|
I'd be more concerned with how you are carrying 100 bullets and enough gunpowder around to make use of your boomstick habit.
The only question is, how much str, because early on firearm too expensive so hitting a few things with greataxe might be useful.mules cord cost 1500 GP to add to on an already enchanted neckslot item and give +8 str for carrying. So no real problem, though of course thats also a concern.
After all, CHA can be dumbed and 2 dumb stats are of limited use.
Edit: cartridges are wightless.
Wait we aren't on the topic of realism anymore? Jeez this thread is all over the place!
|
I'd be more concerned with how you are carrying 100 bullets and enough gunpowder around to make use of your boomstick habit.
The only question is, how much str, because early on firearm too expensive so hitting a few things with greataxe might be useful.mules cord cost 1500 GP to add to on an already enchanted neckslot item and give +8 str for carrying. So no real problem, though of course thats also a concern.
After all, CHA can be dumbed and 2 dumb stats are of limited use.
Edit: cartridges are wightless.
I'd be more concerned with undead in my bandoleer or backpack... ;)
The 'nerf' was probably referencing the limit placed on Musket Masters during a event relating to Paizocon. It limited some of the features.
Either way you look at it. There is a difference between playing a fun/thematic & a Optimized/min-maxed character. Most campaigns where an optimized/min-maxed character would be effective probably are campaigns that focus mostly on combat.
Most optimized characters will focus on rolling the most damage possible and having the best possible start to do so. Which means they will take a class that allows such. In a campaign that allow guns that would most likely be either a Wizard or some Gunslinger built using an archetype. In this type of build yes DEX will be buffed as high as possible. Followed probably by CON for the HP and then WIS.
A Thematic build on the other hand will focus on a character theme (e.g. Johannes 'hawkeye' Schulzer) that defines the character's focus. In the case of Mr. Schulzer, a famous German sniper from WWII who used a replica rifled musket from the Napoleonic era, this means a musket master with high CHA, WIS, DEX, fairly average INT, low STR & CON. This represents his ability to win over even his enemies, his sharp senses and massive common sense, and his fast reflexes. His average intellect & his physically weaker than a standard german soldier body. He would most likely work in conjunction with another character who carries his supplies for him. While he focuses on scouting and sniping with only his Musket and ammo. Forgoing any armor to focus on stealth. In essence a good heroes of battle type character.
Most players go for a Thematic character. In fact the character I just showed you is an Elf Gunslinger from my Weird War II campaign. The player chose this build because of the 'Glass Cannon' feel of the character. He is level 15 with less HP than the Wizard because of the dice and his CON penalty.
How does realism break classes? also hp isn't just how much damage they can take it represents their ability to avoid taking major injury. HP is admittedly flawed. A different system is needed for measuring damage.
|
So again I have to ask...are you going to remove the other dozen or so archtypes for different classes that CAN BE...Then you may as well ban RageLancePounce Barb builds and Vivisectionist/Beastmorph builds and Flurry of Maneuvers builds...they are all very powerful, possibly more powerful, as well.
Thats part of the game...every class and character has a weakness...the difference between a good GM and a GREAT GM is the ability to take whatever the party throws at you and make it still fun, challenging and rewarding for everyone.
The problem with Musket Master isn't that it can be more powerful, it's that it is more powerful. She gains the ability to make full attacks every round with a two-handed firearm, something the base gunslinger class can never do with early firearms, and their musket training applies to all two-handed firearms, where the base class must pick one specific model of firearm. The latter ability is gained with no trade-off expense either. This is not a class that can be better than the base class; it, like the pistolero, unarguably is better than the base class, because neither archetype loses anything even remotely comparable to what it gains. Whether the archetypes are broken in relation to the system or not may be up for debate, but those archetypes are clearly superior to the base class, retaining all of its functionality while giving up little to nothing in return for clear advantages.
A base gunslinger can full attack with 2HF at higher levels. If you bend the rules wording to the breaking point.
A base gunslinger can full attack with 2HF at higher levels. If you bend the rules wording to the breaking point.
It isn't bending, the text of the lightning reload deed is quite vague on that part and we still didn't get a clarification on which of the two reading is correct. I believe that an 11th level vanilla gunslinger can full attack with a two handed early firearm if he uses alchemical cartiges, but i can't say that this is the RAW because i see that the wording is vague.
We also haven't recieved a clarification on the double barrel pistol which i believe doesn't (and shouldn't) double the number of the attacks you have, but i can't say that this is the RAW because i see how one might read the pistol's description and very validitly reach to a conclusion different than my own.We must wait for a FAQ and an errata for UC in order to fully judge things, the errata and FAQ for UM cleared up and/or fixed quite a few things.
Also Azaelas be careful, you are treading on dangerous ground, what you said in your previous post comes close to the stormwind fallacy.
|
|
A base gunslinger can full attack with 2HF at higher levels. If you bend the rules wording to the breaking point.It isn't bending, the text of the lightning reload deed is quite vague on that part and we still didn't get a clarification on which of the two reading is correct. I believe that an 11th level vanilla gunslinger can full attack with a two handed early firearm if he uses alchemical cartiges, but i can't say that this is the RAW because i see that the wording is vague.
We also haven't recieved a clarification on the double barrel pistol which i believe doesn't (and shouldn't) double the number of the attacks you have, but i can't say that this is the RAW because i see how one might read the pistol's description and very validitly reach to a conclusion different than my own.We must wait for a FAQ and an errata for UC in order to fully judge things, the errata and FAQ for UM cleared up and/or fixed quite a few things.
Also Azaelas be careful, you are treading on dangerous ground, what you said in your previous post comes close to the stormwind fallacy.
The pistolero gunslinger in my campaign fires both barrels every shot he takes...its a double edged sword because last week he crit once and misfired 3 times (one time it exploded). That was mathematically PERFECT since he is 3 times as likely to misfire bc of alchemical cartridges.
What I was referring to is rapid reload and alchemical cartridges and another feat can't remember the name. Doesn't even touch lightning reload. And I don't think stormwind fallacy means what you think it means. And not if you go off of a basic balanced gunslinger not some stupid optimized build.
I have to look at the archetype to specify what they nerfed.
The 'nerf' was probably referencing the limit placed on Musket Masters during a event relating to Paizocon. It limited some of the features.
Either way you look at it. There is a difference between playing a fun/thematic & a Optimized/min-maxed character. Most campaigns where an optimized/min-maxed character would be effective probably are campaigns that focus mostly on combat.
Most optimized characters will focus on rolling the most damage possible and having the best possible start to do so. Which means they will take a class that allows such. In a campaign that allow guns that would most likely be either a Wizard or some Gunslinger built using an archetype. In this type of build yes DEX will be buffed as high as possible. Followed probably by CON for the HP and then WIS.
A Thematic build on the other hand will focus on a character theme (e.g. Johannes 'hawkeye' Schulzer) that defines the character's focus. In the case of Mr. Schulzer, a famous German sniper from WWII who used a replica rifled musket from the Napoleonic era, this means a musket master with high CHA, WIS, DEX, fairly average INT, low STR & CON. This represents his ability to win over even his enemies, his sharp senses and massive common sense, and his fast reflexes. His average intellect & his physically weaker than a standard german soldier body. He would most likely work in conjunction with another character who carries his supplies for him. While he focuses on scouting and sniping with only his Musket and ammo. Forgoing any armor to focus on stealth. In essence a good heroes of battle type character.
Most players go for a Thematic character. In fact the character I just showed you is an Elf Gunslinger from my Weird War II campaign. The player chose this build because of the 'Glass Cannon' feel of the character. He is level 15 with less HP than the Wizard because of the dice and his CON penalty.
Are you telling me that this post doesn't go close to the stormwind fallacy?
Also what feat is that? I really want to read it.
What was the Paizocon ruling that "nerfed" the Musket Master?
I would like to know what is being consistently referenced.
I believe it is:
"...Can only benefit from fast musket once per round. And can't be combined with the steady aim deed..." it also has some other restrictions on firearms usable.
Also I think it just allows you another attack based on you BAB so if you can make a second attack with a sword then you can use a double barrel to make that second attack before reloading.
The feat was from one of the golarion campaign setting books that actually dealt with ranged weapons like crossbows but by the reading of it then it applies to firearms.
Stormwind Fallacy is a meme/trope that describes a literary device. It is used to trick readers into thinking a major event that will have a massive impact on the main character's world but turns out to be a false set up to throw off readers.
Source: Writing Techniques: the good, the bad, and those that make you look stupid.
What was the Paizocon ruling that "nerfed" the Musket Master?
I would like to know what is being consistently referenced.
I believe it is:
"...Can only benefit from fast musket once per round. And can't be combined with the steady aim deed..." it also has some other restrictions on firearms usable.
Also I think it just allows you another attack based on you BAB so if you can make a second attack with a sword then you can use a double barrel to make that second attack before reloading.
The feat was from one of the golarion campaign setting books that actually dealt with ranged weapons like crossbows but by the reading of it then it applies to firearms.Stormwind Fallacy is a meme/trope that describes a literary device. It is used to trick readers into thinking a major event that will have a massive impact on the main character's world but turns out to be a false set up to throw off readers.
Source: Writing Techniques: the good, the bad, and those that make you look stupid.
Ok i was talking about the RPG stormwind fallacy that (in a very few words) says that you can't have a character that is both effective and flavorful.
|
Archetypes that are blatantly and obviously more powerful than the base class can be an issue.
Practically every archetype is better than the original at a specific task. That is the point of an archetype. They enhance an aspect of the class and lose others.
Pistolero's are awesome with pistols, bad with muskets. Musket masters are awesome with muskets, bad with pistols. Vanilla gunslingers are mediocre with both. Balance. This is why from a min/max perspective you will always want to pick an archetype.
I believe it is:
"...Can only benefit from fast musket once per round. And can't be combined with the steady aim deed..."
I checked pathfinder society additional resources and found nothing stating this.
That is The Effectiveness Two-Dimensionality Paradox/Paradigm.
The name gets confused because of amateur authors, especially the Marty/Mary Stu writers, using Stormwind Fallacy in an overabundance to make a flavorful character appear effective bit not really be effective. While effective characters become 2-Dimensional and flavorless.
It goes allow with the Marty/Mary Stu as the damsel in distress/ultimate hero tropes.
|
|
A Thematic build on the other hand will focus on a character theme (e.g. Johannes 'hawkeye' Schulzer) that defines the character's focus. In the case of Mr. Schulzer, a famous German sniper from WWII who used a replica rifled musket from the Napoleonic era, this means a musket master with high CHA, WIS, DEX, fairly average INT, low STR & CON.
For one we are discussing the power level of the class and to discuss such you should use an optimized build. However "Thematic" builds can be no different than optimized builds.
My PFS gunslinger is optimized and thematically an American gunslinger (inspired by a painted mini I happened upon at a hobby shop) who fell in some portal during a dramatic escape and ended up in Golarion. Since they pass around gold like candy he figured he'd get his and haul it back to home. So he donned a duster of resistance, magical leather jacket, sheriff badge wayfinder, and spurs that give -2 stealth to join the PFS working for Qadira. His two languages are Common and American and he speaks with a southern drawl (that I of course butcher but is enhanced with a dip of big league chewing gum). Besides gunsmithing he has a few ranks in craft (cigarettes).
Being thematic has nothing to do with optimization or specific stat arrays. Being thematic has everything to do with the type of player and how indepth they get into roleplaying.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, speaking as a DM I was having some issues with the party gunslinger at first. Their ability to near always hit (and when they crit it is nearly always an insta-kill).
That said, I don't believe they are overpowered, just different. Once I adjusted my tactics a bit and reread all the pertaining rules he became much easier to deal with.
My personal recommendations:
1) Concealment/Displacement Effects - The few times I threw out monsters with this, I had the gunslinger pulling his hair out. Suddenly he is missing around half his shots (ours had terrible luck with these rolls...50% became about 75%).
2) Critters with Reach - Like most ranged characters, getting in their face causes them issues. He'll more than likely eat an attack trying to move away or shoot it point blank.
3) Equivalent Counters for Gun Items - If you're in a world where guns exist, chances are people will realize how dangerous they are and prepare accordingly. Especially so in worlds where they have been around a longer time. I recall an item in one of the books that absorbed damage specifically from bullet weapons and wasn't super expensive.
4) Understand the Rules - Whether it is what happens when a gun jams/explodes or for firing into melee, making sure you know the rules goes a long way to stopping the gunslinger from just mowing down foes.
5) Enforce the Costs - Ties into the above rule, but part of the drawback of a Gunslinger is his ammunition cost. Making sure a character adheres to this can make many combats for him expensive.
Kaisc006 the limits on musket master were only for Piazocon to reduce their overall damage output. And the point I was trying to make was even a Thematic build can be optimized for a specific role. But instead of looking at the class and stats first it is about the background first. In fact the player of the sniper used lower values than she rolled to fit the theme. He is actually optimized for a sniper for the group.
Again a Wizard would routinely maintain his spellbook which negates any minor water damage and he would most likely not have it on his person.
Heck by the time PCs would reasonably fight a dragon a Spellbook reliant caster probably has at least a small bag of holding for his precious gear such as his spellbook. Especially if the Wizard takes a profession skill.
You are forgetting most earlier firearms weren't used by anyone who wasn't rich or wasn't in a nations army. Also that is easily mitigated as someone said guns are expensive early on. Simply equip a bow/crossbow and continue fighting. As pointed out multiple times feats good for guns were originally used for bows.
Any suit of armor worth wearing is actually fairly easy to move in albeit some tasks are more difficult. This is represented as a check penalty. Also the weight of armor is actually higher than the average weight of a real life version. Full Plate would weight around 35 lbs for a man 5' 10" weighing 190 lbs if he even wore every little piece which was rare even for knights. The hardest part is actually putting it on as the standard design of full plate was for Knights who had at least one squire and page. All it takes to make usable by a lone soldier though is a simple redesign of how the pieces fit together.
Reread how any non-tribal society made arrows. Part of the process is sealing the shaft and fletching with a special laquer to help it not burn fast when it was set aflame for use in a siege. In fact this was even done in tribal cultures in Africa and the Americas. Europeans used this type of arrow since before the Greeks.
Senses is a problem dealt with by logic in a dungeon a sword clang echoes. In a forest or plains not so much.
How doesn't represent damage. Read the intro to wounds and vigor in UC that passage is almost Word for Word what was said in the original DnD handbook for chainmail which brings up the fact that originally HP was a *gasp* Optional Rule and the original preferred method was a wounds system based on CON. But this was dropped in favor of the HP system when DnD went independent. Do to input from players wanting HP like in some famous Arcade Games.
Also most people think DnD was the first RPG. But the truth is it is only the one that made it common. RPGs date back to pre-1900s originally made for children to learn fundamental skills such as teamwork and resource management. One of the original games that dates back to around the Civil War comes from France and was called Renaissance.
|
|
Also most people think DnD was the first RPG. But the truth is it is only the one that made it common.One of the original games that dates back to around the Civil War comes from France and was called Renaissance.
DnD was the first game marketed as a fantasy roleplaying game. Of course it is based on games before it, nothing is original, but not Renaissance. Gary Gygax and his friends were big into war gaming and developed a system to play individual soldiers rather than whole armies. You can learn all this in an interesting documentary here:
Dungeons and Dragons the Experience
DnD is universally recognized as the first commercial roleplaying game.
PC HP scales, the equipment HP does not -> at higher levels all non-magic equipment destroyed in any combat with area damage, if realism is applied, that in case an area damage cannot be avoided (ref failed), it envelops at least one half of ones body. Then all equipment on the body side must suffer the same effects as the PC suffers. As non-magic equipment HP does not scale, but attack strength scales, good buy to any non-magic equipment.
Great point, I never considered what abusing gear damage could cause at higher levels. For me HP has never meant damage, just an arbitrary number for how much punishment a character can take. For realism, something I read said lvls 1-5 PCs are human, 6-10 fantastical like aragorn in LoTR, 11-15 superhero/mythical quality like Beowulf, 16-20 gods. So by the time a PC is 6th level the game pushes past realistic boundaries.
For everyone arguing for realisim, PF/DnD is not the system for you. Even the economy is unrealistic. If you want a more realistic sword and sorcery experience check out the Conan RPG based off 3.5.
|
|
Archetypes that are blatantly and obviously more powerful than the base class can be an issue.Practically every archetype is better than the original at a specific task. That is the point of an archetype. They enhance an aspect of the class and lose others.
Pistolero's are awesome with pistols, bad with muskets. Musket masters are awesome with muskets, bad with pistols. Vanilla gunslingers are mediocre with both. Balance. This is why from a min/max perspective you will always want to pick an archetype.
I checked pathfinder society additional resources and found nothing stating this.
That's a ridiculous statement though, because the base gunslinger is still shoe-horned into a single gun by the fact that his feats and abilities apply to a single gun type (pepperbox, double-barrel pistol, musket, Etc.) chosen at the time you take a feat or ability. A player is going to choose what firearm he uses at character creation regardless. You lose absolutely nothing by picking one of those archetypes, and modify base abilities to operate far in excess of their normal limitations. The ability to apply your Gun Training to a whole field of weapons (one-handed or two-handed) alone gives you alevel of versatility the base class can't compete with. You obviously are pretty set in your opinion here, so I'm not going to continue in this thread, but trying to argue that pistolero and musket master are in any way balanced to the base gunslinger class is fallacious, and patently and mathematically untrue.
...patently and mathematically untrue.
[side rant]This statement right here displays a huge problem on this board. Everything is judged by mathematics instead of practical application. When I read a lot of these class guides, I constantly wonder if the writer actually ever played the class or if they just worked up a bunch of formula and spit out whatever came out highest.
|
|
...patently and mathematically untrue.[side rant]This statement right here displays a huge problem on this board. Everything is judged by mathematics instead of practical application. When I read a lot of these class guides, I constantly wonder if the writer actually ever played the class or if they just worked up a bunch of formula and spit out whatever came out highest.
I have played, and very much enjoy, the Gunslinger, I just think those Archetypes are not properly offset with the core class, a fact borne out both in play, and in the math that underlies the entire system.
People go to the math in their posts on these boards, generally not because they're theoretical physicists, but because it's really obnoxious when someone says something is or is not true with absolutely no evidence supporting their statement. You gotta be able to cash the checks your mouth writes :)
|
That's a ridiculous statement though, because the base gunslinger is still shoe-horned into a single gun by the fact that his feats and abilities apply to a single gun type (pepperbox, double-barrel pistol, musket, Etc.) chosen at the time you take a feat or ability. A player is going to choose what firearm he uses at character creation regardless. You lose absolutely nothing by picking one of those archetypes, and modify base abilities to operate far in excess of their normal limitations. The ability to apply your Gun Training to a whole field of weapons (one-handed or two-handed) alone gives you alevel of versatility the base class can't compete with. You obviously are pretty set in your opinion here, so I'm not going to continue in this thread, but trying to argue that pistolero and musket master are in any way balanced to the base gunslinger class is fallacious, and patently and mathematically untrue.
How is this ridiculous ? The base principle of an archetype is losing versatility for efficiency in a specific field. The base gunslinger is a bit underwhelming class ; focusing in a single type of weapons allows him to shine a bit more with said weapons. A pistolero has to fight in close range, when a gunslinger may adopt to use a big firearm to snipe, a musket to deadshot incoming bad guys from afar, and switch to pistols if they get close.
The arcane duelist is better at fighting than a bard, but has less ability to deal with skills. Whether he will actually use these skills someday is irrelevant to the discussion, what he is losing is versatility and the ability to deal with a situation if it ever arises.Or maybe you will argue that an archer archetype losing medium and heavy armors is broken because the archer will never wear them i the first place ?
Archetypes are supposed to be mechanically better than the base class with whatever weapon it is using, including real weapons, specific spells, or ability to heal/summon/tank more efficiently. That's why an archer, a two-handed or an unarmed is better than a vanilla fighter at using it's own weapons and dealing damage. It is intended to be mechanically and conceptually more efficient with it's own stick.
|
|
Now experience in the world can anyway lessen, mitigate or avoid the damage from being immersed in lava. As that does 20d6, enough to burn any ordinary human to ash, and as a high level PC can after being immersed for 1 round drag himself out in rpinciple without help, that means that his muscles, bones and other body parts are not damaged by exposure to lava as much as other people. His higher HP represent, that he is as durable as a tree stump, you have to hack his flesh a dozen times or so, before serious damage is done.
To be fair, you probably need to read this free supplement about lava rules.
HP represents damage AND the ability do deal with it/avoid it before falling unconscious.
What logical consequences ? A fireball mage has more mobility and can aim faster than a cannon.
Yeah, but those people are rare. If guns and cannons become commonplace, it changes the face of the world. If you don't believe me, crack a history book.
Oh god. Please stop. I can't stop laughing.Sir, I appreciate your general ignorance of what optimizers can really pull at high levels. You're worried about a guy who threew down money to ignore DR at about 30 feet or so.
I'm worried because the party wizard created a plane of nothing but death traps lashed with the pure physical manifestations of his hate and planeshifts his foes to that dark and terrible realm of no return.
I'm also worried because the party barbarian is seriously considering skipping most dungeon encounters from now on by collapsing the entire structure using his adamantine axe and a sudden knowledge of manmade structures and a strength check roughly enough to bench press tarrasques.
I can defeat a gunslinger with a level 0 orison. Or a bucket of water if you prefer.
Aside from your general unpleasantness in the mode of expressing your opinion, you also are wrong about Create Water working that way against held weapons. But whatever, apparently your way of conversing is to jump rectum-first into the face of other people. Go away.
Also, I got a Wizard and Sorcerer in that party... they don't break the basic mechanical assumptions of the game like the Gunslinger does, because my players know better than to try that. Yeah, you can always roll out Pun-Pun and the other though-exercise OP builds to demonstrate how super-good casters are, but if you don't have that kind of player in your group, then a martial character which simply ignores AC limits is a problem.
The addition of Guns allows a GM who loves history (such as myself) to alter their world to easily reflect an era around the time of Japan getting rifles, Spain exploring the Americas, the Pike and Shotte era, or even the Napoleonic era. Heck you can even make a old west style campaign.
It doesn't break the mechanical assumptions in the game. If anything it shows something that has been constantly stated. Everything allows a player to break the rules. Also a lot of people think hitting on Touch AC is broken (it is the most common complaint over at GiantitP). Might I remind you so do a lot of Arcane Spells. Even some of the Divine attack spells if memory serves. Heck one of the best low level battle spells, magic missile, doesn't require any roll unless the target has Spell Resistance. Heck a wand of magic missile can be one of the best fall back wands a mid-level arcane caster can have especially a Magus.
Also remember that players can and usually will craft wands based on their caster level for most of their combat spells. Again fairly common with Magi thanks to Wand Mastery.
If anything the Gunslinger is an equalizer between Martial classes and Caster classes.