|
Id like to point out that loading a light crossbow is incredibly similar to loading a heavy crossbow, but there is still no option to take Rapid Reload for ALL Crossbows.
I actually disagree with that assertion. Reloading a light crossbow would usually be done with your hands and a foot stirrup. Reloading a heavy crossbow usually required a windless.
It works with all types of muskets.
"Choose a type of crossbow (hand, light, heavy) or a single type of one-handed or two-handed firearm that you are proficient with. You can reload such a weapon quickly.Prerequisites: Weapon Proficiency (crossbow type chosen) or Exotic Weapon Proficiency (firearm).
Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of weapon is reduced to a free action (for a hand or light crossbow), a move action (for heavy crossbow or one-handed firearm), or a standard action (two-handed firearm). Reloading a crossbow or firearm still provokes attacks of opportunity.
If you have selected this feat for a hand crossbow or light crossbow, you may fire that weapon as many times in a full-attack action as you could attack if you were using a bow.
Normal: A character without this feat needs a move action to reload a hand or light crossbow, a standard action to reload a one-handed firearm, or a full-round action to load a heavy crossbow or a two-handed firearm.
Special: You can gain Rapid Reload multiple times. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of crossbow or a new type of firearm."
There is no such thing as Rapid Reload (Heavy Crossbows); there is only Rapid Reload (Heavy Crossbow). There are, however, Rapid Reload (Musket) and Rapid Reload (Muskets).
It isn't plural for no reason whatsoever. If a feat references a specific "thing" it is always singular.
In addition, take a look at this language:
"Starting at 5th level, a gunslinger can select one specific type of firearm (such as an axe musket, blunderbuss, musket, or pistol)."
Specific types. If there are specific types, then there are also general types. Otherwise, there is no such thing as a specific type. In the act of saying "specific type" they are saying that certain firearms can be classified into general ones. This is why the firearms are listed like such, in the format:
Musket; Musket, axe; Musket, double-barreled; Pistol; Pistol, cane; etc.
First, they are muskets or pistols. However, they are also their own specific weapon (axe, double-barreled, etc).
Proficiency with (Musket) means the Musket.
Proficiency with (Muskets) means normal, double-barreled, warhammer, and axe.
Rapid Reload with (Musket) means the Musket.
Rapid Reload with (Muskets) means normal, double-barreled, warhammer, and axe.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
@Alarox: The recent FAQ on prerequisite language does not back up your argument. The fact is that many PrCs state they require the ability to "cast X level spells", yet the designers have stated that you do not have to be able to cast multiple of that level of spell, but qualify even if you only have one spell of that level.
So no, pluralization does not always automatically indicate anything mechanically - in fact, precedent would indicate that the pluralization is often grammatically appropriate but mechanically irrelevant.
@Alarox: The recent FAQ on prerequisite language does not back up your argument. The fact is that many PrCs state they require the ability to "cast X level spells", yet the designers have stated that you do not have to be able to cast multiple of that level of spell, but qualify even if you only have one spell of that level.
So no, pluralization does not always automatically indicate anything mechanically - in fact, precedent would indicate that the pluralization is often grammatically appropriate but mechanically irrelevant.
I understand that whole issue, but that has nothing to do with this.
That FAQ doesn't set precedence for this. That FAQ clarifies what they MEAN when they say "ability to cast X level spells". It does not say "when we make something plural, we don't actually mean plural". It means for those specific words, that is what they meant. For that phrase. An exception to a rule does not negate the rule itself; it makes a clear exception.
-----------
Moving on to the main thing:
My argument isn't simply the pluralization in Pathfinder rules in general. It is that every other feat of this type is singular, while this one is specifically plural. It is not a case of a phrase meaning something else, it is this specifically breaks the norm and is plural. There is a clear, distinction in feats of this type. There is no Proficiency (Heavy Crossbows), only (Heavy Crossbow). Singular.
The text of the feat itself declares that you must select one type of firearm when you pick it. However, the Gunslinger archetype clearly says (Muskets) and not (Musket).
Hence, there are TWO different feats.
There is (Musket) if you take it by your choice, and there is (Muskets) if you choose Musket Master. They are different. Does anyone dispute that these both exist? Both are specifically defined, with specific notation. Rapid Reload (Musket) is not Rapid Reload (Muskets).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You are reading way too much into the fact that a designer (probably a freelancer to boot) pluralized a weapon in a feat in the most notoriously poorly edited book Paizo has ever produced. I think precedence in all cases is against this ability working for anything other Musket(s). Axe Muskets aren't muskets, they are Axe Muskets. Double-barreled Muskets aren't muskets, they are Double-barreled Muskets.
The only thing that is a Musket, is a Musket, and the only thing a Musket Master gets a freebie Rapid Reload for is Muskets.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There is no such thing as Rapid Reload (Heavy Crossbows); there is only Rapid Reload (Heavy Crossbow). There are, however, Rapid Reload (Musket) and Rapid Reload (Muskets).
Really? Why does Rapid Reload (Muskets) exist? Just because it appears in one single location in the rules without definition? This is no more proof that there is such a thing as Rapid Reload (Muskets) then the original printing of the D&D rules means there is such a thing as a Ring of 3 Witches or MiniOnions of Set.
It isn't plural for no reason whatsoever.
Typos are a reason.
If a feat references a specific "thing" it is always singular.
Which is EXACTLY why Rapid Reload (Muskets) is undefined by the rules. You are essentially attempting to give it a rule where none exists.
In addition, take a look at this language:
"Starting at 5th level, a gunslinger can select one specific type of firearm (such as an axe musket, blunderbuss, musket, or pistol)."
Yup, "one specific type of firearm" not one specific type of muskets, or pistols, or even firearms. Firearm is a defined category in PF. Two-handed Firearms are specific category in PF. Muskets is not except as the plural of Musket, which has a specific meaning.
Specific types. If there are specific types, then there are also general types.
Yes. A Musket is a specific subtype of Two-handed Firearms, that are in turn a subtype of Firearms, that are in turn a subtype of Ranged Weapons, that are in turn a subtype of Weapons, that are in turn a subtype of Equipment. Nowhere in the rules does it define the subtype "Muskets." You are arbitrarily creating that subtype for your arguments.
Now did the designer originally intend for you to use this ability with all muskets and simply poorly define the ability? Possibly. But except for the inclusion of a single "s" that could just as easily have been a typo, there is no evidence for that.
Isn't it also quite telling that all of the musket master's other abilities apply specifically to ANY two-handed firearm? If they were trying to say musket+ anything with musket in the name, they would have said so. Or they may have said any two-handed firearm. Buuuut they didn't
This would be far more open to debate if Rapid Reload didn't already exist as a feat, or if the Archtype said something like "may reload muskets as if he had the Rapid Reload feat". But it doesn't say that and rapid reload has pretty specific language.
Even if this were some weird special case where the Musket Master could apply rapid reload to multiple weapons, they would probably have to SAY that. Otherwise, you are assuming that this Archtype either breaks the rules for a longstanding feat, or has generated a NEW feat.
And all of this because there is a single "S" included in one sentence.
Notice that this type of generalization doesn't really happen anywhere else. In the Knife Master rogue archtype they have to plainly spell out what they mean by "Daggers" because otherwise we would have to assume they meant the specific item called a Dagger.
Finally, if this ability was meant to apply to ALL weapons that have musket somewhere in their name, we would have to also presume that a musket master could choose to start at level 1 with a double barreled musket. After all, by your logic... that qualifies as "a musket".
Feats and abilities affecting weapon use either apply to either (a) all weapons, (b) all weapons in a broad category (in which case the feat specifically mentions it), (c) a few specific weapons (in which case these weapons are explicitly spelled out and not automatically extended by the release of later weapons), or (d) one weapon. In the case of feats, (a) and (d) represent the vast majority, and the others are careful to delimit exactly which weapons apply or specify that the GM has discretion to decide which weapons apply.
Since this is a feat that applies, by default, to exactly one weapon type (i.e., "musket" would not normally include "double musket" or "axe musket"), the language to override that default would need to be explicit. For example, "A musket master gains the Rapid Reload feat for all types of musket (such as the musket, double musket, and axe musket)." Otherwise, since "muskets" can be interpreted as the weapon type or an informal group of weapons, one must assume the interpretation of least resistance--that it applies to the weapon type, just as a normal feat does.
As a note, I see a lot of voting going on. RAW is not a democracy. However, how you play the game certainly can be, if that's how your group likes to decide things. I'd like to see feats apply a little more broadly to truly similar weapon types, such as applying the effects of Weapon Focus (brass knuckles) to cesti and gauntlets, and I'd be fully in support should my players or GM want to play things that way, provided that the GM always has the final say and responsibly dealt with unforeseen disagreements.
Now, this argument it getting a bit tedious (not to mention tendentious).
Is the feat poorly written? Yes.
Are other bits of the same book poorly written? Yes (eg Gunsmithing feat - bypasses any need for actual crafting ability or any dice roll at all. And gunslingers, apparently, can only ever make one masterwork weapon).
Does it need some interpretation on the part of any players/GMs to have it make sense? Yes.
By strict reading of the rules, it should only apply to one type of weapon; which should mean one type of musket. But! What is the 'best' interpretation in an actual game?
The average player and GM, on first having a musket master in a game are likely to do something like this:
1st level: Player "can I start with a double musket?" GM "Nope, just a normal one."
By, say, 3rd level: Player "can I make a double musket now?" "Go ahead" says the GM.
Now the player will assume that his Rapid Reload applies to the new double musket. If the GM then declares that it doesn't (having not really considered the problem before), the player will feel very aggrieved. If the GM had explained right from the start that it wouldn't apply, then the player can plan for that and won't feel so short-changed.
Which outcome leads to everyone having the most fun? As I said before, allowing the feat to apply to both types of musket isn't particularly unbalancing.
Are there any other instances where a player CANNOT start with the weapon their character wants to use (double musket), yet has to take a feat that will then be useless for the weapon they HAVE to take at the start?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now the player will assume that his Rapid Reload applies to the new double musket.
Er, why would the player assume that? I mean, if the player knew absolutely nothing about Pathfinder, maybe, but that would apply to weapon feats in general. It doesn't mean that GMs should (or shouldn't) just go ahead and give them those feats. If they do, they should understand that this deviates from the normal rules of the game. House rules are just fine, but they ought to be informed decisions, as most (but sadly not all) of the rules were designed with balance, conciseness, and verisimilitude in mind, and sometimes there are unintended consequences when changing them.
I don't really understand the import of the last sentence. Plenty of characters have started with a feat for a weapon that they didn't start with because the weapon in question was more than the character could afford at character generation. Why should this be an exception?
I'm gonna have to say simple musket. If we all remember, there was the whole faq about sla applying for prc. One of the prereqs was being able to cast 2lvl spellsssssss but the faq stated that u only needed a single sla to met the prereq for the prc even though it said spellssss (with the s meaning more than one) it was met with a single sla of that lvl.
So if spells means 1 spell, then muskets mean a single musket (the base musket).
Now the player will assume that his Rapid Reload applies to the new double musket.Er, why would the player assume that? I mean, if the player knew absolutely nothing about Pathfinder, maybe, but that would apply to weapon feats in general. It doesn't mean that GMs should (or shouldn't) just go ahead and give them those feats. If they do, they should understand that this deviates from the normal rules of the game. House rules are just fine, but they ought to be informed decisions, as most (but sadly not all) of the rules were designed with balance, conciseness, and verisimilitude in mind, and sometimes there are unintended consequences when changing them.
I don't really understand the import of the last sentence. Plenty of characters have started with a feat for a weapon that they didn't start with because the weapon in question was more than the character could afford at character generation. Why should this be an exception?
A) players assume things to there benefit. B) even experienced players get stuff wrong, otherwise this whole thread wouldn't exist.
My last point might have been unclear. I will give an example: suppose you want to play a swordsman. You want to wield a longsword. But you have to pick a shortsword at first level. However, you have weapon focus which you must take also at first level. Do you pick focus in shortsword or in longsword?
As I said above, if the GM is aware of this problem and ensures the player knows, then it's fine. If not, then there will be less fun.
Special: You can gain Rapid Reload multiple times. Each time you take the feat, it applies to a new type of crossbow or a new type of firearm.
This line in itself would imply that the feat works for a specific weapon. a musket and a double barrel musket are two different types of firearms.
To further muddy the waters...
The Axe Musket description includes the following:
Musket, Axe: This musket features an axe blade at the end of its barrel. It can be used as both a musket and a battleaxe.
'Used as a musket and a battleaxe' doesn't really have a clear meaning. It calls out specific weapons (musket and battleaxe) rather than generic (firearm and melee weapon). Does it mean you use the stats for those weapons (1d8x3 / 1d12x4)? One assumes not, since a different set of stats is provided (1d8x4).
Does it mean that the Feats, features, etc. for those individual weapons would also apply to the Axe Musket. E.g. "I have Rapid Reload (Musket), I can use this weapon as a Musket, so I can use Rapid Reload with this weapon." Apparently not, since the Firearms description contains this text:
anytime you take a feat that modifies a single type of weapon (such as Weapon Focus or Rapid Reload), you must still pick one specific type of firearm (such as musket, axe musket, blunderbuss, pistol, or double pistol) for that feat to affect.
Honestly, the whole thing is a mess. Even more so if you introduce other things like Weapon Specialization groups.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This does not need a FAQ. Not sure how an argument can be made that Rapid Reload doesn't affect all muskets only the base musket. By making muskets plural, it signifies all muskets.
Even the halfling sling staff FAQ argument supports this. The trait says a halfling may reload a sling as a free action. A sling staff is a type of sling not a sling. If the trait read a halfling can reload slings as a free action then it would work with all slings.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This does not need a FAQ. Not sure how an argument can be made that Rapid Reload doesn't affect all muskets only the base musket. By making muskets plural, it signifies all muskets.
Even the halfling sling staff FAQ argument supports this. The trait says a halfling may reload a sling as a free action. A sling staff is a type of sling not a sling. If the trait read a halfling can reload slings as a free action then it would work with all slings.
That's . . . creative.
|
Not sure how an argument can be made that Rapid Reload doesn't affect all muskets only the base musket. By making muskets plural, it signifies all muskets.
To be fair, there are two ways to look at the word "muskets".
The conservative analysis, supported by the text of the Rapid Reload feat, would mean the plural of "musket", as in if you owned two muskets.
The more liberal analysis, which really has no support, leans towards all types of muskets, including the double barrel variety.
I think enough people exist on both sides of the debate to qualify this as a frequently asked question.
FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.
As for me, I cant see why someone would think reloading a barrel for a DB musket is in any way different from reloading a single barrel musket. You pour powder down the barrel and shove a bullet down. Don't try to tell me a Musket Master is incapable of figuring out how to reload a barrel of a DB musket as quickly as a single barrel musket.
FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.
As for me, I cant see why someone would think reloading a barrel for a DB musket is in any way different from reloading a single barrel musket. You pour powder down the barrel and shove a bullet down. Don't try to tell me a Musket Master is incapable of figuring out how to reload a barrel of a DB musket as quickly as a single barrel musket.
Loading a standard crossbow isn't all that different from loading a hand crossbow, and loading a pistol isn't all that different from loading a musket, but you still have to take the Rapid Reload feat twice to be able to load both of 'em quickly.
|
|
Since I happen to be here, I'll just say that I think this would apply:
almost definitely to the "musket" portion of things like axe muskets that specifically say they can function "as a musket"
perhaps to things like double-barrel muskets - the question is, would it work for double-barrel pistols? How about repeating crossbows?
not to things like blunderbusses, which are, if anything, even more different from muskets than battleaxes are from longswords.
|
|
FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.
I really, really dislike it when the Design Team responds with, "no response necessary". It seriously gives me anxiety. To prevent that from happening in this thread I wrote earlier that, if they did, I would take their "response" to mean that whichever side had the most votes must be correct.
And so I keep a current count =)
FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.I really, really dislike it when the Design Team responds with, "no response necessary". It seriously gives me anxiety. To prevent that from happening in this thread I wrote earlier that, if they did, I would take their "response" to mean that whichever side had the most votes must be correct.
And so I keep a current count =)
It is quite a presumption that the designers would take that statement into account.
Of course, given that the intent of the recent FAQ limits them to less than their full iteratives anyway, I'm not sure the double-barreled musket is worth the gold, much less a feat. Once you've hit 5th level and gotten Rapid Shot you'll hit your limit of 3 reloads anyway. What does having a double-barreled musket get you? One extra bullet the first round?
The FAQ you are referring to was removed and replaced by modifying Weapon Cords.
|
|
This quote is from the Sound Striker thread going on right now.
So far, there isn't anything remotely resembling a player consensus on this issue, so we're waiting to see what the discussion turns up.
So, clearly, if an interpretation or argument leans heavily to one side the Design Team takes that into consideration as well.
Although, I'm not sure if 17:11 could be counted as "coming to a consensus", either.
FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.
As for me, I cant see why someone would think reloading a barrel for a DB musket is in any way different from reloading a single barrel musket. You pour powder down the barrel and shove a bullet down. Don't try to tell me a Musket Master is incapable of figuring out how to reload a barrel of a DB musket as quickly as a single barrel musket.
Wait, but do you want to load one barrel as fast, or two?
Wait, but do you want to load one barrel as fast, or two?FAQ'd, although I'd like to point out that a running total of people on either side is largely irrelevant.
As for me, I cant see why someone would think reloading a barrel for a DB musket is in any way different from reloading a single barrel musket. You pour powder down the barrel and shove a bullet down. Don't try to tell me a Musket Master is incapable of figuring out how to reload a barrel of a DB musket as quickly as a single barrel musket.
I don't think anyone is claiming to be wanting to reload both barrels at the same time. It's one more reason why applying the feat to double muskets isn't unreasonable - until you can get reloading as a free action, you effectively only have a single barrel musket after your first (double) shot.
So at 11th level you get lightning reload. Now, assuming you have rapid reload, you can load a barrel as a free action. Does this mean you can load one barrel, singular, per round as a free, or both barrels, repeatedly in one round and take all your iteratives with both barrels firing per blast?
It seems some will make a case that if it's a free action to load a single barrel, there's no limit to how many times you can load barrels in a round. A free is a free.
On the other hand the language in lightning reload says a single barrel each round. Singular.
|
|
I have met players of gunslingers who maintain that the "free action to reload a barrel" means you get to reload one barrel as a free action, and it still takes a move action to reload both barrels. Which I think is a fairly reasonable compromise. It does step the iterative down to a more reasonable number of attacks.
(Basically the minor adjustments in grip and orientation that it takes to line up the second barrel adds just enough time to push it over the line to "move action")
Lightning Reload is a swift action, not a free action.
It goes a step down to a free if you have rapid reload or use alchemical cartrideges.
I'm fairly certain about this, I just opened up the class after having always disallowed it and one of my players jumped on the chance to make a dwarven musket master.
I'm already regretting lifting the ban, but we are playing a FGG/Necromancer campaign and they might go to Razor Coast which I know has firearms.
I knew gunslinger was going to be a headache though, I just knew it.
Lightning Reload (Ex): At 11th level, as long as the gunslinger has at least 1 grit point, she can reload a single barrel of a one-handed or two-handed firearm as a swift action once per round. If she has the Rapid Reload feat or is using an alchemical cartridge (or both), she can reload a single barrel of the weapon as a free action each round instead. Furthermore, using this deed does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
Anyone else want to weigh in?
Ah. My apologies. I wasn't aware of the fine print of the deed. I was operating off of the section on Firearms from Ultimate Combat.
It sounds to me like the deed would still only allow you to reload as a free action once a round. It's a good option for a non-Musket Master, I suppose.
It is indeed one free reload per round, any others would require paper cartridges.
This quote is from the Sound Striker thread going on right now.
So far, there isn't anything remotely resembling a player consensus on this issue, so we're waiting to see what the discussion turns up.So, clearly, if an interpretation or argument leans heavily to one side the Design Team takes that into consideration as well.
The basis of this thread is to determine why Musket Masters gain "Rapid Reload (muskets)" instead of "Rapid Reload (musket)". All this thread needs in response is "Yes, we intended it to apply for all musket variants" or "no, it should just read "musket". The way I see it the player opinion has no place here, we just want to know their intent.
In any case if someone wants to use a musket weapon that is not the standard single-barrel musket, they could retrain their rapid reload no problem. The question is whether they actually need to, which has implications (not the least of which being time and money).
Yeah but the thing is wolfmang... nefreet has a point. while we've been blessed with a lot of faq action that no response needed outcome can be pretty bewildering. I think theres a lot to be said for using these rules discussion threads to seek a consensus in the community.
You know it might be really cool to democratize this whole process. Imagine if the devs implemented a polling system on the boards and encouraged us to use it to arrive at rulings by voting. It could really take some work off their plate if u think about it.
I'll sign on the all musket types line.
Then again, if a player in my game took rapid reload (musket), I'd apply it to all musket type guns. I find it difficult to think that putting a ballast or an axe blade onto a barrel causes one to forget how to reload effectively.
