1. There are campaign rules on firearm technology in the main book.
I assume that firearms are unique and not common weapons in your game.
So long as **you**advised**this stipulation to the player, you are not at fault if he decides to accept that "challenge" of playing one any way.
2. Gunfighters are good characters depending on feat and skill selection.
3. Adding ranks in Knowledge skills to increase his monster lore would be helpful. Sees monster, does his monster lore, knows weaknesses.
Chooses one from his ammo collection: silver, adamantite, cold iron, etc.
Bet the other players do not have different metal weapons, gunfighters only need bullets of different metals.
4. The other alternative route would have been if he chose Spellslinger which is a mage that buffs his gun or shoots spells through his gun.
Drawback is losing 4 schools.
5. Rogue levels add sneak damage to his gun damage.
6. Treat gunfighters like archers in terms of feat selection.
Archers are bada** with the right feats.
Thanks for the FYI on the feat.
As for the balance issue I use starting stats that are higher than normal so it balances out quite a bit. I use an array of 16-16-14-14-12-10. That is about a 33 Pt buy so I am less worried about their gold level. My wifes game is even higher with 39! And yes I am adding more gold to the encounters, but they have to win them! The players admitted that they failed because they did not act as a team. They went aboard ship one at a time and were easy to pick off that way. It is going to be hard to come up with 60,000 GP worth of treasure in one level w/o playing Monty Hall. Actually it is twice that as I have 2 games now with 6 characters each. One of the parties has a chance to pick up 30,000+ but they have to fight a Hezrou to do it that is currently locked in a demon trap with the treasure. Can't get the treasure w/o releasing him. I am considering giving them an arrow of demon slaying, but I think that is more than a bit cheesy.
Killing characters resolves nothing as I am having new characters coming in at the ave gp level of the party. I don't consider it fair for new characters to have more than players who have been playing since level 1. They have found some decent hauls already including 4 +2 equivalent weapons on one level. Problem is they sold 2 of them.
Item creation is not an issue as I am proving NPC's that have the necessary item creation feats. The trade off is that they have an exclusive license to create in the town. So if the players want to create their own they will have to establish a lair somewhere. There are several possibilites for them to do so.
Thanks for the FYI on the feat.
As for the balance issue I use starting stats that are higher than normal so it balances out quite a bit. I use an array of 16-16-14-14-12-10. That is about a 33 Pt buy so I am less worried about their gold level. My wifes game is even higher with 39! And yes I am adding more gold to the encounters, but they have to win them! The players admitted that they failed because they did not act as a team. They went aboard ship one at a time and were easy to pick off that way. It is going to be hard to come up with 60,000 GP worth of treasure in one level w/o playing Monty Hall. Actually it is twice that as I have 2 games now with 6 characters each. One of the parties has a chance to pick up 30,000+ but they have to fight a Hezrou to do it that is currently locked in a demon trap with the treasure. Can't get the treasure w/o releasing him. I am considering giving them an arrow of demon slaying, but I think that is more than a bit cheesy.
Killing characters resolves nothing as I am having new characters coming in at the ave gp level of the party. I don't consider it fair for new characters to have more than players who have been playing since level 1. They have found some decent hauls already including 4 +2 equivalent weapons on one level. Problem is they sold 2 of them.
Item creation is not an issue as I am proving NPC's that have the necessary item creation feats. The trade off is that they have an exclusive license to create in the town. So if the players want to create their own they will have to establish a lair somewhere. There are several possibilites for them to do so.
There is nothing wrong with doing it that way, and for many characters this would work out pretty well. But for the gunslinger in particular because of the fairly clunky firearm rules they are tied to, its a problem. This is where things like campaign guides are really important before a campaign starts. Players should be aware if they are going to start as dirt poor slaves for several levels and money will be scarce. You are modifying a base assumption of the game (wealth and stats). When you do this, you need to worry about what it will do to certain character types. Monks for instance would thrive in such a game, gunslingers, obviously have a problem.
There is nothing wrong with this kind of game, but you need to make it clear before the game starts and make sure players understand the implications. The gunslinger is a really bad choice for this campaign, and I would recommend talking to the player about re-stating his character as something else, or even creating a new one.
Without re-constructing the character it will ALWAYS under perform. Paizo with pathfinder has put an emphasis on single classed characters, and many classes (in particular the new ones designed exclusively by paizo) dont multiclass well. Spitting the character between 3 classes is going to be a problem without some serious munchkining. I would have him drop gunslinger entirely and be an archer ranger/cavalier, or even just a straight ranger (if he wanted cavalier for the horse, a ranger can choose a horse as an animal companion at level 4).
Basically, my pointare as follows:
1. Gunslingers literally burn money. If you are playing a dirt poor, scrape by fast paced game where guns are uncommon (thus unlikely to be 'found') advise strongly against a player playing a gunslinger.
2. Any time you modify base assumptions of the game (reducing wealth, increasing point buy) you need to consider the impacts it will have on characters and advise your players, otherwise you could end up with a situation like this one.
3. Help the player change his character (including concept) to something that will actually be competant, because this isnt something that can be fixed with one or two levels. As you said he cant just trip over loads of money and time to craft and be believable.
But, just in case the player really wants to go gunslinger, first, try to convince him to reduce or eliminate his multiclassing. In addition, remember, a character can spend get in 2 hours worth of crafting by rules even if the adventuring day is packed. Thats 1/4 of what you could normally craft if you had a whole 8 hour day. Both encourage and allow him to do this.
|
Define possible. Sure you can twf with a Rogue with 1 feat or a fighter with 1 feat but if you don't invest heavily into it you're not going to be good at it nor will you be as good at hurting things as someone who invested heavily in THF or Sword and Board fighting w/ shield bashes. If you want to come and ask for help or ask why something isn't working you should accept that you're going to be told what you did wrong.
And a lot of helpful advice has been given. However, I think when Rodent asked "How can I turn this character into a reasonably effective gunslinger?" a lot of people heard "How can I make an optimized gunslinger?" Rodent's gunslinger will be more effective if he trades the cavalier level for a gunslinger level and puts that Gunslinger 4 bonus feat into either Rapid Shot or Deadly Aim. This will roughly double his DPR and give him access to Gun Training with his next level. I would also expect that by level 5 the GM ensure you get enough ammo for the gunslinger to use his gun (including a small supply of cold iron and silver bullets). Unless the other PCs are super-optimized, this should be sufficient - people on this thread are describing the optimized gunslinger as overpowered, so a less optimized gunslinger should be balanced in a typical party.
Rodent's gunslinger should be at least effective enough for him to enjoy playing it, without changing so much about the character that he does not enjoy playing it.
And it's not that the Gunslinger absolutely has to be built one way or he sucks, it's that you can't intentionally avoid all the good things the slinger does and then blame the class.
He's not intentionally avoiding them, he just took a detour from Gun Training and only devoted two of his three feats to ranged combat feats.
The biggest advantage a gunslinger gets is at level 5 by getting dex to damage, not taking GS straight up till 5 is like building a dervish dancer getting all the prereqs then delaying getting the key feat for 2 levels you're going to be awful for those two levels no ifs ands or buts about it.
But even then you CAN do it and not do too badly, had he taken GS to 3 and then swapped off to Ranger and Cav. but still picked the right feats(namely Rapid shot, and Deadly Aim instead of Quick draw, and whatever his other superfluous feat was) he could be doing 2 shots a round for 1d8+4-5 dmg per shot which isn't as good as 1d8+8-10 which he could get using the right stat block and lvl 5 in GS but is still several steps above his single 1d8+1 which he currently does.
His "other superflous feat" was a cavalier bonus teamwork feat. He's obviously not playing a human and thus has only three feats to spend by level 5 barring class bonus feats.
It seems pretty clear at this point that the issue in this case is some player decisions and the style of the campaign, rather than the class.
There is nothing wrong with doing it that way, and for many characters this would work out pretty well. But for the gunslinger in particular because of the fairly clunky firearm rules they are tied to, its a problem. This is where things like campaign guides are really important before a campaign starts. Players should be aware if they are going to start as dirt poor slaves for...
The campaign wasn't designed to be dirt poor, but it has been turning out that way. The players have been about a level behind since level 3. Part of it has been the problem that the game has been a victim of its own success, highly popular with an average of 10 players the last 3 months. It is for this reason I have split the party. By previous experience it was figured that gold would be low to start but it would eventually start out and the characters would well surpass WBL. Starting gold was average. Part of the problem was using the chart for XP. They were getting XP for 6 players even though there were 10. I have recently switched to dividing by the number of players. This caused them to get more XP than they were supposed to and didn't get the gold.
As for gunslingers, I don't currently allow them as stated but have several that are at least part monk and a lot of clerics. I am trying to prepare for the class here for 3 months from now when Razor Coast comes out. I question the viability of the class w/o modern weapons that I don't think I will use. Not unless you can see making one with 6 single shot pistols and a rapier!
Mending Paste? Let me J-B Weld my musket!
OK, Gunslingers are supposed to be able to make their own bullets, but UE does not list a price for lead? What are they supposed to make them from? The wagon wheels have wheel weights?
You tried to make BP? It costs 10 GP for 100 shots. The cost is in the bullets. For 50 GP you could have saved 90% of that cost. Your campaign was that poor?
|
Mending Paste? Let me J-B Weld my musket!
OK, Gunslingers are supposed to be able to make their own bullets, but UE does not list a price for lead? What are they supposed to make them from? The wagon wheels have wheel weights?
From UC
*Firearm Bullets - 1 gp
Gunsmithing
Benefit: If you have access to a gunsmith's kit, you can create and restore firearms, craft bullets, and mix black powder for all types of firearms. You do not need to make a Craft check to create firearms and ammunition or to restore firearms.
Crafting Firearms: You can craft any early firearm for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. At your GM's discretion, you can craft advanced firearms for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the firearm. Crafting a firearm in this way takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of the firearm's price (minimum 1 day).
Crafting Ammunition: You can craft bullets, pellets, and black powder for a cost in raw materials equal to 10% of the price. If you have at least 1 rank in Craft (alchemy), you can craft alchemical cartridges for a cost in raw materials equal to half the price of the cartridge. At your GM's discretion, you can craft metal cartridges for a cost in raw materials equal to half the cost of the cartridge. Crafting bullets, black powder, or cartridges takes 1 day of work for every 1,000 gp of ammunition (minimum 1 day).
Restoring a Broken Firearm: Each day, with an hour's worth of work, you can use this feat to repair a single firearm with the broken condition. You can take time during a rest period to restore a broken firearm with this feat.
Special: If you are a gunslinger, this feat grants the following additional benefit. You can use this feat to repair and restore your initial, battered weapon. It costs 300 gp and 1 day of work to upgrade it to a masterwork firearm of its type.
The "Crafting" would be with normal firearm ammo, 1g each, you can do it cheeper and that would be the "making of your own ammo".
1000% markup on ammunition. Boy I am in the wrong business! Seems the guild must have a corner on the market. Seems there is little incentive to adventure if one can make 900 GP a day making ammunition. I would retire quickly and start up a business. On the other hand, the cost for making ones own cartridges seems just as arbitrarily high. I can reload 50 rounds of 45 colt for about $8 when they cost around $45 new. Someone forgot to tell the designers that those cartridges can be reloaded. I would have a hard time seeing a character even with gunsmithing making his own metal cartridges, but you only need to buy them once every 8-10 loads. I would lower the cost for bullets by 50% and allow reloads at 25% rather than 50% for cartridges. You can buy 100 44 Cal bullets for a musket for about $11 at todays prices. At 100/lb that is about the size of the bullet. A lb of BP goes for around $25 and you get over 100 shots out of it. I would have hard time seeing someone making their own. That would be extremely dangerous and would take at least 5 ranks on Craft Alchemy IMHO. You not have to just mix it right but get the right granulation.
As for repairing a broken firearm, proper training should allow that, although parts may have to be purchased in some cases. I don't see this as a game issue for someone with the craft skill and tools, but seriously, J-B Weld?
|
|
The reason for the wisdom was that grit is based on your wisdom modifier. It would make more sense if you gained grit as you leveled. Yet again its a matter of sinking feats for more grit, or to reduce the cost of a single grit ability. This part seems a little silly to me. The grit stuff is nice, but does not reflect being so powerful to limit the use that much.
The Extra Grit feat gives you more grit than +2 Wis does, if that was the only concern.
Yeah, Until about level 4 we had maybe 10 gold each. We now have about 5,000 gp in stuff we can sell since the last session we had. So now getting ammo is viable.
If you have a blunderbuss, you could always load the thing with copper pieces.
In the past our group has had an issue in the past as far as crafting is concerned. The cost you pay is considered covering the cost of materials and the like. What happens if you have all the required materials already? Would it be that you need the GP equivalent of materials and then doesn't cost a thing, or do tools have a money slot and it costs to power them?
The crafting cost is the materials - the tools are your Gunsmithing Kit which doesn't need to be refilled. If you have the materials (your GM has told you "you have enough materials to make X pieces of ammo" or "you have X gp worth of materials suitable for ammo") then there is no additional cost.
1000% markup on ammunition. Boy I am in the wrong business! Seems the guild must have a corner on the market. Seems there is little incentive to adventure if one can make 900 GP a day making ammunition. I would retire quickly and start up a business. On the other hand, the cost for making ones own cartridges seems just as arbitrarily high. I can reload 50 rounds of 45 colt for about $8 when they cost around $45 new. Someone forgot to tell the designers that those cartridges can be reloaded. I would have a hard time seeing a character even with gunsmithing making his own metal cartridges, but you only need to buy them once every 8-10 loads. I would lower the cost for bullets by 50% and allow reloads at 25% rather than 50% for cartridges. You can buy 100 44 Cal bullets for a musket for about $11 at todays prices. At 100/lb that is about the size of the bullet. A lb of BP goes for around $25 and you get over 100 shots out of it. I would have hard time seeing someone making their own. That would be extremely dangerous and would take at least 5 ranks on Craft Alchemy IMHO. You not have to just mix it right but get the right granulation.
As for repairing a broken firearm, proper training should allow that, although parts may have to be purchased in some cases. I don't see this as a game issue for someone with the craft skill and tools, but seriously, J-B Weld?
So after reading your posts I'm going to make a few observations. You don't like the amount of technology that Golarian has introduced to the game. You would prefer the rules to be more 'simulationist' in nature ( which I find odd as you don't want the technology but want the game to be more realistic and follow physics). You seem to have a very controlling point of view on game mastering ('my players didn't earn' the WBL amount and even though the game as written is balanced somewhat on that point, they didn't do what I put in front of them so they don't deserve it) among various other things.
I'm pointing this out as you aren't necessarily the typical gamer this rule set is made for. It seems as if you are shoe-horning the rule set into place and you might actually be happier with another rule set or campaign setting. Obviously it is working in some respects (you've stated 10 players as interested) but that doesn't mean there couldn't be improvements in other areas.
In regards to Dex vs. Wis:
Ideally, for a gunslinger, I'd say Dex is a lot more important. It's true that you'll want some Wisdom for the Grit, and it's a nice bonus to Will, but a lot of the deeds only require you to have at least 1 grit point left for them to be used, and you get some back whenever you drop an enemy or confirm a critical hit.
Dex helps you hit more often, raises your AC, and adds some damage once you get Gun Training. Having 3 as your max grit really shouldn't be too bad, just make sure you keep 1 in the pool and use it if you're topped off (in case you get some back unexpectedly), or whenever it would be highly beneficial to do so. If you have the chance to play around with your stats at all, I would recommend switching the 18 to Dex and the 16 to Wis.
Also of note, Humans have an alternate favored class bonus for gunslingers to add 1/4 of a grit point. If you take that regularly, you can up your Grit Pool by quite a bit.
So after reading your posts I'm going to make a few observations. You don't like the amount of technology that Golarian has introduced to the game. You would prefer the rules to be more 'simulationist' in nature ( which I find odd as you don't want the technology but want the game to be more realistic and follow physics). You seem to have a very controlling point of view on game mastering ('my players didn't earn' the WBL amount and even though the game as written is balanced somewhat on that point, they didn't do what I put in front of them so they don't deserve it) among various other things.I'm pointing this out as you...
No, I am exploring the option of guns in my campaign. And no I don't run a campaign in Golarian. I didn't know everyone's campaign had to fit that setting. I plead guilty to being an old grognard though! Been playing wargames for 46 years now, D&D only for 33. I will say my players had more than 10 GP to their name at level 3. Some of them were just starting to find magical weapons.
I can see that part of the issue is with this many players they have been dividing the existing treasure over more people, but they have also had more power to fight the challenges. And yes I have been increasing the treasure over the last couple of weeks to give them more opportunity to get up to WBL.
How did this thread get pushed into Legacy of Fire? and where are the rest of the posts?
or my display was just glitching :T
(yay, double post)
Ok, so I started the group off at level 0, first of all. Nobody had ANY class levels to begin with, everyone was a level 1 NPC class.
My party isn't a bunch of crying pussies, and they can roll with the punches of being started off in a bad situation, so the fact that he had limited supplies in the beginning wasn't even a detriment - hell, he was right up there with everyone else in the group when they started out!
Then everyone got their first level, JB went into gunslinger, and I didn't feel guilty about not giving him a gun yet because Gunslingers have martial weapon proficiency, meaning that at first level, they're just as effective as anyone else with both ranged and melee weapons. He used a crossbow because it was something he'd gotten familiar with, did good enough damage, and kept him out of direct fire.
The campaign wasn't very combat-heavy, and the only reason things escalated as fast as they did was because my 4th player is a jackoff and decided that he'd rush the gnoll slavery part by trying to escape, dragged the rest of the party in on it because one of the original 3 party members was very paladin-ly in mindset, and forced the entire group out of a situation I was intending to keep them in for some time, developing character, and eventually making a break for it and gaining their first character level in a more controlled and planned out situation.
Either way, the party was in Cheliax, and they made their way to it's capitol of Egorian, and in Egorian they stayed at an inn and tried to rake together some cash however they could. There was some social stuff, and a few 'skill challenges', but for the most part it was a lot of roleplaying, leading up to a rather big event involving the death of the parents of the only member of the group that still had parents. JB got his gun around level 2 or 3, and wasn't involved in a lot of combat before that point - and any combat he WAS involved in went well for him.
By level 4, I think, he had a gunsmithing kit, and was able to make bullets to his heart's content - though he usually didn't because we didn't realize that the 1-day crafting system was the one that bullets were intended to you - and the entire time, the party was 90% sure something was hot on their heels, so they kept moving. Even after he had his gun (A revolver) and a means to make bullets (and the money to, if a few items were sold) he preferred the crossbow because it was more sustainable, and generally just as effective, unless fighting thickly armored targets.
The party ended up in Osirion, and managed to take down a bulette without dying horribly - but the moment they had to fight a mummy, that's when the gunslinger's drawback became painfully obvious. The party was level 5, fighting a CR5 mummy that I had technically gimped - I replaced it's slam attack with a Khopesh attack, and it was dealing about 3 points less damage on average, and wasn't giving the chance of mummy rot.
Everyone in the group was dealing over 10 damage a hit, but JB averaged maybe 4 while using his gun, which wasn't enough to get past the mummy's DR. Broken Wing Gambit saved them, and that's when we realized that gunslinger apparently has to be built like a swiss watch, or its effectiveness is cut severely.
None of us realized that that class had to be babysat so much, since most of the base classes can be multiclassed without a massive detriment.
I'll admit, my campaign is a bit awkward, but I'm not willing to take full blame for this class' ineffectiveness in my campaign - it feels more like it should be a prestige class, given how rigid it's role is as a base class.
I have played in games where we started out as level 0's and they can be a lot of fun! Some of my best characters where developed that way in 3.5. A class that has to be planned that carefully has some issues. You never know what you are going to need in the field, like my Wizard who took the track feat.
None of us realized that that class had to be babysat so much, since most of the base classes can be multiclassed without a massive detriment.
I'll admit, my campaign is a bit awkward, but I'm not willing to take full blame for this class' ineffectiveness in my campaign - it feels more like it should be a prestige class, given how rigid it's role is as a base class.
I find it strange that throughout your whole post, you say that the gunslinger was doing fine, and then at the one mention of DR, you say the class is terribly ineffective.
Anyway, I hope this doesn't sound mean but it's not the fault of the class if it's been built poorly (no offense to you, Rodent, but it could be a bit better, at least in my opinion).
If I built a fighter that used a longsword, but who only had 14 points of strength, and didn't take power attack, and multiclassed over to, I dunno, Bard or something, which delayed obtaining weapon training, you know what his damage output against a mummy would be? He'd average around 2-3 damage per hit, and hit a lot less because he's targeting regular AC (Hell, he needs to hit 20, while the gunslinger needs 10).
On the other hand, if they both take Power Attack/Deadly Aim, they're both doing 4 more damage, making them get through DR quite regularly. The gunslinger however, is hitting a lot more often. If neither of them have multiclassed, then they have Weapon and Gun Training respectively. The fighter has a +1 bonus on attack and damage. The Gunslinger has a (ideally at least +4) bonus on damage.
Targeting touch, the gunslinger is still hitting as regularly, if not more so, and now doing more damage. With one equivalent feat, and no multiclassing.
As for multiclassing, that's perfectly fine, but it obviously delays class features. Gunslinger 5 is a big turning point. If it's put off, then unless you're getting something really good for the other class(es), then yeah, you're probably falling behind a bit. This is true for a lot of classes though, not just gunslingers.
Again not to sound rude or anything, but I think you're way off on calling the gunslinger ineffective. It's not a fault of how the class is designed. Most classes do need at least a little bit of work to be used effectively.
None of us realized that that class had to be babysat so much, since most of the base classes can be multiclassed without a massive detriment.
I'll admit, my campaign is a bit awkward, but I'm not willing to take full blame for this class' ineffectiveness in my campaign - it feels more like it should be a prestige class, given how rigid it's role is as a base class.
I find it strange that throughout your whole post, you say that the gunslinger was doing fine, and then at the one mention of DR, you say the class is terribly ineffective.
Note that he also used a crossbow most of the time, even with the gun as an option. but yes, admittedly he could be built better.
Pathfinder needs some, like, suggested feats or something :T 4E definitely was an improvement on telling you good ways to build things.
|
|
The party ended up in Osirion, and managed to take down a bulette without dying horribly - but the moment they had to fight a mummy, that's when the gunslinger's drawback became painfully obvious. The party was level 5, fighting a CR5 mummy that I had technically gimped - I replaced it's slam attack with a Khopesh attack, and it was dealing about 3 points less damage on average, and wasn't giving the chance of mummy rot.
Everyone in the group was dealing over 10 damage a hit, but JB averaged maybe 4 while using his gun, which wasn't enough to get past the mummy's DR. Broken Wing Gambit saved them, and that's when we realized that gunslinger apparently has to be built like a swiss watch, or its effectiveness is cut severely.
One bad encounter with DR and you conclude that the entire class is problematic? Any archer will have the same problem. Wizards have similar problems with golems.
You know how you deal with mummies if the DR is getting you down? You light them on fire. Any adventurer ought to be carrying if not alchemist's fire at least something flammable - oil, maybe? I was playing a level 2 monk when my party ran into a natural lycanthrope with DR 10/silver. I wasn't carrying a silver weapon and it was literally impossible for me to deal more than 10 damage. So I grappled and pinned it and let the other two party members damage it - one of them had a strong enough attack to overwhelm the DR and the other one (who also couldn't pierce the DR) finished it off with a flask of burning oil. And mummies burn even more nicely than lycanthropes.
If you have that much trouble with DR you look for energy damage, non-damaging ways to hamper your enemy, or worst case scenario you use the aid another to help your allies out.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If someone played a sorcerer, played to level 3, then started taking levels in Cavalier and Ranger instead of progressing to level 4 of sorcerer, and then was surprised that he was still stuck with 1st level spells while the party wizard had 3rd level spells, it wouldn't be the fault of the Sorcerer-class.
As a Gunslinger you need to hit level 5 before multiclassing, after that it's okay. For example, if the player wanted to be a mounted gunslinger with a gun, I'd suggest leveling as a gunslinger til 5, then take at least four levels of Samurai(it would be a better fit due to mounted combat) and then get that feat that lets character level scale up the mount.
It's actually somewhat funny, because a Gunslinger can actually be really good for multiclassing after level 5. The only thing you'll be missing out on are the deeds, dodge, and bonus feats, as well as the capstone at level 20. I suppose if you really want to pick gun training up with multiple weapons, there's that, but really not necessary.
The only thing I would really miss in that list might be the deeds, and only a few of those, even. I think gunslingers can multiclass better than a lot of others, though holding off until after level 5 is probably worthwhile.
@ gnomersy: I think that was supposed to mean multiclassing twice while going for gunslinger. Can you make that work with 3 levels of Gunslinger as well? :P
Edit: Actually, I think I did read that wrong. Nevermind.
2 Levels of Pally for Divine Grace, 1 Level of Oracle for Sidestep Secret, then straight Sorc into Dragon Disciple? :D
Edit: Or Bard, perhaps, for a moderately bigger hit die, and ability to cast in light armor.
Divine Grace (Su): At 2nd level, a paladin gains a bonus equal to her Charisma bonus (if any) on all saving throws.
Sidestep Secret (Su): Your innate understanding of the universe has granted you preternatural reflexes and the uncanny ability to step out of danger at the very last second. Add your Charisma modifier (instead of your Dexterity modifier) to your Armor Class and all Reflex saving throws. Your armor's maximum Dexterity bonus applies to your Charisma instead of your Dexterity.
|
So have we come to an accord here? I guess the idea is that the Gunslinger is not "viable" as a class because it requires 1-5 to be taken with consistency and is hampered greatly if multiclassed before then...Barring that though I think we have come to a consensus.
No I feel the consensus is the Gunslinger is a viable class just the OP's example is an unoptimized character. I've been following this thread for awhile now not sure when to add my two cents but to me the Gunslinger is a "viable" class precisely because dipping is not an option. It's not that the class is bad, just it has so many abilities that synergize with it's niche that multi-classing isn't necessary. That to me is a strong class. One of the core reasons Pathfinder restructured the 3.5 classes was to prevent multiclassing.
Also, from a DPR perspective I posted THIS awhile back that compares the DPR of a Single-Handed and Dual-Wielding Pistolero. This is fantastic DPR but in gameplay is balanced by misfire chance and close range.
As far as money is concerned, ammunition is dirt cheap to a gunslinger. In PFS, at early levels I shot rarely more than 10 times which is 60gp. Even now at level 8 the most I've fired was 26 (156 gp). Pocket change.
And why do people who argue against the gunslinger post builds that use revolvers? Revolvers are advanced firearms and the class was designed for emerging guns. If your campaign is set in an era where guns are scarce then there should not be revolvers. And if revolvers are the "new thing" then there should be muskets abound. Plus be happy he isn't using a double pistol because it is more powerful.
(yay, double post)
Ok, so I started the group off at level 0, first of all. Nobody had ANY class levels to begin with, everyone was a level 1 NPC class.My party isn't a bunch of crying pussies, and they can roll with the punches of being started off in a bad situation, so the fact that he had limited supplies in the beginning wasn't even a detriment - hell, he was right up there with everyone else in the group when they started out!
1) I can understand starting behind the eightball or whatever... but what was the decision behind not giving him a gun at level one?? I would have had them in some loot pile of villain #1 they came across as soon as they hit first level...
Did other players haved that problem? Wizards with no spell books, Divine casters with no holy symbols? Spells are expensive... how did they casters work with only 10g for most the career?
Why would he chose to take that level (seeing as how he was open to the multiclassing idea).
Seriously, Gunslinger starts with 3 abilities at level one.
Gunsmith (Get gun and make bullets)
Grit: Usable and gainable when using firearms...
Deeds: Only one of three starting ones used without a gun....
Basically his first level character started with Martial weapons and gunfighters dodge??
Then when he DID get a gun... a crafting rule misunderstanding kept him from having bullets?!?
SOoooo it sounds like he wasn't REALLY playing a Gunslinger?
2) Multiclassing hurts characters. It is basically saying my character is 3/5th of a Gunslinger... Why isn't he as good as a 5/5th gunslinger? At LEAST the multiclassing was into full BAB classes.. but if you only have half the toys the class gives you.... and the half you DO have is nerfed or missing... then no. The class won't be effective.
So to answer the threads question... How, exactly, are Gunslingers supposed to be viable?
BE a gunslinger! :)
3) In most of my low level games... The problem is always HITTING things... DR shouldn't be a major factor at that level. Gunslingers should be a master of HITTING things with that 'touch AC' bit.
And D8 isn't bad damage for a weapon... My rogue was doing similiar even at level 15 whenever he couldn't sneak attack... And I'm sure there are feats and weapons that boost the effectiveness of ranged weapons...
You say he was doing good with a crossbow... but Light crossbow is the same damage? And only half the crit range... and has to hit regular AC...
Revolver is better in every aspect. It sounds like it was just a bad case of poor rolls on the dice.
HOnestly, my BIGGEST gripe about gunslinger... are those deeds. Most of them are so lame or Tropeish that they shouldn't have to be EARNED... Serioulsy?? I need to be level 3 to shoot a lock off a door? Heat a barrel and push it against a bleeding wound?? REALLY??
Attack and damage?? They're usually considered OP.
So have we come to an accord here? I guess the idea is that the Gunslinger is not "viable" as a class because it requires 1-5 to be taken with consistency and is hampered greatly if multiclassed before then. Firstly, most people don't take a 1 level dip for an ability that doesn't synergize at all with their chose role. Secondly, if someone could post a class/build that can multiclass twice before level 5 and still be as powerful as other party members that would probably help the argument that the Gunslinger is not viable. Barring that though I think we have come to a consensus.
I guess all of pathfinder is not "viable" as a system, because the vast majority of builds are more powerful if you stay a single class rather than mulitclassing. Especially at low levels.
|
So have we come to an accord here? I guess the idea is that the Gunslinger is not "viable" as a class because it requires 1-5 to be taken with consistency and is hampered greatly if multiclassed before then. Firstly, most people don't take a 1 level dip for an ability that doesn't synergize at all with their chose role. Secondly, if someone could post a class/build that can multiclass twice before level 5 and still be as powerful as other party members that would probably help the argument that the Gunslinger is not viable. Barring that though I think we have come to a consensus.I guess all of pathfinder is not "viable" as a system, because the vast majority of builds are more powerful if you stay a single class rather than mulitclassing. Especially at low levels.
You are posting to a February 2013 thread......holy thread necromancy!
You are posting to a February 2013 thread......holy thread necromancy!So have we come to an accord here? I guess the idea is that the Gunslinger is not "viable" as a class because it requires 1-5 to be taken with consistency and is hampered greatly if multiclassed before then. Firstly, most people don't take a 1 level dip for an ability that doesn't synergize at all with their chose role. Secondly, if someone could post a class/build that can multiclass twice before level 5 and still be as powerful as other party members that would probably help the argument that the Gunslinger is not viable. Barring that though I think we have come to a consensus.I guess all of pathfinder is not "viable" as a system, because the vast majority of builds are more powerful if you stay a single class rather than mulitclassing. Especially at low levels.
Holy crap, I thought I was in a different thread!
Whoops!
(Hides in shame)