he acts like I broke his favourite toy...
Not to derail, but just as an aside - Back in the 3.5 days I spent a noteworthy chunk of time designing what I felt was an extremely cool warlock/antipaladin mini-boss in this big, sprawling customized City of the Spider Queen campaign. I worked diligently to create an encounter that would challenge the party in multiple ways.
First round, the paladin charged through the mooks, crit-smited and one-shotted the mini-boss. He did indeed break my favorite toy of the moment. To add insult to injury, the adventuring group decided the mini-boss had plenty of useful knowledge on what was coming up so they decapitated him, pickled the head, and carried it around in a bag of holding and pillaged it for info with speak with dead all the way down through the underdark.
I got over it. As a GM, my enjoyment of the game should not have been predicated on my one special toy tearing up the party. All that time spent building an unused cool encounter was worth seeing the enjoyment my players had from one-shotting it and the subsequent head-toting.
GMs can find themselves on a real slippery slope when it comes to challenging their group with customized material in the name of fun. The more they care about doing a good job, the more time they spend creating encounters. The more time they spend creating encounters, the easier it is to become attached to some of the cool stuff being created. The more attached they are, the easier it is to take the outcome of encounters personally and develop a really skewed perspective. Bad news all around.
He keeps picking on my character class (and also the magus, that is) fueled by the fighter's player. I guess the mage's player also has his fingers in there, cause each time I deal some 50ish damage a round he utter sometzhing like "Sick" or "Overpowered". But himself has no problems throwing around maximized fireballs as an evocation specialist... Ah well, maybe I should resort to some nice base class and show him how barbarian or fighter kick ass.....
Again, resolving whatever conflict there is between you and the fighter's player (with or without involving the GM) is going to be best. It's a game, everyone should be having fun. Helping someone who isn't having a good time makes for a better gaming experience for everyone involved.
Talk to your GM about it. If he can't handle the occasional high damage round or figure out what works against a gunslinger then he's not up to the task. If you are still railroaded into a new character, I'd recommend a protest PC either ridiculous damage being the goal or completely ineffectual scatterbrain minor contributor. Sometimes they just have to be shown that it could be worse if telling them doesn't work.
|
Talk to your GM about it. If he can't handle the occasional high damage round or figure out what works against a gunslinger then he's not up to the task. If you are still railroaded into a new character, I'd recommend a protest PC either ridiculous damage being the goal or completely ineffectual scatterbrain minor contributor. Sometimes they just have to be shown that it could be worse if telling them doesn't work.
Or just make a Witch and Slumber EVERYTHING...every class has a way to make a GM mad...and in respect to that every class has a weakness a GM can use to balance it out...
What's really interesting to me is how many GM's seem to look at playing as a win/lose situation. The GM is there to tell a story, and make the game fun,(which includes challenging) not to win by killing the party.
That said,I can see how having multiple major bad guys killed in one round would be annoying, but rather than change the monster stats to make it harder on the gunslinger, change the layout of the combat to include more cover, add extra bad guys that close on the gunslinger to prevent him from focusing on the BBEG. Make sure every character gets a chance to shine.
Just my two cents.
PS. It doensn't sound like this GM is like the example above, just not finding creative ways to make the encounters more challenging.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
You have a group of 8 players. He's getting mad at the Magus and Gunslinger's damage capability?
Honestly, his first mistake was to allow 8 player characters in an adventure path designed for 4. I'd be annoyed at the level of work I'd need to adjust things in such a game for it being a pre-printed adventure path.
But he's displacing his annoyance into the wrong areas. If it was just Mage, Cleric, Fighter, and Gunslinger, I'd think his problems would be far, far less and it wouldn't be such a big issue.
Your party is destroying the action economy. Through number of actions and options alone, your party will obliterate any single creature combat.
Magus and Gunslinger are fine. The DM really needs to adjust his perception away from "ooh big numbers" to how often those numbers are showing up.
If you are spending rounds cleaning your weapon, your damage overall is not nearly as high as he thinks. 120 damage in one round, is only 60 DPR when you add in even a single round of clearing your gun.
The Fighter (Mr. Guaranteed Average) is complaining about big numbers? Does he spend whole rounds doing absolutely nothing? Do these guys also complain about a Rogue's 10d6 sneak attack on each attack?
I think there's other problems going on here.
Our GM really likes big groups. (I don't really agree with him there, but that is not the point...) He prefers to have 6 or 7 players at the table. And yes, he goes a long way and rewrites the encounters in the books to fit a bigger party. Last time we fought 10 werewolves accompanied by 3 of those crazy demonwolfshapechangeroutsidercasters with full healing each round, hurling fireballs. But I made the experience now that besides being fitted to our grup, the monsters are especially fitted to my gunslinger with their ridiculous touch ACs. This renders the gunslinger class pretty pointless.
Well, as stated above, I had a talk with him and mailed him a writeup of my character with short explanations of the mechanics; just how my musketeer works. (It's not rocket science!)I will see what the next playsession brings.
Edit: I've been playing for 20+ years now, DMing a lot myself, but never ran into a situation like this, where one player/character was explicitly countered. This leaves me a bit baffled and clueless. I am runnig a RotRL camapign myself atm and my players have one-hitted two main opponents from book 1 with crits. That's how crits are supposed to work in my eyes, hence the name. The players had a good laugh, felt really lucky und we carried on... No hard feelings. *shrug*
Our GM really likes big groups. (I don't really agree with him there, but that is not the point...) He prefers to have 6 or 7 players at the table. And yes, he goes a long way and rewrites the encounters in the books to fit a bigger party. Last time we fought 10 werewolves accompanied by 3 of those crazy demonwolfshapechangeroutsidercasters with full healing each round, hurling fireballs. But I made the experience now that besides being fitted to our grup, the monsters are especially fitted to my gunslinger with their ridiculous touch ACs. This renders the gunslinger class pretty pointless.
Well, as stated above, I had a talk with him and mailed him a writeup of my character with short explanations of the mechanics; just how my musketeer works. (It's not rocket science!)I will see what the next playsession brings.Edit: I've been playing for 20+ years now, DMing a lot myself, but never ran into a situation like this, where one player/character was explicitly countered. This leaves me a bit baffled and clueless. I am runnig a RotRL camapign myself atm and my players have one-hitted two main opponents from book 1 with crits. That's how crits are supposed to work in my eyes, hence the name. The players had a good laugh, felt really lucky und we carried on... No hard feelings. *shrug*
So he spends alot of time making big encounters for you and your group to enjoy. You can probably imgine how he might feel when you blast though an encounter he spent several hours on with little effort
How the wizard is able to throw maximized fireballs at that level? The only way i can think of is a lesser rod of maximize but that is a quite explensive item.
Anyway your wizard shouldn't be trying to damage the enemy unless he is built for damage, and no taking evocation as the school of magic you specialiaze in is only the first step.
Don't touch attacks bypass DR? So not having silver bullets doesn't mean anything as long as the target is in the first range increment you do full damage vs anything even DR/epic. It is kinda like a paladin smiting evil and ignoring DR.
Touch attacks and DR penetration are what make the gunslinger cool.
Where in the world are you getting "touch attacks bypass DR"? simply put : Um...NO!?
I've seen ranger archers do as much if not more damage on criticals. Once they get instant enemy it gets nuts along with Gravity Bow. As well there isn't much as GM that can counter archery with out breaking the game. As GM I ran into this build in my King Maker game. I'd have had gunslinger over the Ranger any day.
Either the world of the game has to adapt, to make it just as hard on you as it would be without guns or the gunslinger has to go.
I think the problem is not inherent with my gunslinger, but with the damage it deals. I could easily build a barbarian or archer dealing the same or even higher DPR. Maybe those characters could be countered less obvious (higher AC, period), but I guess I would still deal more damage than most other characters with a totally legal base class build.
4: He is playing on Tilt. His anger about his lack of control is forcing him into a largely irrational state where he believes that he must go out of his way to humiliate a player to the point of ruining his entire play groups enjoyment.
Thank you for that link, and the term. How useful!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
the problem with the gunslinger is in the way that touch AC works. Don't believe me---go look at dragons and their ac.
at 1st level--most mobs AC is close to equal to their touch ac---so while other characters are trying to hit ac 18--the gunslinger is trying to hit about 14.
but as you get higher level--others are trying to hit ac 40 while the gunslingers can actually go DOWN
young dragon ac 21 and touch ac 12
adult dragon ac 28 and touch ac 10
ancient dragon ac38 and touch ac 8
too many monsters are like this--the higher up you get---the easier it gets for a gunslinger to hit---only needing 1/3 to 1/4 of the to hit of other classes. A DM almost HAS to play the monsters against the gunslinger to keep from being one shotted (ie keep them out of PB range until they attack, doing fly by attacks and not letting the gunslinger get a full out attack in pb range.)
archers may be powerful--but say they do get the same dex as a gunslinger--both +5. they get a +5 bow, and bracers of greater archery for +2. give them focus for +1, give them point blank for +2.
for all of that they get a +15 to hit--at 10th level a fighter archer gets a further 10 BAB for a total of plus 25---so needs a 13 to hit the ancient dragon----costing him 2 feats and the price of a +5 bow and greater bracers
the gunslinger gets +5 dex, and +10 for level giving him a +15 to hit an AC of 8--meaning he needs a NEGATIVE 7 for no extra feats or costs
touch ac is broken when you get 8 shots a round at it with a X4 crit weapon and an effective NEGATIVE needed to hit it
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just judging by your description of your GM's reaction to things, I'd find a new GM.
I've GM'd for most of my life (13 to 29) and I am proud of my players when they finally make builds that challenge me as a GM to create better encounters.
Of course, I am a munchkin at heart, which is why I ended up the dedicated GM as no one wanted to deal with the characters I could pump out.
I always tell my players "Anything you can build, I can build better" so that's their warning not to totally break the game.
Even recently when I FINALLY got to play again, I ended up with a 3rd level character who could do 7d6+7 damage in one swing.
*shrugs*
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...
GM linearity is usually a function of experience.
Or in some case a very linear GM gets changed by that special player who wouldn't walk down a path with a sign on it that says "free loot" simply because you want them to walk down that path.
I learned to GM with a player who pretty much was the antiGM, so the idea of linear adventures got thrown out the window for me early.
Many people end up playing packaged adventures for most of their GM career and have players willing to follow the bread crumbs without question and they just don't learn to be a more spontaneous GM.
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...
Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.
I would not disallow a gunslinger--but I would play any intelligent monster as knowing what a gunslinger can do. A stupid monster--fine--it may be dumb enough to attack the first person and let the gunslinger get his attacks. But a smart one--nope. It sees the party and realizes the damage the gunslinger can do--if it can invis--it does and tries to kill the gunslinger first. If it can flyby and attack--it tries to kill the gunslinger. This is not targetting the gunslinger out of vendetta--this is common sense for that creature.
Take the ancient dragon--it knows it can fly and the big warrior and rogue cant do much to it. the cleric is only a threat if it stays close. Its magic resist protects it from casters. so two threats are archers and gunslingers. It has a 38 ac from archers and an 8 ac from gunslingers, who do you thing a super intelligent beast would swoop down, pick up in its claws, carry to 1000 ft and then drop. and if the character started feather falling, start to blast with its breath weapon all the way down. then if still healthy--go back and repeat with archer. by the time the party gets there, having taken away their ranged, it just hovers and decimates them.
an invis mob or other PC type-(ie monster party)---invis up--kill gunslinger first if low touch ac. if they are a high dex party--then maybe kill cleric first. but basically smart monsters kill the biggest threat first. gunslingers will often be first killed since gunslingers are often the biggest threat to more powerful monsters (who for some reason have low touch ac????---why is it easier to get thru a young dragons scale than an older ones?--yeah I know dex plays in--but come on??--should be some deflection for dragon scales) LOL imagine lord of the rings---dont worry about smaug---they get easier to kill as they get older.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.
I'm not talking about disallowing the class...I am talking about all the people here that are complaining that dragons have a low touch and you can't stop a gunslinger from hitting you and gunslingers do so much damage and they can fly and shoot lightning from their arse.
Its not a superhero people. Gunslingers have a shorter range than archers, their Will saves blow big ones, they carry an explosive satchel of death, their guns and ammo are the single most expensive pieces of equipment in the game, and to top it all off it only takes 1 hit on an intelligent monster to having them focusing the hell out of that gunslinger.
There is no need to break the game just because someone can do damage...learn the rules and use concealment (there are a TON of monsters that give miss chance), use charm, hold person, illusions, etc., take a few steps back so you are outside their range and force them to move so they can't get a full attack, use a freaking wall spell, etc.
I can see people now looking at their screens reading this going "oh...well I didn't think of that." Yea its not hard...read the books and be creative don't just raise the touch AC of everything to be a d-bag.
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.I'm not talking about disallowing the class...I am talking about all the people here that are complaining that dragons have a low touch and you can't stop a gunslinger from hitting you and gunslingers do so much damage and they can fly and shoot lightning from their arse.
Its not a superhero people. Gunslingers have a shorter range than archers, their Will saves blow big ones, they carry an explosive satchel of death, their guns and ammo are the single most expensive pieces of equipment in the game, and to top it all off it only takes 1 hit on an intelligent monster to having them focusing the hell out of that gunslinger.
There is no need to break the game just because someone can do damage...learn the rules and use concealment (there are a TON of monsters that give miss chance), use charm, hold person, illusions, etc., take a few steps back so you are outside their range and force them to move so they can't get a full attack, use a freaking wall spell, etc.
I can see people now looking at their screens reading this going "oh...well I didn't think of that." Yea its not hard...read the books and be creative don't just raise the touch AC of everything to be a d-bag.
AMEN! preach it
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.I'm not talking about disallowing the class...I am talking about all the people here that are complaining that dragons have a low touch and you can't stop a gunslinger from hitting you and gunslingers do so much damage and they can fly and shoot lightning from their arse.
Its not a superhero people. Gunslingers have a shorter range than archers, their Will saves blow big ones, they carry an explosive satchel of death, their guns and ammo are the single most expensive pieces of equipment in the game, and to top it all off it only takes 1 hit on an intelligent monster to having them focusing the hell out of that gunslinger.
There is no need to break the game just because someone can do damage...learn the rules and use concealment (there are a TON of monsters that give miss chance), use charm, hold person, illusions, etc., take a few steps back so you are outside their range and force them to move so they can't get a full attack, use a freaking wall spell, etc.
I can see people now looking at their screens reading this going "oh...well I didn't think of that." Yea its not hard...read the books and be creative don't just raise the touch AC of everything to be a d-bag.
Or even use a gunslinger against the PCs who has access to a better gun.
There's no reason why, say, the Duergar couldn't have invented rifling, metal cartridges, and more consistent black powder deep in the earth even while top dwellers are using muskets or paper charges.
Best part is if they win, the GS gets a way better gun. It could be considered as good as a magic item depending on the tech level of the world.
I took out a player's rogue with a good crit on a GS I made up to counter their highly armored fighter. Took him to like -21 in one shot.
Anything a player can build, a DM can build better.
spellcrafters who also have to hit touch ac--have to deal with higher saving throws and SR as they level up--gunslingers don't. Take a level 1 wizard with a 16 int. His save verus his spells are 14, at a time when most things dont have SR and their plust to save are probably +3 at most. so they need an 11 to save. as he levels up, it gets harder for him to land his spells. at 10th level, things probably have a save of +11 or better and spell resistance of 20. but his save DC is only going to be about 19--meaning they only need an 8 or so to save. and some on top of that will have SR--meaning you now have to roll a 10 or better to damage. so even after hitting--two chances to negate you
gunslingers dont face those two additional chances to negate after the easy hit against touch ac, which is why a smart monster will kill them first.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.I'm not talking about disallowing the class...I am talking about all the people here that are complaining that dragons have a low touch and you can't stop a gunslinger from hitting you and gunslingers do so much damage and they can fly and shoot lightning from their arse.
Its not a superhero people. Gunslingers have a shorter range than archers, their Will saves blow big ones, they carry an explosive satchel of death, their guns and ammo are the single most expensive pieces of equipment in the game, and to top it all off it only takes 1 hit on an intelligent monster to having them focusing the hell out of that gunslinger.
There is no need to break the game just because someone can do damage...learn the rules and use concealment (there are a TON of monsters that give miss chance), use charm, hold person, illusions, etc., take a few steps back so you are outside their range and force them to move so they can't get a full attack, use a freaking wall spell, etc.
I can see people now looking at their screens reading this going "oh...well I didn't think of that." Yea its not hard...read the books and be creative don't just raise the touch AC of everything to be a d-bag.
oh I agree 100%. The problem is, a LOT of gunslingers then complain that because the monster focused on them, the GM is picking on them or singling them out. NO--the monster is just being smart. An intelligent monster is no different than the players, it will remove it's greatest threat first.
also, I have seen gunslingers fail saving throws against fire several times--still waiting for the first one to have any adverse affects from carrying gunpowder. If I run a home campaign and you are carrying a significant amount of gunpowder (and PCs who fire 8 shots a round have to be) and fail a save vs fire--you better hope your life insurance is paid up.
|
|
spellcrafters who also have to hit touch ac--have to deal with higher saving throws and SR as they level up--gunslingers don't. Take a level 1 wizard with a 16 int. His save verus his spells are 14, at a time when most things dont have SR and their plust to save are probably +3 at most. so they need an 11 to save. as he levels up, it gets harder for him to land his spells. at 10th level, things probably have a save of +11 or better and spell resistance of 20. but his save DC is only going to be about 19--meaning they only need an 8 or so to save. and some on top of that will have SR--meaning you now have to roll a 10 or better to damage. so even after hitting--two chances to negate you
gunslingers dont face those two additional chances to negate after the easy hit against touch ac, which is why a smart monster will kill them first.
And yet you have a spell book of atleast 20 other spells you could use instead. That gunslinger has...oh yea he just has his gun.
Any more uncreative GMs want to put this to the test?
I've said it once and I say it again...the gunslinger is a one trick pony where that one trick has a 28% chance of exploding in your face.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
They don't even have to be overly smart.
Anything that has lived in a world where fighting for your life is a common occurrence is going to gain an almost instinctual response to big damage dealers.
Even the dumbest animal can target prioritize.
Studies show that even us humans see someone as being larger than normal if they're holding a weapon. So a guy who's 6'2 looks 6'6 if he's holding a gun.
It's a function of our animal brain prioritizing threats.
|
|
oh I agree 100%. The problem is, a LOT of gunslingers then complain that because the monster focused on them, the GM is...Judging from the responses in this thread I have reached the conclusion that there are a lot of very linear and uncreative GMs. I couldn't imagine playing in a game where the GM couldn't figure out how to balance a class/ability without breaking it...Disallowing a problem class from the start of a campaign solves a lot of problems and has little to do with "uncreativity". Some classes are simply built in a pretty broken way and I don't see it as my duty to completely rebuild it so that it does work. Especially since I got pretty argumentative players in one of my groups when it comes to rules and new interpretations thereof.I'm not talking about disallowing the class...I am talking about all the people here that are complaining that dragons have a low touch and you can't stop a gunslinger from hitting you and gunslingers do so much damage and they can fly and shoot lightning from their arse.
Its not a superhero people. Gunslingers have a shorter range than archers, their Will saves blow big ones, they carry an explosive satchel of death, their guns and ammo are the single most expensive pieces of equipment in the game, and to top it all off it only takes 1 hit on an intelligent monster to having them focusing the hell out of that gunslinger.
There is no need to break the game just because someone can do damage...learn the rules and use concealment (there are a TON of monsters that give miss chance), use charm, hold person, illusions, etc., take a few steps back so you are outside their range and force them to move so they can't get a full attack, use a freaking wall spell, etc.
I can see people now looking at their screens reading this going "oh...well I didn't think of that." Yea its not hard...read the books and be creative don't just raise the touch AC of everything to be a d-bag.
I treat gunpowder like an exposed Necklace of Fireballs, and god help you if you get hit with a fire spell that specifically says you catch fire...
my approach to gming would be
dumb monster--attack the closest member in general or weakest looking one---if one hurts me a lot turn to them
smart monster who has had time to study party--target their weaknesses
smart monster with about equal touch and regular ac---take out healers first (probably)
smart monster with specific weaknesses (ie fire)and no SR--probably attack spell caster looking types--they probably have fire spells
something like that
monsters that can fly and do good damage?---why land next to a party and fight all 6. fly--grab one--take him off at your leisure to finish off without his partys support. yes I know you need to make a grab roll, but still smarter than landing next to 6 heavily armed party members who have come looking for you.
I know as a player--if playing a cleric who casts enchant type spells, I always ask the GM, what the enemy is wearing or carrying---if they are obviously rogue or fighter types--I target them for my mind spells(due to lower wil saves in general) vs caster types.
I think that link to the 'tilt' was excellent. It actually explains alot of behaviour in DMs and players i have seen over the years. In regards to the gunslinger issue.
Ive found that players and DMs are often not very good at looking at the big picture. My group used to see rogue sneak attack dice think 'rogues can do lots of damage' and didnt every look at the big picture. This resulted in house rules like 'cant sneak attack an aware enemy even when you win initiative' It wasnt until the big picture was availble that the realized that these views were irrational.
My group currently has 3 PCs with x3 or x4 crit weapons, when they crit its spectacular and messy for the NPC if players get lucky it creates the illusion of over the top damage. Even though were only lvl 5 and none of them having imp crit all need 20's to crit.
Even so we had one boss encounter end nearly in the surprise round because of lucky rolls and last session one PC archer rolled tripple 20's on his attack.. against an elemental though it would have been neat otherwise.
In the case of gunslingers, their range for the Touch AC sucks and this means Monsters can either close to them quickly or stay out of range forcing them to move and only get one attack. even if guns are rare in a game all it takes is one round of BOOM BOOM BOOM for most creatures higher than animal intelligence to figure out that gunslingers are scary and at least treat then like they have some sort of BOOM wand even if they cant grasp what a gun is.
spellcrafters who also have to hit touch ac--have to deal with higher saving throws and SR as they level up--gunslingers don't. Take a level 1 wizard with a 16 int. His save verus his spells are 14, at a time when most things dont have SR and their plust to save are probably +3 at most. so they need an 11 to save. as he levels up, it gets harder for him to land his spells. at 10th level, things probably have a save of +11 or better and spell resistance of 20. but his save DC is only going to be about 19--meaning they only need an 8 or so to save. and some on top of that will have SR--meaning you now have to roll a 10 or better to damage. so even after hitting--two chances to negate you
gunslingers dont face those two additional chances to negate after the easy hit against touch ac, which is why a smart monster will kill them first.
And yet you have a spell book of atleast 20 other spells you could use instead. That gunslinger has...oh yea he just has his gun.
Any more uncreative GMs want to put this to the test?
I've said it once and I say it again...the gunslinger is a one trick pony where that one trick has a 28% chance of exploding in your face.
kind of curious how you do this. Does the gunslinger have to declare how many attacks he is making first? Our gunslingers just stop after the first misfire--and then clear the gun.
I think that link to the 'tilt' was excellent. It actually explains alot of behaviour in DMs and players i have seen over the years. In regards to the gunslinger issue.
Ive found that players and DMs are often not very good at looking at the big picture. My group used to see rogue sneak attack dice think 'rogues can do lots of damage' and didnt every look at the big picture. This resulted in house rules like 'cant sneak attack an aware enemy even when you win initiative' It wasnt until the big picture was availble that the realized that these views were irrational.
My group currently has 3 PCs with x3 or x4 crit weapons, when they crit its spectacular and messy for the NPC if players get lucky it creates the illusion of over the top damage. Even though were only lvl 5 and none of them having imp crit all need 20's to crit.
Even so we had one boss encounter end nearly in the surprise round because of lucky rolls and last session one PC archer rolled tripple 20's on his attack.. against an elemental though it would have been neat otherwise.
In the case of gunslingers, their range for the Touch AC sucks and this means Monsters can either close to them quickly or stay out of range forcing them to move and only get one attack. even if guns are rare in a game all it takes is one round of BOOM BOOM BOOM for most creatures higher than animal intelligence to figure out that gunslingers are scary and at least treat then like they have some sort of BOOM wand even if they cant grasp what a gun is.
aye but that takes some realization on both the GMs and the players part. the GM has to realize and play the monsters different--ie not have them just walk up and engage the party---has to ambush, stay out of range and kill off biggest threat. The player has to realize that hsi gunslinger will probably be the target most often for SOME mobs and not complain that the "intelligent" mob with a low touch ac came and killed him specifically out of all the other party members.
healers and spellcasters and archers should realize this too---often they will be picked out to be first killed. why would that intelligent monster keep focusing on a hard to hit tank the cleric just keeps healing, when the dpsers with lower hps keep pounding it?
|
|
kind of curious how you do this. Does the gunslinger have to declare how many attacks he is making first? Our gunslingers just stop after the first misfire--and then clear the gun.spellcrafters who also have to hit touch ac--have to deal with higher saving throws and SR as they level up--gunslingers don't. Take a level 1 wizard with a 16 int. His save verus his spells are 14, at a time when most things dont have SR and their plust to save are probably +3 at most. so they need an 11 to save. as he levels up, it gets harder for him to land his spells. at 10th level, things probably have a save of +11 or better and spell resistance of 20. but his save DC is only going to be about 19--meaning they only need an 8 or so to save. and some on top of that will have SR--meaning you now have to roll a 10 or better to damage. so even after hitting--two chances to negate you
gunslingers dont face those two additional chances to negate after the easy hit against touch ac, which is why a smart monster will kill them first.
And yet you have a spell book of atleast 20 other spells you could use instead. That gunslinger has...oh yea he just has his gun.
Any more uncreative GMs want to put this to the test?
I've said it once and I say it again...the gunslinger is a one trick pony where that one trick has a 28% chance of exploding in your face.
Some gunslingers aren't worried about that first misfire. They think they can get it later bc they need to keep their one trick up or the party gets disappointed.
And congrats you proved my point perfectly...there is no critical fumble in Pathfinder...Only one class has it and its typically higher than 5% chance. It can happen on shot 1 or shot 16, but its going to happen and thats a round he isn't doing damage unlike that bow fighter or 2H barbarian.
One of my players came to me with a brilliant plan for doing a TON of damage to one enemy, but it took like 3 rounds to set up. Cool you can do 15d6 damage, but when you think about it at level 12 15d6 in 3 rounds isn't really that impressive.
A lot of people also just overreact to things that are objectively not any better than what "standard" classes can do just because they're different in ways they're not used to. If full casters weren't a thing and they introduced a class that could easily end encounter after encounter in a single roll, people would absolutely lose it, but wizards have been part of the game for long enough that people don't even bat an eye at that.
The other thing that makes people rage out at gunslingers is that they - along with bomber alchemists - are very resistant to just making encounters tougher, because pathfinder's math is stupid and touch AC doesn't scale right. (Even if touch AC wasn't originally intended to be something that got targeted with every attack, the fact that it starts scaling backwards at some point makes things pretty silly.) Bump up the CR of an encounter? Gunslinger don't care. In fact, if you've got a huge party and you're using harder monsters because of that, then the gunslinger IS going to be really powerful, because harder monsters aren't the same difficulty upgrade against gunslingers as they are against other classes. You have to specifically do things that nerf the gunslinger if you want to nerf the gunslinger.
Talk to your DM, he does know that it costs you GOLD to fire your guns whereas it costs everyone else silvers or coppers to fire their ranged weapons.
Also, inform him of the dangers of water for your class. Inform him of ALL of your possible counters, and be prepared to bring hand-crossbows or light crossbows so you can still dual wield if you want to.
My usual counter to gunslingers is lots of low level grapplers that they can't kill off all at once. Mr. Gunslinger is great until he gets grappled by 8 zombies, and then he is just delicious. Is it bad that I purposefully focus down a single character as the DM that I tend to find as a bullcrap class that breaks the game's systems in potentially unintended ways? Nope, not in my book, because the necromancers who are commanding said zombies from afar will be directing them to do just that.
Also, remind him of what happens when you get set on fire and your ammo begins to burn . . . .
Direct your DM to this place, it is how I tend to build encounters these days: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pz59?Large-enemy-encounters-what-are-your-thou ghts#1
It is better to build encounters that are extremely dangerous to your super dangerous characters than it is to build encounters that are highly resistant to said characters for the simple reason that it punishes the rest of the party.
This all said, be prepared to get killed very fast when he realizes HOW to kill you, and expect him to go out of his way to ensure your character cannot come back.
Also, I am guessing that he has not discovered the art of invisible assassin comes in during the middle of the night and Coup De Grace.
There are a great many ways for the DM to deal with characters he doesn't want at his table. It is exceedingly easy to get rid of them since the DM is essentially able to use all of the resources Big-Bad has, and usually he can spare an invisibility potion for a roguish minion.
Other fine examples include enemies that fly and can carry a character, grapple, fly 200 feet up, release. Repeat until character is dead.
Have them go through a tunnel, have a minion, probably undead, charge in with a satchel charge, BOOM, CAVE IN, someone is sure to die.
Afflict the character with Lycanthropy . . . no seriously, just have a bunch of werewolves grappled him and chew on him until he fails the save, then drag him off, let him pass the point of no return, and then give him back with all his gear. He might kill himself with deadly nightshade, or he might turn into a werewolf and try to kill the party only to be cut down. Done, next character, thanks.
Mummy Rot . . . .
Lots of different poisons, stack them for best results!
All of the enemies have Crossbows, and shoot at the guy with the guns because, hey, he is the most dangerous person there.
Land Mines.
Powerful Magnets.
ENEMY GUNSLINGERS who purposefully target ONLY THE REST OF THE PARTY--preferably the people with the least hp--.
Enemy enchanters who Dominate Person the Gunslinger and tell him to coup de grace the cleric when everyone goes to sleep so neither can be revived.
Enemy enchanters dominate the REST OF THE PARTY and have them stomp on the gun slinger's balls.
The list goes on and on.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing the a great many DMs do not understand for some reason is that higher CR singular monsters are really, really, REALLY easy to kill. However, bring in 16 really, really, REALLY east to kill low level monsters and now everyone is powerful.
Ensure all the monsters are grapplers and . . . oh . . . oh no, now they are really dangerous, especially if they can ambush the party. The more monsters there are the less super murder death kill characters like Gunslingers, Nova Magi, and straight evokers are since that 2-handed fighter is just great cleaving through enemies, the general wizard's fireball is killing all of them, and everyone is having a great time.
All this said, it is not the DM's job to "win" vs the party. Any DM who has the "Us VS Them" mentality needs to stop DMing because that is simply toxic to your players unless that is what they are specifically asking for.
|
The discussion on Gunslingers and Archers (specifically Zen Archers) breaking the game has been a re-occurring point in my local gaming groups (PFS mostly with a couple Home Games thrown in).
First things first, this assumption that Gunslingers are 1 trick ponies and all they do is damage is completely incorrect. As they are being played NOW that's what it looks like but that's doing a full disservice to the classes abilities. Getting a free Trip attempt on all melee attacks is nothing to sneeze at as well as being able to do ranged Trips, Disarms, Confused effects and free Improved Critical feat before anyone else in the game while STILL being able to do significant damage at the same time is nothing to laugh at. This aspect is usually overlooked in the pursuit of bigger damage to the detriment of the class as a whole.
As designed the Gunslinger is a strong, skill rich, utility focused fighter with decent, consistent damage.
With all the discussion the best option we've come up with to mitigate the game breaking nature of these 2 classes without re-writing or banning anything was strictly feat based. There are exactly 3 feats that every player takes that makes most GM's look at banning them both. Removing or modifying these two feats pull these two options in-line with the rest of the class options and solves most of the GM hate.
Step 1: To resolve the Gunslinger issue was simple, remove the Rapid Reload exception. Drop them down to 1-2 shots a round (Maxxing them out to 3 attacks period with everything running). They'll start optimizing for one BIG hit per round instead and become high mobility, utility based fighters who benefit the party with their abilities instead of the whole party doing things to benefit the Gunslinger.
Example, the 7th level Gunslinger will shoot the BBEG for 3D12+10 each round while knocking it prone or hitting it with a confused state. This gives the melee characters a big boost, the casters extra time and protection and the skill monkeys plenty of support for whatever their schtick is.
Step 2: fixing the Gatling gun ranged characters is almost as easy. Remove Clustered shots from the game. It's a stupidly broken feat and is the greatest contributor to ranged DPR madness at high level games. Getting rid of this will definitely bring the Archers damage in line with everyone else at there level and slow down the rocket tag game that mid-high level games become.
Step 3: (Optional but mostly for the Zen Archer), remove access to Point-Blank Master from them. Biggest counter to ranged characters is getting in close to make them pay for making ranged attacks by forcing AoO's, this feat removes that weakness. For Zen Archers with their sky high saves, AC, Attack Bonuses and resistance to Combat Maneuvers not provoking AoO's is excessive. Remove this and your game will run better.
As you can probably guess I'm not a fan of either the Gunslinger or Zen Archer but hate removing players class options. This feels like a nice middle ground and should actually make the game fun for EVERYONE without picking on anyone in particular.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Step 2:
Low level games are rocket tag too. You know what CR a level 3 orc warrior is? 1CR. Do you know your chances of surviving even a non crit high damage strike at level one? 2d4+7 using the basic npc stat line and power attack averages out to 12. I've seen many a starting life total below the average damage. Crits can kill outright very easily and that falchion that orks likes to crit quite often. You can do the same thing with ranged using monster that have the appropriate bonuses. The things you can do with a crossbow wielding kobold is hilarious (warrior kobolds get lvl-3=CR with that sort of budget you can get a level 5 kobold for only 2CR budget used, that is 3 of the archery feats).
Having huge amounts of damage is only a good thing. I've seen people try to engage targets at 10th level with their 1d8+whocares before and its completely pointless. By the time they get done whittling away HP on the monster it could easily kill the entire party, the village they are protecting, and a good portion of that entire county. High burst damage keeps combats short and sweet so you have more time for the RP, exploration, and goofing off out of character (you know you do it). If you choose a class whose job is single target DPR, then do your job as best as you can otherwise it wastes the parties time and resources carrying an anchor. Sure it wrecks single enemy encounters but that is more of a product of single target damage MUST be high to compensate for only affecting one target. Problem solved by not wasting your CR budget on solos or PC class enemies.
Mathwei ap Niall, again, large encounters mitigate non-AOE characters damage to a major degree. If there are 16 weak enemies that attack statistics then things get even worse.
16 Shadows, for instance, is death for whomever gets mobbed.
|
|
@notabot Having huge amounts of damage is almost never a good thing, from a team game perspective. If player A can destroy any 1-3 opposing npc's in a single round of actions then players B (and C, D, E, etc) and GM A are reduced to either ignoring the combat side of this game or escalating the rocket tag nature to ridiculous levels.
Option A removes you from the overwhelming point of this game (RP is great but the rules set is about combat) since D&D is a combat focused endeavor with RP tacked on as a freeform addition with little rule support. This leaves everything to the GM constantly grasping at straws and making it up as they go along (not fun to do as a regular endeavor).
While Option B leads you back to exactly the issue that the OP was asking about, GM's constantly having to bend, mangle and break the game expectations to challenge that one player making every encounter absolutely lethal to anyone who isn't that one player. This forces every other player to cram in every possible rule-abusing, meta-gamey DPR boost they can just to survive and throwing away their character concept along the way.
Neither one makes for an entertaining evening for anyone so a compromise is needed. I suggested one that walks a comfortable line between, if you have a better option then please suggest it.
@Taku Ooka Nin, Large encounters CAN mitigate most of the non-AOE characters damage issues but will also seriously hamper the AOE characters as well as bring with it a whole different host of problems. Foremost among them is the issue of time, Time to prep, time to resolve each participants actions, time to adjudicate results, etc. Prepping and running a battle between 5 PC's and 3 NPC's can easily take over an hour per encounter and only increases as each participant gets more options as their HD goes up.
Ignoring the time issue and just focusing on the basic design of the game shows that the primary advantage the PC's have is in their superior action economy. THAT is what the rule-set depends on to insure the PC's win (the assumption should always be that the PC's will win, the CR rating is to determine how much effort that win requires). Throwing 16 opponents against them undermines that basic rule and significantly changes how the game is played.
Both of your options requires a HUGE increase in the workload for the players and the GM while offering little return on that investment and significantly reducing the basic enjoyment of the game.
A solution to these issues should be simple and require less work on everyone's part, not more and my suggestions are about as minimally invasive as I can come up with.
If you have a better way of resolving these concerns that doesn't triple or more the workload I would definitely be interested in discussing it with you.
|
Optimizing for damage (not saying you did, at all) can be a bit detrimental to your group, depending on your makeup. Some folks prefer the substance over the mechanics, which is a good thing. Blasting everything to bits in a single turn can make a fellow player feel obsolete.
However, hating the gunslinger as a GM for targeting touch AC instead of "regular" AC is on the GM.
If she/he thought it was soooooo terrible, then gunslingers (and firearms in general) would not have been allowed in the first place.
If your overall damage in one turn gives her/him fits, (and no class/archetype is barred) roll a Zen Archer Monk, or an archery based inquisitor, or an archery based ranger that relies heavily on the Instant Enemy spell.
The last bit was sarcasm; this will most likely cause hers/his to hit their enrage timer.
As an aside, I'm currently running a Runelords game that has a Barbarian with 20 strength (started at 19) and using two-handed weapons. I've been compensating by increasing the hit points of the monsters, sometimes using the Advanced build (which I'm hesitant to do; to be honest, adding hit dice seems the better decision in this case).
I realized there was a problem after an upgraded Skaverling paralyzed the Barbarian. It then proceeded to do a number on the remaining PCs. They took it down, but partly because I didn't maximize its potential... as I'd realized that a monster that would fall in two to three hits from the Barbarian would be overpowerful against the rest of the group.
So what I do is fudge rolls. I'll reduce damage dealt against other players and I've altered how I do hit points for each level - instead of rerolling if it's below half, I give them half-plus-one (which isn't bad for a mage, but does hurt a bit for a fighter or barbarian - still better than below half though!).
What your GM could very well do is just eliminate critical hits for everyone - monsters and PCs. Personally, I think this is a fairly good idea as certain weapons do ungodly amounts of damage when they crit. Your gunslinger will do a lot of damage... just not an ungodly amount periodically.
But yes, your GM is making a mistake. He's letting things get personal. The GM is not the monsters. The GM is not supposed to "win" except by running a fun game. He needs to take a step back and stop competing with you. And I say this as a GM of 20 years... who once killed an NPC because he realized the NPC had been created only to compete with one player's character. (Killing the NPC proved to be one of the more memorable moments of the campaign, I'll say that. I'd never seen the group beat a retreat before!)
The part that I found most interesting is how the GM says he'd never allow Gunslingers into his campaign again, but when the OP offers to swap to another character, he doesn't allow it.
I wonder why. Would it put all of his hard work of countering the Gunslinger to waste?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I changed the gun rules to the following:
Within the first range increment (or first 5 for advanced guns) a gain gains a +5 bonus to hit. It does not target touch AC.
That's it. It's a reasonable compromise because the game has so many monsters with massive normal ACs and super low touch ACs.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've had a drink or so, and now my self-control has dropped to the point I'm posting on this overkill thread.
If you are running a module out of the box for PFS, then suck it up and get moving.
If you are running your own campaign and discovered that certain class mechanics are not behaving the way you thought they would, then all I can say to you is: Learn.
Just learn it. If your long term villains are at all realistic, then they will recruit and cultivate capable individuals to overcome the threat. Don't tailor your encounters to one player, that's absurd. Tailor the encounter to the entire party. Grapple the crap out of that Gunslinger. He doesn't have feats invested in it, and your summoned monster does.
Are you unsure how to counter a developing power house and maintain the feeling that every character is a main character in this story?
Just learn it.
No matter what, if you run enough games for enough people, or long enough, you will encounter things that completely throw you. As the Arbiter of the game you are beholden to the same rules as the players. It is the agreement. "I won't cheat as a player, and you won't cheat as a GM". Let the NPC die, let the character die. The world goes on. It hurts, there is emotional involvement, but in the end, the sun sets and the moon rises.
You must be adaptable.
A player leaves town. Dice rolls go the wrong way. Players fail to pick up on some serious hints you've been dropping. Whatever it is, it changes the "plan". Go with it. The BBEG died ten sessions early. Think it through. Who takes over, what steps in to fill the void. Do any lieutenants try to pick up where he left off? Does a separate power base move in? Don't run your game on a rail. You expect your characters to be resilient to multiple encounters and all kinds of setbacks, shouldn't you be?
Whining because a particular player has started to force you to work harder at system mastery, or storytelling, is just poor performance. Suck it up GM's. You chose to be the world. The living, breathing, dynamic world. That is not easy. It means sacrifice. Your time is sacrificed on that altar. Your NPC's are sacrificed on that altar. Your very story is sacrificed on that altar. The only way to save the game is to prepare yourself and your players. Set expectations appropriately, live up to them appropriately, let players get the "Holy Unexpected Victory Batman! What a dice roll!" moments. You, as the GM, have to be adaptable and just learn it.
As a GM who very recently nearly tipped over the very same edge your GM did, I feel I can put in a little weight.
One of my players is using a double barreled musket, and was having a fairly good time of it. The party is level 6 and up until now they've had a pretty decent time. They made some fights look easier, but as soon as the GS wasn't able to just sit and single-focus the main target with no harassment, it became a little easier. Well, as of about 3 sessions ago, I was informed that the gunslinger in particular using his Rapid Reload was technically able to fire four times a round at 6th level using 8 bullets, because of a) full round attack for 2 shots, b) rapid shot, and c) haste from the party wizard. Roughly this meant that at 6th level he was doing 8d12+20 points of damage in a single round, with no crits. Now, that essentially means that his slightly-below-average damage is 64 points of damage, minimum. This is of course also not counting any crits, which he tends to do fairly frequently, since he's just very lucky (I watch his rolls to ensure no cheating, because it happens so often.) I almost blew my stack when I added some extra HP onto a boss to try and counter his damage and he ended up blowing through it in one full round of attacks.
My position is this: use tactics. My players are starting to get annoyed with me because their enemies are getting smarter. Their complaints are falling on deaf ears however, because IC when you watch this guy blow away the big badass with ease, you want to make sure that guy goes down fast so he can't keep firing. This has meant a few more sneak-attack encounters, and a lot more where the tank is starting to complain about how he can't "Draw Aggro" because the Gunslinger is getting jumped because he does simply too much damage.
Tl;Dr: Don't mess with the rest of the party and make them suffer for his power, just fight smarter.
The part that I found most interesting is how the GM says he'd never allow Gunslingers into his campaign again, but when the OP offers to swap to another character, he doesn't allow it.
I wonder why. Would it put all of his hard work of countering the Gunslinger to waste?
Sounds right to me. He's made the OP his official whipping boy and doesn't want to lose that.
|
|
the only thing I can add to this for all of you saying just learn the class and suck it up is:
When you have 2 11th level characters (Gunslinger + Zen Archer) one round a CR 20 Balor with Mythic Levels in a published scenario without taking any damage and laughing at it there is a problem with the rules.