| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would agree with you Stephen that most people didn't note two separate actions (free or otherwise) when a player drew a bolt and then loaded said bolt into a crossbow. That was however before the FAQ suggesting that 3-5 free actions was a reasonable limit. Now, people are counting actions to determine if this is a viable suggestion for their game. Many of us are baffled by the inconsistency of what "free actions" should count as free actions and what "free actions" should not count as free actions, and what "free actions" should get bundled together to make one "free action."
Help us Stephen, you're our only hope!
LOL. Well I don't know if I will be much help on that front. The juggling of free actions, and the GM's ability to limit them is more art than science. I will freely admit that. And the FAQ suggestion seems more like science, but I guess I see it more as giving relative guidelines for the art of it.
Here is a technique. Use it when it makes sense, abandon it when it doesn't.
Can we just take that quote and add it to the FAQ?
:-D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
you have agreed we should follow the FAQ since you are the authority.
- Gauss
I'm quiet sure that is not what I have said at all. I have a long standing feud with authority. I don't like it. Never have. That said, when we get an FAQ question, we try to answer it honestly, to help people out. That's it.
That's what gets me off. Giving people good game material so they can have fun. Screw authority. :)
Like it or not, for good or ill, Paizo is THE authority on Pathfinder. You say 3 is too much, who are people to argue?::looks around:: Yeah, I don't think this is a problem. :)
I apologize if I misunderstood but I took this comment to mean that you agreed.
In any case, if we are to ignore the FAQ then it has failed to do it's job as a guideline. If we pay attention to the FAQ then it creates unintended consequences such as limiting the number of arrows you can draw per round to 3 (the FAQ does not state that bows are not part of the limit, that is only in Dev comments).
- Gauss
Like it or not, for good or ill, Paizo is THE authority on Pathfinder. You say 3 is too much, who are people to argue?::looks around:: Yeah, I don't think this is a problem. :)I apologize if I misunderstood but I took this comment to mean that you agreed.
In any case, if we are to ignore the FAQ then it has failed to do it's job as a guideline. If we pay attention to the FAQ then it creates unintended consequences such as limiting the number of arrows you can draw per round to 3 (the FAQ does not state that bows are not part of the limit, that is only in Dev comments).
- Gauss
From the FAQ: "Again, these are guidelines, and the GM can allow more or fewer free actions as appropriate to the circumstances."
So I think you should pay attention to the FAQ, even when it says, hey your milage may vary.
That's what gets me off. Giving people good game material so they can have fun. Screw authority. :)
Yep. Every RPG rules set breaks down at some level of granularity. Clearly Pathfinder, as written and FAQed, doesn't resolve free actions well - either we allow certain game breaking behaviors (double barreled, two weapon fighting gunslingers) or specify the free action rules in such a way that we get unintended consequences to existing rules. For home games this is less of an issue as these issues can be papered over with home rules. For PFS games we really would like to have a clearer ruling to allow for uniformity of play experience between tables and GMs.
I think the main issue that many commenters have with the FAQ is that if the developers wished to curtain gunslinger exploits a more sensible approach would have been to start with the action economy of rapid reload coupled with paper alchemical cartridges. For example, they could change the rules to paper cartridges to allow only the number of iterative attacks the gunslinger would otherwise has free reloads (1 at 1st, 2 at 6th, 3 at 11th, etc) and an additional reload or two as a free action with a feat, bringing gunslingers in line with archers with manyshot, rapid reload and iteratives.
Like it or not, for good or ill, Paizo is THE authority on Pathfinder. You say 3 is too much, who are people to argue?::looks around:: Yeah, I don't think this is a problem. :)I apologize if I misunderstood but I took this comment to mean that you agreed.
In any case, if we are to ignore the FAQ then it has failed to do it's job as a guideline. If we pay attention to the FAQ then it creates unintended consequences such as limiting the number of arrows you can draw per round to 3 (the FAQ does not state that bows are not part of the limit, that is only in Dev comments).
- Gauss
From the FAQ: "Again, these are guidelines, and the GM can allow more or fewer free actions as appropriate to the circumstances."
So I think you should pay attention to the FAQ, even when it says, hey your milage may vary.
All well and good but it does come off as you SHOULD do X but you CAN ignore that if you want. I have said before that the average character wealth by level tables are written into the rules as a suggestion. You CAN decide not to follow them... but the implication in any case like this is that doing so would be a deviation from the baseline assumption. This FAQ suggestion or not has changed what that baseline assumption SHOULD be for GMs out there.
If anyone thinks that this won't have the effect that I and so many others are worried about they should poll players to see how many GMs use the WBL table or the suggested ability score generation method of point buy. Just a suggestion is one thing when its from another player... its very different when it is conveniently nestled into a FAQ that is mostly comprised of solid rules.
With the exception of snap shot, but yes.You can't take free actions when it is not your turn.
And talking.
And talking.With the exception of snap shot, but yes.You can't take free actions when it is not your turn.
Yes, and it has that exception in the description.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And talking.With the exception of snap shot, but yes.You can't take free actions when it is not your turn.
Hush you! You spoke out of turn...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
If a guideline is to be effective at all, should it be a workable guideline or should it conflict with the rules in such a way that it is automatically dismissed (or worse, followed)?
Yes, we can ignore the guideline. Yes, that is written right into the FAQ. But, is a guideline that is written in such a way that the majority ignores it much of a guideline?
As a customer, this is a bit frustrating for me. It really feels the Devs are tap-dancing around the issue that this guideline is written in such a way that it conflicts with the rules. And yet, you guys keep pointing to the 'ignore me' clause.
This means we are left with 'ignore me' as our only recourse since the guidelines interact badly with the existing rules.
Where the frustration comes in is that there has been little acknowledgement that yes, the guidelines do interact badly with the existing rules.
Instead we get what has seemed like doublespeak.
I'm not one to normally post something like this, I prefer to keep things logical and without emotion.
However, rather than stating, yes, a bow requires a free action to shoot because you must draw your arrow I am told it does not despite being clearly in the rules that it does.
We are also told (in a different thread by a different Dev) that this FAQ has nothing to do with the number of attacks, when it clearly does since drawing an arrow and/or reloading is what enables many ranged attacks.
It feels like we are being told we are stupid because we are bringing up how the the guidelines to applying the law disagrees with the letter of the law.
Yes, we can ignore the guidelines, but it's like giving a guideline that the penalty for theft is beheading instead of the written jail time and then saying to ignore the beheading and someone is wrong if they do it that way. Someone, somewhere, is going to lose his head because of that guideline. If it wasn't meant to be followed, why put it out?
Anyhow, back to your regularly scheduled logic based discussion. :)
- Gauss
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,However, rather than stating, yes, a bow requires a free action to shoot because you must draw your arrow I am told it does not despite being clearly in the rules that it does.
First off, let me say I'm sorry you are frustrated. That is not our intent.
Second, no one is saying the above. It takes a free action to reload a bow normally. It doesn't take two. That was the point of that discussion.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,However, rather than stating, yes, a bow requires a free action to shoot because you must draw your arrow I am told it does not despite being clearly in the rules that it does.First off, let me say I'm sorry you are frustrated. That is not our intent.
Second, no one is saying the above. It takes a free action to reload a bow normally. It doesn't take two. That was the point of that discussion.
Ok, let me pose a serious series of questions. And please respond in the same spirit of guideline giving as the original FAQ was posted in, so that we may begin to understand your intention.
How many free actions are used in the following assuming you begin with an empty weapon and only the weapon in your hand:
Attack Action with a Bow. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a crossbow, with rapid reload. *I think it is 2
Attack Action with a thrown weapon, with quick draw. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a musket, with rapid reload, with paper cartridge. *I think it is 2
It is reasonable to count each free action in those processes (if there are more than one)?
Is it reasonable to treat those actions differently with regards to the guidelines from the FAQ? If so, which ones?
Is it reasonable to limit attack actions because a player has reached a limit of free actions in the round which preclude them from using their weapon? If so, which weapons and why?
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
Perhaps I misunderstood what section of my post you agreed to disagree with. In that post I had stated that a bow required 1 free action (drawing ammunition) while a crossbow required 2 free actions (drawing ammunition and reloading the crossbow both of which are listed separately).
For clarification:
Bow: 1 free action (drawing ammunition)
Hand/Light Crossbow + Rapid Reload: 2 free actions (drawing ammunition, reload the crossbow)
As for the frustration, you haven't lost me. I still love Pathfinder and ultimately I make whatever house rules I feel are necessary. However, I do not like having a lot of house rules. They are hard to keep track of. Having to house-rule away FAQs is an odd position to be in since they are supposed to clarify things, not muddy them up.
- Gauss
Ok, let me pose a serious series of questions. And please respond in the same spirit of guideline giving as the original FAQ was posted in, so that we may begin to understand your intention.
How many free actions are used in the following assuming you begin with an empty weapon and only the weapon in your hand:
Attack Action with a Bow. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a crossbow, with rapid reload. *I think it is 2
Attack Action with a thrown weapon, with quick draw. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a musket, with rapid reload, with paper cartridge. *I think it is 2It is reasonable to count each free action in those processes (if there are more than one)?
Is it reasonable to treat those actions differently with regards to the guidelines from the FAQ? If so, which ones?
Is it reasonable to limit attack actions because a player has reached a limit of free actions in the round which preclude them from using their weapon? If so, which weapons and why?
Is it reasonable to
All of your examples above is just one free action. As I have stated earlier, grabbing ammunition (of course assuming it is on your person in the proper receptacle) and loading it is all part of the same free action. I know the rules are entirely clear on that, but the design team is in agreement on that fact, and we know that's how most people play it. Lastly, it serves absolutely no purpose in the game to split those into numerous free actions other than to have a bloat of free actions. We have no desire to make this game needlessly complicated.
As for the other questions. Ask your GM. The rule is that it is up to the GM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
In that case, the rules disagree with the Design Team and thus an Errata should be issued combining the Draw ammunition free action and the Reload a weapon action if both are a free action.
As written, they are two separate (free) actions. Without someone reading your post they would never know that they should be combined into the same free action.
- Gauss
Ok, let me pose a serious series of questions. And please respond in the same spirit of guideline giving as the original FAQ was posted in, so that we may begin to understand your intention.
How many free actions are used in the following assuming you begin with an empty weapon and only the weapon in your hand:
Attack Action with a Bow. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a crossbow, with rapid reload. *I think it is 2
Attack Action with a thrown weapon, with quick draw. *I think it is 1
Attack Action with a musket, with rapid reload, with paper cartridge. *I think it is 2It is reasonable to count each free action in those processes (if there are more than one)?
Is it reasonable to treat those actions differently with regards to the guidelines from the FAQ? If so, which ones?
Is it reasonable to limit attack actions because a player has reached a limit of free actions in the round which preclude them from using their weapon? If so, which weapons and why?
Is it reasonable to
All of your examples above is just one free action. As I have stated earlier, grabbing ammunition (of course assuming it is on your person in the proper receptacle) and loading it is all part of the same free action. I know the rules are entirely clear on that, but the design team is in agreement on that fact, and we know that's how most people play it. Lastly, it serves absolutely no purpose in the game to split those into numerous free actions other than to have a bloat of free actions. We have no desire to make this game needlessly complicated.
As for the other questions. Ask your GM. The rule is that it is up to the GM.
Thanks Stephen, that goes a long way in helping me understand the thought process involved here. I personally still feel the numbers in the FAQ's example are quite low, but at least I get that it isn't meant to disproportionately effect one weapon type over another.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
In that case, the rules disagree with the Design Team and thus an Errata should be issued combining the Draw ammunition free action and the Reload a weapon action if both are a free action.
As written, they are two separate (free) actions. Without someone reading your post they would never know that they should be combined into the same free action.
- Gauss
I agree this really does need errata.
Also, the question remains about SKR's statement that this should not effect bow users.... That still doesn't seem to mesh with what I am hearing.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
In that case, the rules disagree with the Design Team and thus an Errata should be issued combining the Draw ammunition free action and the Reload a weapon action if both are a free action.
As written, they are two separate (free) actions. Without someone reading your post they would never know that they should be combined into the same free action.
- Gauss
Or they are not wrong and you can draw a bolt as one free action or you can draw and load a bolt as one entirely separate free action. They are two entirely separate actions.
You seem to be assuming that because drawing ammunition is listed as a free action that you have to use that one specific free action in addition to the free action to load it. That is not the case.
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
In that case, the rules disagree with the Design Team and thus an Errata should be issued combining the Draw ammunition free action and the Reload a weapon action if both are a free action.
As written, they are two separate (free) actions. Without someone reading your post they would never know that they should be combined into the same free action.
- Gauss
Or they are not wrong and you can draw a bolt as one free action or you can draw and load a bolt as one entirely separate free action. They are two entirely separate actions.
You seem to be assuming that because drawing ammunition is listed as a free action that you have to use that one specific free action in addition to the free action to load it. That is not the case.
That would seem like EXACTLY the kind of over complication that is trying to be avoided. I cant think of anytime inside of initiative that a player would draw ammunition and then NOT use it. Outside of initiative it hardly matters because you are not counting actions in a turn.
Lord Twig, could you point out anywhere in the rules that states they are the same action?
Reloading a Light Crossbow (without Rapid Reload): Free action to draw ammunition and Move action to reload.
Do you disagree these are two separate actions?
Reloading a Light Crossbow (with Rapid Reload): Free action to draw ammunition and free action to reload.
Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of crossbow is reduced to a free action (for a hand or light crossbow) or a move action (for a heavy crossbow). Reloading a crossbow still provokes an attack of opportunity.
So, free action to Reload.
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.
Free action to draw ammunition.
I can find no wording that indicates that drawing ammunition is part of the same action as reloading. If you know of such wording, please point it out. :)
Note, I do find this:
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading (as noted in their descriptions). Generally speaking, ammunition that hits its target is destroyed or rendered useless, while ammunition that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost.
I can see where some might think that that is where it implies that the only action required for a crossbow or sling is the action for reloading. Unfortunately, it does not in any way negate the drawing ammunition clause on page 187 which specifically calls out bolts and sling bullets.
- Gauss
I think this should be stated in a simple faq
Does it take 2 separate actions to draw and load ammunition?
No drawing is part of loading so they aren't separate actions.
This doesn't really fix the Faq as it stands but it clears up a related issue. I guess the next issue would be this: if a free action is a limited action type, does it belong on the action heirarchy so that a swift or move action can be downgraded to get extra free actions?
For example... could a gunslinger load six chambers of a pepperbox by taking his three free actions and then downgrading his swift, move and standard actions.. effectively taking a full round to load all six bullets?
Or could he fire 4 shots by spending his swift action? As this is a valuable limited action type that should be worth more than a free action?
| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.- Gauss
Blankety, blank, blank, blank.
Yeah, I don't know what to tell you on that one. I do know this. It serves no purpose to split up those actions (other than to do it) and nearly no one I know plays that way. But yeah, that thing. Crap.
Son of a....
Listen ::looking around:: just between you me and the wall. Just have fun playing the game and don't worry about nit-picky crap like this. Angels don't dance on the head of a pin, and we will continue to strive to make things sync and work well for you.
IMO no one should be counting free actions as regular play, but a GM should have some recourse when a player seems to be taking advantage of some strange bit of the free action economy. That is the purpose of the guideline. We want you to shoot all the arrows you can. We want you to do cool things, just as long as your GM is cool with it. That's it. That is all. That is the whole point of the FAQ.
On the point of drawing ammunition as it's own free action as well as the (potentially, based on feats) free action to load various weapons. I'm a huge fan of having both actions listed separately.
Consider the classic "Oh crap, I'm out of ammo!" *buddy across the way tosses a clip/arrow/bag of shots* Scene.
Now I don't know if it's because we really track everything when we play, but we've had this happen with repeating crossbows and the like while in combat. Knowing that it's a free action for my friend to draw that clip for me (and the move to toss it) is really hand to have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stephen Radney-MacFarland,
Thank you for your blankety blank blank blank. It amused me. :)
I do have fun, like I said, the problem is the number of times I have to house rule something. It is much simpler to open the book and point to a rule than to open book, open FAQs, open house rules and try to make sense of why I house ruled something awhile back.
- Gauss
LazarX, I generally avoid the firearm discussions because of that. I actually do shoot muzzleloaders (I own 3 caplocks but I also have experience with flinters and even a few matchlocks) and the rate of fire bugs me.
I have a player that may run a gunslinger using my (untested) house rule replacing the regular shooting mechanics with a mechanic based on the Dead Shot deed.
- Gauss
That would seem like EXACTLY the kind of over complication that is trying to be avoided. I cant think of anytime inside of initiative that a player would draw ammunition and then NOT use it. Outside of initiative it hardly matters because you are not counting actions in a turn.Or they are not wrong and you can draw a bolt as one free action or you can draw and load a bolt as one entirely separate free action. They are two entirely separate actions.
You seem to be assuming that because drawing ammunition is listed as a free action that you have to use that one specific free action in addition to the free action to load it. That is not the case.
I might draw a sling bullet to throw it without a sling. I might draw an arrow and hand it to a friend that is out, or use the Stabbing Shot feat.
Lord Twig, could you point out anywhere in the rules that states they are the same action?
Reloading a Light Crossbow (without Rapid Reload): Free action to draw ammunition and Move action to reload.
Do you disagree these are two separate actions?
Reloading a Light Crossbow (with Rapid Reload): Free action to draw ammunition and free action to reload.
CRB p132 Rapid Reload wrote:Benefit: The time required for you to reload your chosen type of crossbow is reduced to a free action (for a hand or light crossbow) or a move action (for a heavy crossbow). Reloading a crossbow still provokes an attack of opportunity.
So, free action to Reload.
CRB p187 wrote:Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.
Free action to draw ammunition.
I can find no wording that indicates that drawing ammunition is part of the same action as reloading. If you know of such wording, please point it out. :)
Note, I do find this:
CRB p141 wrote:Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading (as noted in their descriptions). Generally speaking, ammunition that hits its target is destroyed or rendered useless, while ammunition that misses has a 50% chance of being destroyed or lost.
I can see where some might think that that is where it implies that the only action required for a crossbow or sling is the action for reloading. Unfortunately, it does not in any way negate the drawing ammunition clause on page 187 which specifically calls out bolts and sling bullets.
- Gauss
Yes, p141 is exactly where it is implied, and Stephen has basically said the same thing. When you reload, the drawing of the ammunition is implied. You can also draw the ammunition as a free action without shooting it, but you don't have to use two separate free actions to load a crossbow with Rapid Reload.
How did this go one for 677 posts? Man can we debate minutia to death here!
And anyone who argues that a flintlock, (which is more advanced than the average Golarion firearm) should be anywhere near as rapid fire as a bow, is taking some drugs high enough quality that I'd love to meet their supplier.In summary, you have agreed we should follow the FAQ since you are the authority. However, without reading a ton of comments by Devs, the authority has, in effect, stated that you cannot draw more than 3 arrows per round.
I concur with this statement and the logic that derived this statement.
Bows do not deserve a "free pass" just because they are bows.
Right, but the problem is that reloading a flintlock is a free action in the first place, not that PCs are using too many free actions in a round.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Please keep in mind those of us disagreeing with the FAQ are a loud minority.
The majority of people are going to go "what's reasonable?" look at they FAQ, see "no more than three if you're trying to reload", go "oh, okay", count the actions and then no one will ever fire a crossbow more than twice [because you are trying to draw ammunition a second time you fall under the three maximum heading and so can only draw, reload, fire, draw end-turn] in one turn again*
We hope you can help us correct this while it is still fresh, so that it does not become "long established fact - why are you all railing against it now?" as certain rulings have become in certain games. You may not like authority much but you basically are IT. And so we turn to you.
The examples given become guidelines, just like everyone uses the 15/20 point-buy values offered in regards to character creation. These things become PFS-Law, at the very least.
And then there are those who do not know the game well yet, and who will take their groups with them in this direction, forever preventing monks from flurrying more than three shuriken in a round.
*some of us strongly suspect this to be the goal after "oh but bows are not intended to be affected by this" was explained about the pistol being a specific example and very much do not like it...
Even more than that I think that after reading the rules, most people would think that more than 3 crossbow shots would be perfectly reasonable after seeing that rapid reload specifically says that a character with that feat can make their full compliment of attacks.
The same would be true for thrown weapons with quickdraw. Matter of factly that has obviously been the majority assumption by not only we the players but judging by the comments in this and other threads also the assumption of the developers.
That is why this FAQ seems like its coming from so far out of left field. Similarly it contradicts the idea that specific trumps general with regard to those feats (rapid reload in particular).
If it is common sense that drawing and loading ammunition shouldn't be 2 actions, fine. But up until this faq it was common consensus that a ranged character could make use of all of their attacks as long as they could prepare their weapon as a free action.
This faq essentially puts an "or up to three times per round maximum" at the end of a lot of abilities. Of course it is just a suggestion but it is impossible to decouple that fact from the actual impact it will have. It is a suggestion surrounded by rules... this gives it nearly the same weight.
Similarly, the suggestions within the subsequent reaction threads where the devs may say that drawing and loading ammo are 1 action or that this limit shouldn't apply to bows at all carry very little weight because of where they are located.
Lord Twig, while it may be implied it does not state this and does not counter the statements that do explicitly state what the actions are. Until such a time when it is changed, it is just implication (at best) and not rule.
- Gauss
Lord Twig, while it may be implied it does not state this and does not counter the statements that do explicitly state what the actions are. Until such a time when it is changed, it is just implication and not rule.
- Gauss
It doesn't say that you have to use the draw ammunition action before you reload either, you are just making an assumption. Why do I have to draw a bolt to load my crossbow? It doesn't say I have to anywhere. So by the rules you don't have to.
Of course this is somewhat ridiculous. It wouldn't make sense that you could load a crossbow without first getting a bolt into your hand somehow, but how specific do we really need the rules to be? After a certain point it just becomes silly.
Can we convince you to replace the FAQ with this new and better version?
IMO no one should be counting free actions as regular play, but a GM should have some recourse when a player seems to be taking advantage of some strange bit of the free action economy.... We want you to shoot all the arrows you can. We want you to do cool things, just as long as your GM is cool with it...
Seconded!
Can we start a petition now?
Lord Twig, when a rule is not stated we can come up with something on our own to fix that.
However, this is not a case where we have nothing to go on.
This is a case where the rules specifically list two independent actions and then in a third location list only one of them. While the third location may imply (big may there) it doesn't state this and it does not counter the other rules.
Your example of having to draw ammunition before you reload might be an example of a missing rule, but it is not an example of one rule implying one thing while two other rules that say otherwise.
- Gauss
Lord Twig, when a rule is not stated we can come up with something on our own to fix that.
However, this is not a case where we have nothing to go on.
This is a case where the rules specifically list two independent actions and then in a third location list only one of them. While the third location may imply (big may there) it doesn't state this and it does not counter the other rules.Your example of having to draw ammunition before you reload might be an example of a missing rule, but it is not an example of one rule implying one thing while two other rules that say otherwise.
- Gauss
But I am saying it is not a missing rule. It would be a huge waste and incredibly pedantic to require a rule that said you had to draw a bolt before you load it into a crossbow. It is assumed. If you start making rules for everything you will go insane!
Another missing rule: You must swing a sword to do damage with it. Swinging a sword is a free action.
Or how about: In order to speak your mouth (or other vocal orifice) must be clear of obstruction and you must be able to take a breath and exhale before uttering a word.
No, we do not need a rule stating that you must draw ammunition before loading or nocking it to a weapon.
Lord Twig, when a rule is not stated we can come up with something on our own to fix that.
However, this is not a case where we have nothing to go on.
This is a case where the rules specifically list two independent actions and then in a third location list only one of them. While the third location may imply (big may there) it doesn't state this and it does not counter the other rules.Your example of having to draw ammunition before you reload might be an example of a missing rule, but it is not an example of one rule implying one thing while two other rules that say otherwise.
- Gauss
But I am saying it is not a missing rule. It would be a huge waste and incredibly pedantic to require a rule that said you had to draw a bolt before you load it into a crossbow. It is assumed. If you start making rules for everything you will go insane!
Another missing rule: You must swing a sword to do damage with it. Swinging a sword is a free action.
Or how about: In order to speak your mouth (or other vocal orifice) must be clear of obstruction and you must be able to take a breath and exhale before uttering a word.
No, we do not need a rule stating that you must draw ammunition before loading or nocking it to a weapon.
We might not need a rule saying that, but we have it anyway.
And anyone who argues that a flintlock, (which is more advanced than the average Golarion firearm) should be anywhere near as rapid fire as a bow, is taking some drugs high enough quality that I'd love to meet their supplier.In summary, you have agreed we should follow the FAQ since you are the authority. However, without reading a ton of comments by Devs, the authority has, in effect, stated that you cannot draw more than 3 arrows per round.
I concur with this statement and the logic that derived this statement.
Bows do not deserve a "free pass" just because they are bows.
From a realism perspective, you're quite correct. But them, from a realism perspective, neither guns nor crossbows should be reloadable in one turn, likely not in the same combat with as fast as combats go in D&D. But this is distinctly unplayable from a mechanical perspective. The full attack is king in D&D, and a weapon that can't make one is almost definitionally inferior. And if you create options-absolutely basic options, more or less specifically noted--to reload a firearm as fast as a bow, it should not be a surprise that people make full attacks with firearms.
From a realism perspective, you're quite correct. But them, from a realism perspective, neither guns nor crossbows should be reloadable in one turn, likely not in the same combat with as fast as combats go in D&D. But this is distinctly unplayable from a mechanical perspective. The full attack is king in D&D, and a weapon that can't make one is almost definitionally inferior. And if you create options-absolutely basic options, more or less specifically noted--to reload a firearm as fast as a bow, it should not be a surprise that people make full attacks with firearms.And anyone who argues that a flintlock, (which is more advanced than the average Golarion firearm) should be anywhere near as rapid fire as a bow, is taking some drugs high enough quality that I'd love to meet their supplier.In summary, you have agreed we should follow the FAQ since you are the authority. However, without reading a ton of comments by Devs, the authority has, in effect, stated that you cannot draw more than 3 arrows per round.
I concur with this statement and the logic that derived this statement.
Bows do not deserve a "free pass" just because they are bows.
Considering how incredibly unrealistic the rest of the mechanics for D&D and Pathfinder are, insisting on realism when it comes to the rate of fire of one or two specific missile weapons seems a bit out of place to me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
IMO no one should be counting free actions as regular play, but a GM should have some recourse when a player seems to be taking advantage of some strange bit of the free action economy. That is the purpose of the guideline. We want you to shoot all the arrows you can. We want you to do cool things, just as long as your GM is cool with it. That's it. That is all. That is the whole point of the FAQ.
This seemed clear on my initial reading - I completely failed to anticipate the controversy which greeted the example (even though my first thought was 'It's silly to make someone shoot less for talking').
I wonder whether the FAQ would actually be improved if you just cut out the examples? That might still give the DM the 'written authority' to do whatever seemed reasonable to them - perhaps this is one area of the rules best served by the designers not appearing to be prescriptive (since it's inherently a judgement call).
So, the conclusion I reach from this is that drawing ammunition is either not an action (if done as part of the action involved in loading ammunition into the projectile weapon) or a free action (if drawn for any other reason), and it is from that stance that the FAQ begins with describing "reasonable" limitations on free actions should the GM feel the need to impose them. I suspect there's a further issue with shuriken, somewhere in there, but that's getting into the real nitty-gritty of the rules which aren't likely to be necessary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, the conclusion I reach from this is that drawing ammunition is either not an action (if done as part of the action involved in loading ammunition into the projectile weapon) or a free action (if drawn for any other reason), and it is from that stance that the FAQ begins with describing "reasonable" limitations on free actions should the GM feel the need to impose them. I suspect there's a further issue with shuriken, somewhere in there, but that's getting into the real nitty-gritty of the rules which aren't likely to be necessary.
Ultimately, I don't think that this FAQ will be taken at face value by any GM with decent system mastery (except, of course, for PFS GMs who must take the FAQs to heart whenever they can) but that isn't really the problem. Everyone here would like to see the brand grow as well as the hobby and a new GM looking to the internet for guidance (a very common occurrence nowadays) probably doesn't have the system mastery needed to understand exactly how to limit free actions in a way that is fair. What is more, they would have to dig pretty deep into the forums to find out that the Devs themselves wouldn't actually use this guideline or the examples provided. They would also have to dig pretty deep to find out that the number of free actions needed to load a crossbow are anything other than what is spelled out clearly and specifically in the rulebook.
There ARE situations where free actions can be abused, but that line for where abuse begins should be determined by each GM on a case by case basis. Providing a flat cap on free actions just isn't the answer. It is more bookkeeping than anyone should have to do, and it doesn't have the desired effect anyway.
Common sense and GMs fiat should be the only things that come into the picture here. If something seems super over-powered to a GM and it seems sketchy or abusive of the rules... they can step in and make a ruling.... but no free action on its own, without combining it with other abilities or egregious use is something that deserves a limit.
Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.- GaussBlankety, blank, blank, blank.
Yeah, I don't know what to tell you on that one. I do know this. It serves no purpose to split up those actions (other than to do it) and nearly no one I know plays that way. But yeah, that thing. Crap.
Son of a....
Listen ::looking around:: just between you me and the wall. Just have fun playing the game and don't worry about nit-picky crap like this. Angels don't dance on the head of a pin, and we will continue to strive to make things sync and work well for you.
IMO no one should be counting free actions as regular play, but a GM should have some recourse when a player seems to be taking advantage of some strange bit of the free action economy. That is the purpose of the guideline. We want you to shoot all the arrows you can. We want you to do cool things, just as long as your GM is cool with it. That's it. That is all. That is the whole point of the FAQ.
My bold.
The FAQ does not do a very good job conveying this.
My advice: Add a paragraph to the FAQ that says just what the bold part of your quote says. Sometimes saying just what you mean is the simple solution.
The intention is not to nerf archers, or nerf characters that throw daggers. The intention is to stop abuse. (And if I understand correctly from SKR’s previous posts, it is mainly abuse connected to the gunslinger).
Just state your intention and lock this thread and be done with it. You got better things to do, right? ....like answering a other FAQs ;-) or even better, writing cool new books :)