fact that some people don't get "Different classes are different" Is rather... upsetting.

It took me a lot of digging to find it. I finally gave up and Googled it.


Ah... the only problem with the multi-target theory is the fact that they can still do everything until they lose that last hit point.

A fighter would be looking at (5 opponents for example):

1 round = 1 kill 4 left attacks.
2 round = 1 kill 3 left attacks.
3 round = 1 kill 2 left attacks.
4 round = 1 kill 1 left attacks.
5 round = last kill.

Where the blaster would have:

1 round = blast, 5 attack.
2 round = blast, 5 attack.
3 round = blast, 5 attack.
4 round = blast, 5 attack.
5 round = blast everything dies.

Personally I rather the 10 attacks as opposed to the 20 for the same damage dealt at the end of the day (which is when it actually matters).

Now not that the wizard doesn't have his place, or the fighter doesn't have his, or what have you -- it's just that if you want something dead without having a lot done to your side the fighter does quite the job of it.


Abraham spalding wrote:
stuff

This is assuming that the damage dealt to each dude is 1/5 their health.

Assuming the fighter is able to 1shot each of the dudes, then you'll have a steady decrease in the number of attacks coming the party's way.

However, is the Caster is able to do 1/3 or 1/2 the opponent's health, then suddenly they're competing with the fighter in terms of how quickly they're able to safely clear out dudes. This of course chews up more resources than the fighter does, so point still stands for the martial character.


Jeranimus Rex wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
stuff

This is assuming that the damage dealt to each dude is 1/5 their health.

Assuming the fighter is able to 1shot each of the dudes, then you'll have a steady decrease in the number of attacks coming the party's way.

However, is the Caster is able to do 1/3 or 1/2 the opponent's health, then suddenly they're competing with the fighter in terms of how quickly they're able to safely clear out dudes. This of course chews up more resources than the fighter does, so point still stands for the martial character.

And of course if the enemies are already hurt and there's five of them the wizard can drop with one spell it's a great choice...

I simply don't see it happening at level 10 -- you've got save throws, energy resistances, and SR at that point which isn't going to be a given. Now can it be a decent choice? Sure... is it likely? No.

EDIT: I'm kind of curious now to see a wizard (or sorcerer either works) that can get to 1/3 to 1/2 of a monsters health with one blasting spell -- that's the major complaint about spell damage -- you have monsters with about or higher than the caster's level in d8~d12's then adding about 3~5 per dice from Con against caster level in d6's and maybe a half level bonus (or two... possibly three).

When you have d8+2~10 per level against d6+0~1.5 per level it simply doesn't add up well for the wizard to start with -- and simply gets worse once saves, resistances and SR get thrown into the mix.

The only reason the fighter gets away with it is due to his extremely high bonus damage combined with multiple (multiple) hits and the effects of critical hits on his non-typed (for resistances usually) damage to really power through quickly.


Has anyone who played with this in one of their games had trouble with it? Or success for that matter.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just LOVE that a build is being attributed to my name. :D

My build by itself should be able to take off 1/3 or more of the hit points of anything it encounters (in one round, not in one attack) that isn't immune to the energy damage used.

Minor modifications can help get around energy resistances, saves, and SR as well.


Ravingdork wrote:

I just LOVE that a build is being attributed to my name. :D

My build by itself should be able to take off 1/3 or more of the hit points of anything it encounters (in one round, not in one attack) that isn't immune to the energy damage used.

Minor modifications can help get around energy resistances, saves, and SR as well.

Can help yes... but not completely mitigate -- and you point out the major flaw yourself -- that "isn't immune to the energy damage used".

You are using a 15th level caster, with spell perfection and 3 metamagic feats.

The DC of the spell is at best a 26 without feats... 34 with them (eating up 4 more feats which only affect a specific energy type or school of magic). However at level 15 it's more likely we are looking at a 22 (dropping the +5 inherent bonus and the last 2 bonuses from leveling starting with a 20) before feats and a 30 after them (if you took all four) probably settling at a 27 (spell focus and greater since they give the most options and leave the slots you need for intensify, maximize and quicken spell as well as spell perfection).

Which sounds nice until we remember that save bonus (unlike save DCs) are uncapped and again -- immunities.

And you aren't even just using 1 spell -- you are using 2 a round that way.

Now lets look at a CR equivalent monster -- Dragons, old dragons. We have an average SR of 26 -- so unless you spend more feats you are looking at a 50/50 waste of time for both spells, spend two feats and you are down to 10% per spell thanks to spell perfection (30% of spells without spell perfection). 1 in 10 spells wasted out of the gate at best.

Now we get to save throws which are average (on a reflex save) about +12. So they need between a 10~18 at minimum depending on exact build. This knocks of anywhere from 20~45% of your damage (statistically speaking). Finally resistances and immunities kick in -- this is an odd point because so many of the creatures at CR 15 are dragons with spells... meaning a distinct possibility of energy resistance or immunity being up, however barring that we can easily call it an 'average' of 15 points dropped (statisically again) from spell damage.

So after losing 10% of spells, and then another 20~45% and finally dropping 15 points off (each spell) we are looking at 139 damage dropping to 82.3 damage from the first spell and 30.5 from the second spell actually landing which is 112.8 damage... meaning that you are right -- for two spells a round with a 8 feat investment (and your racial choice as well) you can deal about 1/3~1/2 of a creature's hit points in damage to them in a round...

At a significant investment of spell slots (maximized empowered intensified with spell perfection is going to still eat a 6th level slot with a fireball), feats, and everything else.

And finally this is at level 15 -- not 10. A level 16 fighter can (and has in theory craft at least) dropped Balors in under 2 rounds.


Right. What's the issue here? A blaster-caster is very resource intensive and isn't able to chew through monsters all day.

That isn't to say they don't contribute. Hell, the best thing in life is when everyone is doing high damage to everything in sight, that way everybody at least feels like they're doing something worth it.

Grand Lodge

overdark wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:

can you re state your original post?

are you upset that you cant "craft" a gun?

or that guns use touch ac?

Yeah sorry my original post was just concerning the crafting, but the thread quickly derailed into other aspects of firearms.

And you can totally craft firearms, with no checks involved. (lame)

The rest of it is just as bad.

First, you are trolling this thread... you ask antagonistically about crafting guns and the words,"crappy" and such purposely encourage troll responses to yours. Sad..

Second... the main thing you are forgetting and what a couple people have posted is, THIS IS AN OPTIONAL CLASS AND GUNS ARE OPTIONAL!! Just because they are in a book does not allow them to be used by any GM in THEIR campaigns! I agree they are overpowered and do not completely fit in to a fantasy type of campaign. While I think they are personally overpowered and such, I am GLAD that they have the rules in the game now in case I want to use them in another campaign that a friend of mine is using or something. Not to mention if I change my mind the rules are there for my to use should I choose to.

Now while you may or may not think it is not optional because they are in a rule book, does not make it any less an option then it is. All classes are optional for anyone's campaign. The three classes from Ultimate Combat are not even "real" classes as they are Archetypes.


Deanoth wrote:
The three classes from Ultimate Combat are not even "real" classes as they are Archetypes.

Slight error -- two of the three classes are alternate classes -- the gunslinger is a full fledged class of its own.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

I just LOVE that a build is being attributed to my name. :D

My build by itself should be able to take off 1/3 or more of the hit points of anything it encounters (in one round, not in one attack) that isn't immune to the energy damage used.

Minor modifications can help get around energy resistances, saves, and SR as well.

Can help yes... but not completely mitigate -- and you point out the major flaw yourself -- that "isn't immune to the energy damage used".

You are using a 15th level caster, with spell perfection and 3 metamagic feats.

The DC of the spell is at best a 26 without feats... 34 with them (eating up 4 more feats which only affect a specific energy type or school of magic). However at level 15 it's more likely we are looking at a 22 (dropping the +5 inherent bonus and the last 2 bonuses from leveling starting with a 20) before feats and a 30 after them (if you took all four) probably settling at a 27 (spell focus and greater since they give the most options and leave the slots you need for intensify, maximize and quicken spell as well as spell perfection).

Which sounds nice until we remember that save bonus (unlike save DCs) are uncapped and again -- immunities.

And you aren't even just using 1 spell -- you are using 2 a round that way.

Now lets look at a CR equivalent monster -- Dragons, old dragons. We have an average SR of 26 -- so unless you spend more feats you are looking at a 50/50 waste of time for both spells, spend two feats and you are down to 10% per spell thanks to spell perfection (30% of spells without spell perfection). 1 in 10 spells wasted out of the gate at best.

Now we get to save throws which are average (on a reflex save) about +12. So they need between a 10~18 at minimum depending on exact build. This knocks of anywhere from 20~45% of your damage (statistically speaking). Finally resistances and immunities kick in -- this is an odd point because so many of the creatures at CR 15 are dragons with spells......

It's just like was said earlier: Different builds work better in different scenarios. Nobody is perfect for everything (thankfully).

My blaster could drop a single powerful enemy in a single round with a little luck. However, as you show, he may well not if he comes up against enough defenses. An army of weaker enemies doesn't stand a chance, however.

Your fighter could potentially fell a balor, as you say, but said fighter could not also take out an army easily. He would have to wade through them one at a time while their natural 20s eventually do him in.

Everyone harps on the blasters. Whatever. I know which build is superior.

Grand Lodge

Abraham spalding wrote:
Deanoth wrote:
The three classes from Ultimate Combat are not even "real" classes as they are Archetypes.
Slight error -- two of the three classes are alternate classes -- the gunslinger is a full fledged class of its own.

The point is still basically moot. The class is an option and not necessarily allowed by any GM in every campaign.

Basically if it was not for Overdark and his rants and purposeful antagonism, I would find this thread a good read.

Thanks.. and yes it is certainly a popcorn thread where Overdark is concerned.


SRT4W wrote:
To be honest, musket master really doesn't shine until 5th level where you can move action reload with normal ammo and paper carts make it a free action.

3rd level is when you can reload a 2-handed firearm as a 1-handed firearm when using the Musket Master archetype


Emmeline Kestler wrote:

While we're all angsting about Guns, Skill checks and Misfire chance, can anyone spell out to me how I'm meant to use my skills to remove the broken condition from a firearm?

Playing as a level 1 Gunslinger with woeful reloading, I'm worried about how I'd fare against a large group of weak enemies. 5 goblins could down me as assuming 100% accuracy and killing damage with every blow, it'd take me a minimum of 10 rounds to kill them all with a musket master, while they'd get something like 25 attacks against me. Even a caster gets group spells that'd allow them to handle this encounter easily, but a gunslinger would need to forget their weapon and pull out a bow.

At levels 1-4 you really need to play your Musket Master like a Musketeer. Fire! Fix bayonets! Charge! All right everyone is dead. Time to reload.


Cathedralsquares wrote:
Emmeline Kestler wrote:

While we're all angsting about Guns, Skill checks and Misfire chance, can anyone spell out to me how I'm meant to use my skills to remove the broken condition from a firearm?

Playing as a level 1 Gunslinger with woeful reloading, I'm worried about how I'd fare against a large group of weak enemies. 5 goblins could down me as assuming 100% accuracy and killing damage with every blow, it'd take me a minimum of 10 rounds to kill them all with a musket master, while they'd get something like 25 attacks against me. Even a caster gets group spells that'd allow them to handle this encounter easily, but a gunslinger would need to forget their weapon and pull out a bow.

At levels 1-4 you really need to play your Musket Master like a Musketeer. Fire! Fix bayonets! Charge! All right everyone is dead. Time to reload.

It's more like levels 1 and 2 you need to fight like that. If you take rapid reload early and have a few paper cartridges, at 3rd level you would be able to reload as a free action since you will be treating a 2-handed firearms as a 1handed firearm.


Ravingdork wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:

I just LOVE that a build is being attributed to my name. :D

My build by itself should be able to take off 1/3 or more of the hit points of anything it encounters (in one round, not in one attack) that isn't immune to the energy damage used.

Minor modifications can help get around energy resistances, saves, and SR as well.

Can help yes... but not completely mitigate -- and you point out the major flaw yourself -- that "isn't immune to the energy damage used".

You are using a 15th level caster, with spell perfection and 3 metamagic feats.

The DC of the spell is at best a 26 without feats... 34 with them (eating up 4 more feats which only affect a specific energy type or school of magic). However at level 15 it's more likely we are looking at a 22 (dropping the +5 inherent bonus and the last 2 bonuses from leveling starting with a 20) before feats and a 30 after them (if you took all four) probably settling at a 27 (spell focus and greater since they give the most options and leave the slots you need for intensify, maximize and quicken spell as well as spell perfection).

Which sounds nice until we remember that save bonus (unlike save DCs) are uncapped and again -- immunities.

And you aren't even just using 1 spell -- you are using 2 a round that way.

Now lets look at a CR equivalent monster -- Dragons, old dragons. We have an average SR of 26 -- so unless you spend more feats you are looking at a 50/50 waste of time for both spells, spend two feats and you are down to 10% per spell thanks to spell perfection (30% of spells without spell perfection). 1 in 10 spells wasted out of the gate at best.

Now we get to save throws which are average (on a reflex save) about +12. So they need between a 10~18 at minimum depending on exact build. This knocks of anywhere from 20~45% of your damage (statistically speaking). Finally resistances and immunities kick in -- this is an odd point because so many of the creatures at CR 15

...

A fighter, however, could take out a whole army, because he doesn't spend any resources to operate at his peak. Blasters do. Due to nat 20s, the fighter can't keep up his game forever, but due to spells/day, neither can the caster. Also, if we assume the caster attacks from as far as reasonable, then so does the fighter. If we assume that the fighter, attacking from a great distance, can still be hit by opposing armies, then we assume the caster *probably* can as well, and, on average, dies earlier than the full-plate wearing, d10HD-having fighter. further, which armies are we talking about? Humans? Blaster gets some advantage there. Devils? Fighter gets some edge there. Furthermore, even if your caster IS better at fighting hordes, who fights hordes anyway? I mean, the MOST creatures (enemies+allies+noncombatants) I've seen in a single encounter was in the area of 35-40, and even with that, AoE spells can be...hazardous without proper resistances/metamagicking. And getting those can waste valuable spell/equipment slots.

Anyway. Considering how ponderous managing whole armies is, focus tends to be on small-scale skirmishes. Sure, that's metagame, but so is optimization in general.

Point is, calling a build "superior" is strong language, and I'm not sure it's justified here.

RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32

Irulesmost, Abraham spalding, and Ravingdork wrote:
fighter/wizard stuff

Is this going to be Yet Another fighter versus wizard thread? I think discussing firearms versus other weapon styles is topic enough.


A Man In Black wrote:
Irulesmost, Abraham spalding, and Ravingdork wrote:
fighter/wizard stuff
Is this going to be Yet Another fighter versus wizard thread? I think discussing firearms versus other weapon styles is topic enough.

Meh. Sure. I'm not committed to a fighter vs. wizard sort of thing, just against tier systems. Like, at all. It all comes down to initiative, foreknowledge, and preparation at high levels anyway.

In my mild amount of playtesting guns, they feel reasonably distinct from other styles, but not quite good enough to justify as a sidearm for, say, melee users, esp. due to the relative cheapness/free proficiency that bows get.

As something to build a character around, they become deceptively powerful, despite many who believe they are underpowered, especially compared to, say, bows, but are not broken compared to other martial styles available. Vanilla Gunslingers just don't do it for me, especially considering that one of the class features that makes them competitive in terms of damage (Gun Training), doesn't scale, and feels a bit...silly, in that it..sort of seems to encourage using a wide range of different firearms (which, given the cost of magic weaponry, or even mundane guns and ammo, is just not feasible).

The archetypes, I feel, are a saving grace of the 'slinger, as musket master makes muskets usable for something other than sniping or whipping out for situational cones of damage, and pistolero starts good, and ends great (signature deed [up close and deadly] is probably a bit too good, relative to other deeds, but I feel I'd prefer the other deeds be better, rather than this one be worse), and the eventual "no misfires ever" bit pretty much fixes my only real problem with firearms (eliminates misfires AND reload times, due to use of paper cartridges suddenly having no drawback)

As far as other firearm archetypes, I like Holy Gun, but Divine Hunters (if proficiency weren't an issue) are honestly probably better gun wielding paladins than holy guns. Mostly because I like standard smite way better than smiting shot, though. Spellslinger is cute, but your wizard is probably better off vanilla. Rogues with wis based ki pools and grit pools have the potential to be super freakin' versatile, and that's great.

Due to reload times, misfires, and proficiency issues, fighters, as they have no archetype, aren't good with early firearms (And I think it's ok that they can't outshoot the gun classes). But, if you introduce advanced firearms, I'd hazard a guess that they actually get to make pretty good use of them. This is just speculation (as a fair bit of the above was), of course, as I haven't run any numbers or encounters or w/e with anything but early firearms.


Crafting is broken? HOLD THE FRONT PAGE!


Ravingdork wrote:
Everyone harps on the blasters. Whatever. I know which build is superior.

Except that -- you've never actually provided a build -- you've got a theory that uses eight feats (out of 10) and nothing else. No stats, no equipment, nothing.


A Man In Black wrote:
Irulesmost, Abraham spalding, and Ravingdork wrote:
fighter/wizard stuff
Is this going to be Yet Another fighter versus wizard thread? I think discussing firearms versus other weapon styles is topic enough.

Nah, fighters do fine, wizards do fine, on occasion with extreme work they can cover some of the others job -- but they aren't really made to do it well.

Was simply curious where the idea that a wizard could out damage a fighter came from -- didn't realize it was Ravingdork abusing math and statistics again.


Abraham spalding wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Everyone harps on the blasters. Whatever. I know which build is superior.
Except that -- you've never actually provided a build -- you've got a theory that uses eight feats (out of 10) and nothing else. No stats, no equipment, nothing.

Abe, he has provided a full build for that character before, I just don't know where to find it. I was the one that provided that link, based off a Google search (I knew of its existence but couldn't remember where), but I assure you that it is a full-fledged build. I'm sure Ravingdork can give you a link.


Cibulan wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Everyone harps on the blasters. Whatever. I know which build is superior.
Except that -- you've never actually provided a build -- you've got a theory that uses eight feats (out of 10) and nothing else. No stats, no equipment, nothing.
Abe, he has provided a full build for that character before, I just don't know where to find it. I was the one that provided that link, based off a Google search (I knew of its existence but couldn't remember where), but I assure you that it is a full-fledged build. I'm sure Ravingdork can give you a link.

Ah, well in which case I would love to revisit the actual character again -- but I'll stop nitpicking for the time being anyways -- while it can be fun to rehash old news and beat dead horses there are so many new things to cover for the time being.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:
Cibulan wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Everyone harps on the blasters. Whatever. I know which build is superior.
Except that -- you've never actually provided a build -- you've got a theory that uses eight feats (out of 10) and nothing else. No stats, no equipment, nothing.
Abe, he has provided a full build for that character before, I just don't know where to find it. I was the one that provided that link, based off a Google search (I knew of its existence but couldn't remember where), but I assure you that it is a full-fledged build. I'm sure Ravingdork can give you a link.
Ah, well in which case I would love to revisit the actual character again -- but I'll stop nitpicking for the time being anyways -- while it can be fun to rehash old news and beat dead horses there are so many new things to cover for the time being.

This seems strangely appropiate. :p


ZappoHisbane wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
ZappoHisbane wrote:
I understood his point, but I think it's more than just semantics. Overdark seemed to think that the average roll of a d20 is 10, and gave himself a point to either side to cover himself and said that's what's going to come up on a die more often. Me saying that's wrong isn't semantics, it's math.
Well we can't use 10.5 unless you alternate 10's and 11's. Assuming perfectly balanced dice that is what the average result would be. Now as for the not ever rolling 1's and 20's I disagree with that since they are autohits and fails, and have to be accounted for.

Actually, we can (and should) use 10.5 if we're taking a serious look at chance-to-hit or DPR, or whatever. And then also take into account the auto-hit, auto-miss and crit ranges. Saying that you've got a 55.993% chance at hitting, or that you deal 35.73 DPR is perfectly acceptable for analysis' sake (numbers are random examples).

It's a little gratifing to see that I'm not the only one who noticed this and thought it was an issue.

Did you not understand that I was saying that it is impossible to roll 10.5 on the dice in an actual game. As for a precise number in a simulation 10.5 is acceptable.

Liberty's Edge

Someone seems to have gotten two different posts confused, the post with the builds in it has the correct AC for the Iron Golem.

Those builds were just to illustrate the fact that when you take Archer A versus Gunslinger B (built on the same stats and stuff), the Gunslinger hits more often and does more damage.

Can you build a better archer, probably. Does that archer get a +1 or 2 that I might have missed, maybe. He certainly can't take Penetrating Shot or any other feat that he needs to be 12th level for since he's only 10th.

Big whoop. Give him another couple of bonuses the Gunslinger still wins.

They weren't built to compete in your precious DPR thread. If they were I would have posted them in that thread.

They arent meant to be the greatest characters ever. They are to make a point. Claiming I'm wrong just because you don't like my numbers is just baffling to me, you focus on how my archer sucks while missing the point behind the post, but oh well.

Back to the point of this thread anyway...crafting.

Liberty's Edge

Crafting a Katana 50 gp (500 sp)

1st level expert (human with basic NPC stats, Int 15), takes 10 on his craft check, gets a 16.

Takes him 2 weeks to make one Katana. (thats crap too, but ok)

With Skill Focus and masterwork tools he can get a 21 by taking 10, so then it still takes him 2 weeks to make one katana.

Same expert takes Gunsmithing for his feat. Turns out a revolver every 4 days.

Crying foul because I picked a katana, fine longsword then...
15 gp (150 sp)
16 check: 1 week
21 check: 1 week

Lets be a little more fair and compare them to the other ranged weapons in the Core book...
Light Crossbow 35 gp. 16 check: 2 weeks; 21 check: 2 weeks. For 1 crossbow

Heavy Crossbow 50 gp. 16 check: 3 weeks; 21 check: 2 weeks. For 1 crosssbow

Shortbow 30 gp. 16 check: 2 weeks; 21 check: 2 weeks. For 1 bow

Composite Shortbow 75 gp. 16 check: 4 weeks; 21 check: 3 weeks. For 1 bow

Longbow 75 gp. 16 check: 4 weeks; 21 check: 3 weeks. For 1 bow

Composite Longbow 100 gp. 16 check: 5 weeks; 21 check: 4 weeks. For 1 bow

Hand Crossbow* 100 gp. 16 check: 4 weeks; 21 check: 3 weeks. For 1 crossbow

Light Repeating Crossbow* 250 gp. 16 check: 9 weeks; 21 check: 7 weeks. For 1 crossbow

Heavy Repeating Crossbow* 400 gp. 16 check: 14 weeks; 21 check: 11 weeks. For 1 crossbow
* I used DC 18 to craft these exotic ranged weapons since there is no entry on the Craft chart and logically they should be somewhat more difficult to craft than a regular crossbow.

1 bowyer can turn out 13 longbows per year.
1 gunsmith can turn out 78 revolvers per year.

I know what your thinking higher level craftsmen will make items faster, true. But thats higher level experts, which are not as common as 1st level experts.
Lets look at a 16th level expert [Int 19, masterwork tools, skill focus] craft +31
Longbow: 41 check: 2 weeks. [1st level gunsmith still makes 3 guns]
41 times 12 = 492 sp of progress out of 750 sp.
or he could go ahead and take the +10 to the DC and then he gets it done in 1 week. (If you wanna go figure that out by days instead of weeks be my guest)
Composite Longbow: 41 check: 2 weeks; +10 DC: 1 week.
So a 16th level master craftsman can craft longbows at about the same rate that a 1st level gunsmith (with no ranks in any craft skill) can craft revolvers.
Yeah, that seems fair to me too.
The bowyer took a feat too, his just didn't let him magically bypass the craft checks needed to craft items.

Note that none of the bows are Strength bows or masterwork bows. DCs go up for that, so more time.
And yes I know I used the Advanced Firearm revolver as my example firearm, thats because I like revolvers. As a power gamer at heart I like something that lets my guy make touch attacks on monsters out to 100 feet, but I can also be realistic and realize that thats just not fair within the Pathfinder game.
A gunsmith can craft one pistol every day. Thats 313 pistols in one year from one gunsmith (hey we'll be nice and let that guy have one day off per week right?).

Crossbows were specifically designed to penetrate heavy armor, so why don't they use the first range increment as touch attacks? How come they just get to do more damage than bows.
How about firearms that just do more damage than crossbows, wouldn't that be a more logical progression.

Longbow does 1d8, heavy crossbow does 1d0, pistol does 1d12 (or 2d8). Doesn't that fit better within the game, instead of insituting the touch attack mechanic?
Touch attack = 95% success rate even for a 3/4 BAB character, even on his 2nd and 3rd attacks.
I just spent my last game session hitting guys with attacks that would have missed if not for my brand new Accurate Strike magus arcana. I know your gonna say 'well how come Accurate Strike isn't "broken" it lets you make touch attacks?'.
It costs something to do it (2 arcane pool points, double what most other magus abilities cost), so my magus with his 13 arcane pool points can only do that 6 times per day, which will affect a maximum of 12 attacks. And thats with 2 Extra Arcane Pool feats helping out, without those 2 feats I would only have 9 points and that would only affect 4 attacks. By the way thats assuming I don't want to use any of my other powers.
Doesn't cost a gunslinger anything to make his touch attacks.

Again, I know their not gonna change things. But that doesn't mean its right, just because its been printed and its out there.

Liberty's Edge

Oh and one more thing, Gunslingers and guns are not 'optional' they are fully legal for Pathfinder Society Play.

By your reasoning Druids are optional, horses are optional, daggers are optional.

Thats just breaking out your rule 0 because you have no other tool in your debate repertoire.

Yes I know I can use rule 0, for anything I want to, but my point is I dont have to use it for Druids, and horses, and daggers, or anything in the Core book or the APG or UM,so I shouldn't have to do it for 1 particular piece of equipment from UC.

IF it had been balanced properly within the rules.


Quriosity questions:
1) Are advanced firearms available for purchasing in PFS?
2) What happens to the no crafting feats rule of PFS and the gunsmith (for crafting alchemical cartridge)?

Liberty's Edge

leo1925 wrote:

Quriosity questions:

1) Are advanced firearms available for purchasing in PFS?
2) What happens to the no crafting feats rule of PFS and the gunsmith (for crafting alchemical cartridge)?

1) No because Paizo knows exactly how broken their advanced firearms are.

2) What happens to it? You can't craft in PFS. How does that relate to anything.

That was to answer the 'its all optional' claim that someone made.
They aren't.
Go read the first campiagn guide, Golarion has guns and Gunslingers. There is no question about it. The first guide didn't include one word about GM permission (because those guns weren't unbalanced).

They used to have freely available revolvers and rifles, but for some reason those all went away when the new book came out.

And I don't want to hear about your world/game in the core conceit of the world of Golarion guns exist they have existed and they will continue to exist.

If you don't want 'em in your world/game then fine. I'm not talking about your world/game, because I don't play in it.

I'm talking about the rules as they sit and the world of Golarion.


overdark wrote:
leo1925 wrote:

Quriosity questions:

1) Are advanced firearms available for purchasing in PFS?
2) What happens to the no crafting feats rule of PFS and the gunsmith (for crafting alchemical cartridge)?

1) No because Paizo knows exactly how broken their advanced firearms are.

2) What happens to it? You can't craft in PFS. How does that relate to anything.

Thank you for answering.

Well i was thinking that since PFS doesn't allow you to craft then that means that the gun users have to pay 12gp for alchemical cartiges (per shot) than 6gp, and that's quite steep, especially at low levels.

Anyway i didn't ask my question in order to prove a point or make an arguement, my opinion on firearms right now weights very little since i haven't seen them in a game yet, just armchair theorycrafting and reading other people's numbers or play examples. I asked this question just out of simple curiosity.


overdark wrote:

Someone seems to have gotten two different posts confused, the post with the builds in it has the correct AC for the Iron Golem.

Those builds were just to illustrate the fact that when you take Archer A versus Gunslinger B (built on the same stats and stuff), the Gunslinger hits more often and does more damage.

Can you build a better archer, probably. Does that archer get a +1 or 2 that I might have missed, maybe. He certainly can't take Penetrating Shot or any other feat that he needs to be 12th level for since he's only 10th.

Big whoop. Give him another couple of bonuses the Gunslinger still wins.

They weren't built to compete in your precious DPR thread. If they were I would have posted them in that thread.

They arent meant to be the greatest characters ever. They are to make a point. Claiming I'm wrong just because you don't like my numbers is just baffling to me, you focus on how my archer sucks while missing the point behind the post, but oh well.

Back to the point of this thread anyway...crafting.

It's not just a couple of bonuses. The gunslinger does not still win. That was the point of posting. You can't compare two classes, saying one is clearly better at dealing damage, then at the same time say that dealing damage wasn't the point when we call your builds into question.

151 to 200 of 562 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Paizo Products / Product Discussion / Firearms - Now 100% More Broken! All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.