|
The one thing I would like to mention is that Gunslingers spent a feat, uses a class feature, and has a higher risk of misfire in order to get free action reloads. So if your going to put a limit on the number of free actions a gunslinger can take to reload, you should put the same limit on archers, or people who quick draw and throw daggers and such. Otherwise you are just being a jerk to the gunslinger player and treating them unfairly.
Justifying cheating the gunslinger out of his free action reloads that he spent the feats, and class features, and gold [all three required] by saying that by "common sense" no one could load that fast is unfair. By the same logic a wizard would be banned from casting fireball.
Double Barrel Pistols are a bit powerful, but really the key is to enforce the rules that are already on the books. A 20' range increment is a bit tough, and if they want to hit touch AC after the first range increment it's 1 grit per increment per shot. That's a lot of grit with so many attacks.
As for being able to dual wield and use the weapon cords, that one is a bit tough just because I'm not even sure it's what the rules intended. I always read the rules on full attacks...
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.I always took that to mean that you go from highest to lowest switching back and forth between hands. Not that you do all the attacks with one hand, and then all the attacks with the other hand. But I can see how that could be read that way.
This comment here from the core rulebook on Combat is what I've always looked at for this. It's pretty straightforward that you have to go mainhand then offhand and back and forth that way when making attacks with two weapons.
Have I read something wrong or is there something else that lets you change this?
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Mathwei, let's say I strike with all my left-hand attacks, and then all my right-hand attacks. What part of the rules you've provided have I violated?
For each mset of multiple attacks I received because my base attack bonus was high enough, I made the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest.
I don't have to strike with my highest left-hand bonus before my second right-hand bonus, because that doesn't trigger the "multiple attacks bacause base attack bonus is high enough" condition. In that particular, I have multiple attacks for a different reason, and the rule doesn't apply.
|
|
Mathwei, let's say I strike with all my left-hand attacks, and then all my right-hand attacks. What part of the rules you've provided have I violated?
For each mset of multiple attacks I received because my base attack bonus was high enough, I made the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest.
I don't have to strike with my highest left-hand bonus before my second right-hand bonus, because that doesn't trigger the "multiple attacks bacause base attack bonus is high enough" condition. In that particular, I have multiple attacks for a different reason, and the rule doesn't apply.
I understand what you're saying but this is the part I'm talking about.
you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first
There is nothing in the two weapon fighting line that says you don't have to take your attacks in order of bonus, only that you can choose which one goes first.
Lets say you have all the required TWF feats and get +20/+15/+10/+5 & +20/+15/+10 on off-hand.Per the line above he can choose either hand to go first (left or right) but since his offhand weapons first bonus is higher then his mainhand bonus second attack he HAS to take the off-hand attack next.
the only change that TWF does to this is let you pick which weapon attacks first.
This right here kills the weapon cord issue and makes all this cheese go away. I could be wrong I just can't find any rule that contradicts this.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Mathwei, the statement isn't "You must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest." The statement is "If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest."
Analogy:
Dude 1: If I'm on fire, pour water on me.
Dude 2: [pours water on him]
Dude 1: Why did you do that now?
Dude 2: You told me to!
Dude 1: Only under one condition, and that condition isn't met.
since his offhand weapons first bonus is higher then his mainhand bonus second attack he HAS to take the off-hand attack next.
Why does he have both an off-hand weapon's first attack and a main-hand bonus second attack? At least in part, it's because he has two weapons. So the condition "multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough" isn't met.
|
|
Mathwei, the statement isn't "You must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest." The statement is "If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest."
Analogy:
Dude 1: If I'm on fire, pour water on me.
Dude 2: [pours water on him]
Dude 1: Why did you do that now?
Dude 2: You told me to!
Dude 1: Only under one condition, and that condition isn't met.since his offhand weapons first bonus is higher then his mainhand bonus second attack he HAS to take the off-hand attack next.Why does he have both an off-hand weapon's first attack and a main-hand bonus second attack? At least in part, it's because he has two weapons. So the condition "multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough" isn't met.
I understand what you are saying but they ARE getting multiple attacks because their Bab is high enough.
Look at the Greater two weapon fighting feat:You are incredibly skilled at fighting with two weapons at the same time.
Prerequisites: Dex 19, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: You get a third attack with your off-hand weapon, albeit at a –10 penalty.
Since you are required to have a Bab of +11 you are getting that extra attack because of your Bab, condition is now met. Same for Improved two weapon fighting.
the only extra attack that doesn't have a Bab requirement is the first feat, all the rest of the multiple attacks you get are because your base attack bonus is high enough (and you took the feat).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
After seeing all the math and such I've just come to the conclusion that of someone wants to blow almost 100 gp a round on ammo I'm just gonna let them. I will be keeping careful track of his ammo supply however. Of course that doesn't mean I won't try and sunder the cords or something. (That's doable right?)
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I understand what you are saying but they ARE getting multiple attacks because their Bab is high enough.
Look at the Greater two weapon fighting feat:
You are incredibly skilled at fighting with two weapons at the same time.
Prerequisites: Dex 19, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: You get a third attack with your off-hand weapon, albeit at a –10 penalty.
Since you are required to have a Bab of +11 you are getting that extra attack because of your Bab, condition is now met. Same for Improved two weapon fighting.
the only extra attack that doesn't have a Bab requirement is the first feat, all the rest of the multiple attacks you get are because your base attack bonus is high enough (and you took the feat).
A high BAB doesn't grant those attacks. Certain feats do. Just because those feats have BAB prereqs doesn't mean the effects of the feats are linked to BAB. After all, some PCs might get those feats without having to meet the prereqs.
The rule isn't "if a high BAB is in any way related to the acquisition of extra attacks", it's "if you get extra attacks because of your high BAB". That's not the same thing.
so no one sees the problem of comparing a dps focused character (fighter archer-with 2+int skills and all his class benefits being used to generate dps) to a utility gunslinger (with 4+int skills and the ability to do a lot of things with his grit)
the fifth level comparison on dps should be between a gunslinger and a fifth level fighter archer using only 3 feats (the other 3 feats are bonuses to being that class--just like gunslinger is getting other bonuses)
at fifth level the fighter has
3 bonus feats---(being figured into his dps)
weapon training--figured into his dps
armor training 1
bravery
saves of +4 , +1 +1
10 skill points
at fifth level the gunslinger has
1 bonus feat
Gunslingers spend grit points to accomplish deeds. Most deeds grant the gunslinger some momentary bonus or effect, but there are some that provide longer-lasting effects. Some deeds stay in effect as long as the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point. The following is the list of base gunslinger deeds. A gunslinger can only perform deeds of her level or lower. Unless otherwise noted, a deed can be performed multiple successive times, as long as the appropriate amount of grit is spent to perform the deed.
Deadeye (Ex): At 1st level, the gunslinger can resolve an attack against touch AC instead of normal AC when firing beyond her firearm's first range increment. Performing this deed costs 1 grit point per range increment beyond the first. The gunslinger still takes the –2 penalty on attack rolls for each range increment beyond the first when she performs this deed.
Gunslinger's Dodge (Ex): At 1st level, the gunslinger gains an uncanny knack for getting out of the way of ranged attacks. When a ranged attack is made against the gunslinger, she can spend 1 grit point to move 5 feet as an immediate action; doing so grants the gunslinger a +2 bonus to AC against the triggering attack. This movement is not a 5-foot step, and provokes attacks of opportunity. Alternatively, the gunslinger can drop prone to gain a +4 bonus to AC against the triggering attack. The gunslinger can only perform this deed while wearing medium or light armor, and while carrying no more than a light load.
Quick Clear (Ex): At 1st level, as a standard action, the gunslinger can remove the broken condition from a single firearm she is currently wielding, as long as that condition was gained by a firearm misfire. The gunslinger must have at least 1 grit point to perform this deed. Alternatively, if the gunslinger spends 1 grit point to perform this deed, she can perform quick clear as a move-equivalent action instead of a standard action.
Gunslinger Initiative (Ex): At 3rd level, as long as the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she gains the following benefits. First, she gains a +2 bonus on initiative checks. Furthermore, if she has the Quick Draw feat, her hands are free and unrestrained, and the firearm is not hidden, she can draw a single firearm as part of the initiative check.
Pistol-Whip (Ex): At 3rd level, the gunslinger can make a surprise melee attack with the butt or handle of her firearm as a standard action. When she does, she is considered to be proficient with the firearm as a melee weapon and gains a bonus on the attack and damage rolls equal to the enhancement bonus of the firearm. The damage dealt by the pistol-whip is of the bludgeoning type, and is determined by the size of the firearm. One-handed firearms deal 1d6 points of damage (1d4 if wielded by Small creatures) and two-handed firearms deal 1d10 points of damage (1d8 if wielded by Small creatures). Regardless of the gunslinger's size, the critical multiplier of this attack is 20/×2. If the attack hits, the gunslinger can make a combat maneuver check to knock the target prone as a free action. Performing this deed costs 1 grit point.
Utility Shot (Ex): At 3rd level, if the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she can perform all of the following utility shots. Each utility shot can be applied to any single attack with a firearm, but the gunslinger must declare the utility shot she is using before firing the shot.
• Blast Lock: The gunslinger makes an attack roll against a lock within the first range increment of her firearm. A Diminutive lock usually has AC 7, and larger locks have a lower AC. The lock gains a bonus to its AC against this attack based on its quality. A simple lock has a +10 bonus to AC, an average lock has a +15 bonus to AC, a good lock has a +20 bonus to AC, and a superior lock has a +30 bonus to AC. Arcane lock grants a +10 bonus to the AC of a lock against this attack. On a hit, the lock is destroyed, and the object can be opened as if it were unlocked. On a miss, the lock is destroyed, but the object is jammed and still considered locked. It can still be unlocked by successfully performing this deed, by using the Disable Device skill, or with the break DC, though the DC for either break or Disable Device or the AC increases by 10. A key, combination, or similar mechanical method of unlocking the lock no longer works, though knock can still be employed to bypass the lock, and the creator of an arcane lock can still bypass the wards of that spell.
• Scoot Unattended Object: The gunslinger makes an attack roll against a Tiny or smaller unattended object within the first range increment of her firearm. A Tiny unattended object has an AC of 5, a Diminutive unattended object has an AC of 7, and a Fine unattended object has an AC of 11. On a hit, the gunslinger does not damage the object with the shot, but can move it up to 15 feet farther away from the shot's origin. On a miss, she damages the object normally.
• Stop Bleeding: The gunslinger makes a firearm attack and then presses the hot barrel against herself or an adjacent creature to staunch a bleeding wound. Instead of dealing damage, the shot ends a single bleed condition affecting the creature. The gunslinger does not have to make an attack roll when performing the deed in this way; she can instead shoot the firearm into the air, but that shot still uses up ammunition normally.
gun training +1
nimble +1
saves of +4, +4 +1
20 skill points
so did two different developers come up with gunslingers? One thinking it would be full dps and the other thinking it should be a utility class? Ask a fighter archer what they can do instead of dps?
Like I said--a comparison should be a fifth level gunslinger vs a 5th level fighter archer only using 3 (or 4 to counter the one bonus for gunslinger) max of his feats. The fighters other 2-3 feats should be putting him ahead of dps on the gunslinger to make up for lack of utility.
so was looking at gunslinger archetypes--thinking that if they gave up utility to go to 2+int skills and some utility to get equal dps to an archer fighter who only does dps. I thought I would look at pistolero to see if they did this. I found this instead
Pistol Training (Ex): Starting at 5th level, a pistolero increases her skill with one-handed firearms. She gains a bonus on damage rolls equal to her Dexterity modifier, and when she misfires with a one-handed firearm, the misfire value increases by 2 instead of 4. Every four levels thereafter (9th, 13th, and 17th), the bonus on damage rolls increases by +1. At 13th level, a pistolero never misfires with a one-handed firearm
ouch
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A few thing to remember about Gunslinger.
- You can't start off with a Double Barreled Weapon
- Being able to shoot is very expensive because you need paper cartridges (If you are the GM are not enforcing this, it is not the fault of the class)
- Double Barreled Weapon is very expensive, before the fame restriction you would have to save all your money just to get 1 by your 5th game (Level 2.1), impossible to get before that assuming Max gold and not playing up and it is a waste if it is not masterworked (2050 gp). Which means you are not buying anything else and hurting yourself because of that.
- For your second one assuming you don't make your first magical if you are lucky and save all your money you will be deep into 3rd level maybe fourth due to the upkeep (Ammo) of the first weapon.
- Now with the Fame restriction you can't get your first until 13 fame which at best is Level 3, and if you saved all your money at this point which means your not self sufficient you may be able to buy 2 of them.
- You are severely crippling yourself if you save up money to get 2 double barreled weapons at low levels, which means a greater likelihood of death.
- Also because if the great diversity of the gunslinger I would say this is a corner case build anyway.
- Your chance of hitting go down significantly (as mentioned many times) when you are firing as many shots as the corner case build
- Your chances of Misfire go up as well, and most sane gunslingers will take the time to quick clear the weapon instead of chancing it's destruction
- By the time the the negatives for firing so many shots per round don't make a difference all other DPS classes are doing a ton of DPS as well so it really does not matter at that point who does more.
- Gunslingers don't get the feats they need as quickly as a Archer Fighter.
- And the most important thing to remember about Gunslinger... It is my Favorite class (Only class I have 2 PC with) and trust me even with going against touch AC I miss a lot!! ask anyone in my group.
|
dragonmoon
you have 4 missile types heading out on an extended adventure. each is going to be carrying 300 rounds of ammo---how much weight is each carrying
sling specialist for 300 sling bullets = 150 lbs
crossbow specialist for 300 bolts = 30 lbs
bow specialist for 300 arrows = 45 lbs
gunslinger with 300 paper cartridges = ???
zero weight according to RAW
|
|
nope--look under alchemist cartidge paper. which includes the entire thing. no weight. at least not by RAW
The reason it doesn't show a weight, is because it is a single piece of ammunition.
A single firearm bullet also shows no weight.
A cartridge includes a bullet.
30 bullets equals half a pound.
Therefore 30 paper cartridges will weigh 5 pounds.
You can argue all you want about that, but that's how I'd rule it at my table, and I believe RAW would back me up on it.
|
|
I understand what you are saying but they ARE getting multiple attacks because their Bab is high enough.
Look at the Greater two weapon fighting feat:
You are incredibly skilled at fighting with two weapons at the same time.
Prerequisites: Dex 19, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.
Benefit: You get a third attack with your off-hand weapon, albeit at a –10 penalty.
Since you are required to have a Bab of +11 you are getting that extra attack because of your Bab, condition is now met. Same for Improved two weapon fighting.
the only extra attack that doesn't have a Bab requirement is the first feat, all the rest of the multiple attacks you get are because your base attack bonus is high enough (and you took the feat).A high BAB doesn't grant those attacks. Certain feats do. Just because those feats have BAB prereqs doesn't mean the effects of the feats are linked to BAB. After all, some PCs might get those feats without having to meet the prereqs.
The rule isn't "if a high BAB is in any way related to the acquisition of extra attacks", it's "if you get extra attacks because of your high BAB". That's not the same thing.
I fully understand and mostly agree with you Jiggy, however since we are only dealing with Raw here since you are required to have a +11 or +6 bab to even get access to those feats that give you those extra then the higher Bab is what gives you those attacks.
It is a pre-req for the feats that are a pre-req for the attacks. QED the bab is the pre-req for the attacks so it is the Bab that gives you the attacks. Same way as having a weapon is a pre-req for the attacks as well.Look at the words of this statement:
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough.
The feat calls for a bab high enough to qualify, so the bab is a requirement for the feat and the feat is a requirement for the extra attack. Therefore the bab is a requirement for the extra attack which kicks in this rule.
I have no problem admitting I'm wrong if you can show me ANYWHERE that the pre-reqs for a feat are irrelevant for the effect of that feat. As far as I can tell from all other rulings like this that the pre-reqs impact on the final outcome as much as the actual feat does.
|
I have no problem admitting I'm wrong if you can show me ANYWHERE that the pre-reqs for a feat are irrelevant for the effect of that feat. As far as I can tell from all other rulings like this that the pre-reqs impact on the final outcome as much as the actual feat does.
There are several cases (such as the Monk's access to Improved Unarmed Attack) where a character can get a feat even though they don't meet the pre-requisites. That certainly suggests that the pre-requisites themselves don't have an effect on the outcome.
That said, though, I'm with you that the requirement for attacks to be taken in order of decreasing attack bonus is global, not just a local requirement to be applied to each weapon individually. That's not quite as strong as saying attacks with two weapons must use each weapon in strict alternation; if the bonus for main hand and off hand are the same, that would still permit the sequence main/off/off/main/main/off
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
played a sixth level game where the barbarian and the paladin got up from the table halfway through in frustration and said call us back when it is over. They started shopping in the store for the next hour or so. The barbarian had got to attack for one round each in two combats, the paladin not even a single round up to that point. As the cleric I had gotten off one spell in the two encounters. Between the druid, animal companion and gunslinger nothing lived to get off a second attack
but dont you see--it is the rules for the gunslinger---same as synthesist. The rules are so convoluted. One GM posted it---it would take half his time just managing the one character out of 6.
That said...
...the entire burden of performing all the rules for a class does not fall entirely onto the GM. If someone is reading Gunslinger and knows the rules well enough to put this build together, they cannot be utterly unaware of misfires, ammunition costs, penalties, etc. At some point, they have chosen to ignore one or more of these issues.
It is the player's responsibility as much as the GM's to be aware of how their class/gear/spell mechanics work and to follow through with all the appropriate costs, rolls, and modifiers. Failure to do so is negligent at best; cheating at the worst.
Suppose I'm the GM. A gunslinger comes to my table and I ask to look at her chronicles. She hasn't been spending gold on ammo. What should I do?
|
|
Suppose I'm the GM. A gunslinger comes to my table and I ask to look at her chronicles. She hasn't been spending gold on ammo. What should I do?
"Hmm, it looks like your previous GMs haven't advised you on the need to track your ammunition and the cost of replacing it. In PFS play, all costs should be accounted for on your chronicle sheets. Let's sort it out now. How many bullet & black powder shots do you estimate you've taken, and how many alchemical paper cartridges do you think you have used?"
(Take B&BP answer and multiply by 1.1gp; take alch. cart. answer and multiply by 6gp. Write 'retrospective ammo costs' in items bought section of chronicle sheet. In a spare space on chronicle sheet, write 'advised player of need to track ammo costs (not done so far)'.)
That's what I'd do anyway. It's purely theoretical, as the only gunslinger PC I've encountered so far is my own.
|
|
In addition, if I looked at the chronicle sheets and some previous GM had already pointed out issues with the player tracking their ammo costs, then I'd consider reporting the player to a VC/coordinator.
I'd be a lot more likely to do so if it seemed the player was very rules-aware and trying to pull a fast one, than if it was one of those players who seems perennially clueless about the rules.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Look at the words of this statement:
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough.
The feat calls for a bab high enough to qualify, so the bab is a requirement for the feat and the feat is a requirement for the extra attack. Therefore the bab is a requirement for the extra attack
Except that's not how english works. When an english statement refers to "X because of Y", with no mention of other factors, the sentence is calling out Y as being the only (or at least the only relevant) cause for X. Something that requires both Y and Z is not being referred to by that sentence.
Furthermore, a ranger can have Greater TWF (prereq BAB +11) with only +10 BAB. So either the ranger has the special ability to take that attack out of order when no one else can, or else feat-granted attacks really aren't the same as BAB-granted attacks.
|
|
Generally I agree with you Jiggy, however consider the following:
I get iterative attacks for a higher BAB.
Certain feats allow me to get those same iterative attacks for a high BAB with an offhand while two-weapon fighting.
Yes, the improved and greater feats do not indicate the extra attack is an iterative attack. But it is easy to interpret as such, because of the -5 to the attack on improved and -10 on greater.
While the language may not explicitly say it, the intent behind the feats is exactly that, granting the ability to use your iterative attacks with your offhand. Previous iterations of DnD made that much clearer.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Generally I agree with you Jiggy, however consider the following:
I get iterative attacks for a higher BAB.
Certain feats allow me to get those same iterative attacks for a high BAB with an offhand while two-weapon fighting.
Yes, the improved and greater feats do not indicate the extra attack is an iterative attack. But it is easy to interpret as such, because of the -5 to the attack on improved and -10 on greater.
It kind of throws a wrench into your interpretation when a ranger could have, say, Improved TWF without having TWF or Greater TWF, getting only the "middle" attack. Or better yet, he can have GTWF without meeting the BAB prereq and without having the other attacks.
While the language may not explicitly say it, the intent behind the feats is exactly that, granting the ability to use your iterative attacks with your offhand. Previous iterations of DnD made that much clearer.
Careful what you infer about intent based on D&D. You already know that it's easy to get tripped up on rules that subtly changed in Pathfinder. Intents change too. For example, the order of natural attacks used to matter, but Pathfinder's intent is different. Some details about TWF changed as well, such as whether or not penalties apply when you take your iteratives with different weapons.
Given how much TWF has been tweaked, assuming legacy intent is quite a stretch, especially when that assumption isn't actually supported in the text.
A quick comment: remember that Rapid Reload is for a single type of weapon only. Double barreled pistols and regular pistols are different types. In the new guide, you can't get double barreled pistols until you reach the PA for it...so if you ultimately go the double barreled route, you're handicapped for the first few levels. (of course, GM credit changes this)
A long time ago, before the weapon cord build was out, I built a musket master, with the intent of getting a double barreled musket. I realized quickly that either I was useless for the first few levels if I got Rapid Reload (double musket) or I had a feat that I had to take a second time.
|
|
A quick comment: remember that Rapid Reload is for a single type of weapon only. Double barreled pistols and regular pistols are different types. In the new guide, you can't get double barreled pistols until you reach the PA for it...so if you ultimately go the double barreled route, you're handicapped for the first few levels. (of course, GM credit changes this)
A long time ago, before the weapon cord build was out, I built a musket master, with the intent of getting a double barreled musket. I realized quickly that either I was useless for the first few levels if I got Rapid Reload (double musket) or I had a feat that I had to take a second time.
Actually, a musket master has no choice in which Rapid Reload he gets: it specifically calls it out as musket (so no starting off with Rapid Reload: Double-Barrel Musket).
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Mathwei/Andy:
Here's something interesting:
"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough... you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks."
Cleave has a prereq of BAB+1. It grants an extra attack. If we go with the interpretation that this means you're getting an extra attack because your BAB is high enough (same as the ITWF/GTWF feats), then per the above rule you have to use a full-round action to get that attack. But Cleave requires a standard action. Since you can't use a standard action and a full-round action in the same round, Cleave never functions.
Or maybe the rules mean what they say, and "extra attacks because of a high BAB" actually means just that and not a bunch of extra things.
|
|
Based on the language of how interative attacks work, and how they changed flurry of blows, I am pretty sure that legacy intent is completely valid here.
And I’m not entirely sure how a Ranger could get improved TWF without TWF or why a Ranger would want to do so. Seems completely silly to say that. But to answer your question, ITWF gives a -5 on that attack, so yes, it would be considered the first iterative attack on the offhand (regardless the fact whether they get the 1st offhand attack or not.)
In many cases of intent vs. actual language Jiggy, you gotta know the history of how everything developed from the old small white box through Pathfinder and why things changed they way they did.
The major pitfall with this, is when people try to ignore what’s actually written because things used to work a certain way.
In this case I am not ignoring what’s actually written. I’m applying an inference based on experience and knowledge to what is written. And what is written is actually ambiguous enough to support either stance.
So would you rather interpret something that’s ambiguous based on past knowledge on how things worked, or based off what makes the most cheesy build?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
And what is written is actually ambiguous enough to support either stance.
Correction: What is written supports one view and fails to directly contradict another. That's not the same as supporting both.
There is nothing in the Pathfinder ruleset that "supports" the idea of attacks granted by feats having to be taken in a certain order. Someone reading the text on its own, and reading it carefully, would never come to that conclusion. The only reason to think it works that way is either "I want it to" or "It did in D&D".
So what we have here is "D&D did X, and Pathfinder doesn't specifically contradict X, therefore X is supported in Pathfinder, despite Pathfinder rules not including X". I've followed lots of rules debates that involved that stance, and every single time, it's been wrong and the Pathfinder rules have meant only what they said.
An item omitted from Pathfinder rules is not part of Pathfinder rules, no matter what other games it's been in.
Now, if the Pathfinder rules say something really vague, such that an unbiased reading would leave anyone (including an RPG "virgin") not knowing what it means, then legacy intent can be a great suggestion. But when the text says one thing and one thing only, and legacy says something else, the lack of the text specifying an end to legacy does not constitute validity on the part of the legacy interpretation.
|
|
@Mathwei/Andy:
Here's something interesting:
"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough... you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks."Cleave has a prereq of BAB+1. It grants an extra attack. If we go with the interpretation that this means you're getting an extra attack because your BAB is high enough (same as the ITWF/GTWF feats), then per the above rule you have to use a full-round action to get that attack. But Cleave requires a standard action. Since you can't use a standard action and a full-round action in the same round, Cleave never functions.
Or maybe the rules mean what they say, and "extra attacks because of a high BAB" actually means just that and not a bunch of extra things.
You are reading way too much into this Jiggy.
Individual feats that break the standard set of rules do just that. They break the standard set of rules and creates a new rule by which that feat works.
You can’t use the new rule that Cleave creates to justify how you interpret two-weapon fighting.
I know what you are going to say now. Then how can I not just take the two-weapon fighting feats for what they say?
The answer:
1) The rule for how and when you can use your iterative attacks is clear. You must go from highest bonus to lowest.
2) The rule for how to apply an offhand weapon is clear (as are the penalties for any additional attacks by ITWF and GTWF).
3) It is, however, not explicitly stated that the extra offhand attacks are considered the offhand iterative attacks.
4) It is also not stated anywhere that you can take all one hand, and then all another hand.
5) So, knowing what is explicitly written, and what is not explained at all, some extrapolating is required to determine how to adjudicate the issue. In this case, using past versions and how things worked with those makes sense when considering intent.
Moral:
Lets look at the big picture, and how the entire rule set works within itself, rather than small out of context rules subsets when trying to figure out how something works.
|
|
Actually, a musket master has no choice in which Rapid Reload he gets: it specifically calls it out as musket (so no starting off with Rapid Reload: Double-Barrel Musket).
Actually to put more confusion on that, Musket Master get Rapid Reload (muskets), which is the incorrect wording. If it was just for Musket, it would be Rapid Reload (musket).
We are still trying to get clarification if the term (muskets means any Musket.
|
|
And what is written is actually ambiguous enough to support either stance.Correction: What is written supports one view and fails to directly contradict another. That's not the same as supporting both.
The rules are far closer to saying that all attacks you take in a round must be done in BAB order, than they are to saying you can take all primary attacks, then all offhand attacks.
The solution for the gunslinger? A Gug.
|
|
Comparison vs. Crossbowmen Stuff
I did the Crossbowmen vs. Bow math before building my own crossbowman. The raw damage output is greater for a bow, if every shot hits. A Vital Strike/Deadshot/Rogue Dip for Sneak Attack build holds a steadier (and greater) DPS in the long run.
In terms of Crossbowmen vs. Gunslingers, I haven't done the math because Ultimate Combat didn't exist when I planned the Crossbowman's build. But I imagine that it would boil down to the same issue. I'm more inclined to believe the Gunslinger surpasses the Crossbowman purely due to the touch AC issue counterbalancing the low to-hit rolls.
But you know what? I'm happy to snipe at foes from just outside charge range while the gunslinger rests within a single move of the BBEG.
I agree with mergy. It is easy to counter gunslingers in house games. You can control range or have multiple monsters or control the touch ac. in home games a GM can make whatever call he wants on reloads to balance issues or disallow certain weapons. It is PFS where all range is close and the gunslinger rules.