If you can reload a gun and a bow with equal alacrity, then you should be able to fire the gun as frequently as you fire the bow,Yes.
It's not the free action per round limit that needs fixing, but free action firearm re-loading that needs fixing.
No. it's the free action per round limit that needs fixing. I have zero problem firearms actually being *gasp* useful.
The guideline of "3" as the maximum number of shots you can take with a gun has not been on the books for 10 years.And it still isn't the guideline. The FAQ actually states:
The FAQ isn't limiting how many shots you can take with a gun, it's suggesting a reasonable limit to how many times you can reload a gun if you have the combo that allows you to reload as a free action. Stating otherwise ("3 is the max number of shots") is false and just muddles the discussion.
Oh I see, so if you can shoot your gun without reloading then you're fine.
Oh wait you can't.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh I see, so if you can shoot your gun without reloading then you're fine.
Oh wait you can't.
Um. Revolver?
I removed a post. Accusing me (or anyone) of intellectual dishonesty violates the most important rule of the Paizo messageboards.
Most folks ignore the advanced firearms, but the early ones are still very usefull.
Any gun with a capacity greater than 1 can make it's full attacks (assuming a max of 6 attacks with the same gun).
A preloaded pepperbox let's you take 6 shots, then spend 3 free actions loading it, from then on you'd get 3/rnd. you could always spend a round repositioning for better shots or cover and reload the rest.
Even with a double pistol, you can fire both, reload both, fire again, and reload one more bullet, sure, you only get 5 shot, but that's not half bad.
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.
Sice we're talking about the number of reload free actions, not teh number of shots, it's not really as bad as it sounds.
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.
Yeah...they kinda do. Especially in fantasy where you get stuff like "I threw my bullets in the air, emptied my chamber, and then swiped my gun through the air so the bullets all went in perfectly".
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.Yeah...they kinda do. Especially in fantasy where you get stuff like "I threw my bullets in the air, emptied my chamber, and then swiped my gun through the air so the bullets all went in perfectly".
Which in Pathfinder, would be a Revolver which you can use a single free action (with the Rapid Reload feat reducing the time) to fully reload the gun all at once. So you could fully reload your revolver 3 times, assuming you could find some way to need all those shots.
Advanced Firearms: Advanced firearms are chamber-loaded. It is a move action to load a one-handed or two-handed advanced firearm to its full capacity.
Which in Pathfinder, would be a Revolver which you can use a single free action (with the Rapid Reload feat reducing the time) to fully reload the gun all at once. So you could fully reload your revolver 3 times, assuming you could find some way to need all those shots.
You assume it was a single action. =)
But we're just talking thematics in here since you tried to attack the "nobody even in fiction reloads that fast" angle.
I also very much disagree that actually taking the suggestion that 3 Free actions is the limit is anywhere close to a good idea.
Just take it as is, a FAQ reiterating what the rules already say quite clearly, with a very unfortunate example used to illustrate those rules.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
A whole thread arguing over a guideline to help GM's make rulings in their games on a case per case basis based on a rule (limiting free actions) that has been a part of the game for over ten years.
*Epic Facepalm*
I posted the following quote and statement back in December, and apparently it needs repeating:
It is the spirit of the game, not the letter of the rules, which is important. Never hold to the letter written, nor allow some barracks room lawyer to force quotations from the rule book upon you, if it goes against the obvious intent of the game. As you hew the line with respect to conformity to major systems and uniformity of play in general, also be certain the game is mastered by you and not by your players. Within the broad parameters given in the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons Volumes, you are creator and final arbiter. By ordering things as they should be, the game as a whole first, your campaign next, and you participants thereafter, you will be playing Advanced Dungeons and Dragons as it was meant to be. May you find as much pleasure in so doing as the rest of us do!
Granted within this afterword—which was written entirely in capital letters in the original; since that is considered shouting on the internet I changed it—you can see Gygax's belief that the players were secondary to the campaign. Not all of his original intent seems as great with many modern players of the game. But his core assumption that you as GM should be consistent with your rulings above the written law is still valid. I'm am often astonished that so many GMs seem to need "official" rulings before making a decision. Don't be scared: make a call!
This is the heart of the problem here as far as I can see. The design team responded to some people abusing the free action mechanic of the game by reminding everyone that the GM is in charge of what free actions are allowable in a round. He can allow any number from one to fifty or more should he rule that way. The design team gave a general guideline of five free actions if they are all different actions and three if two or more are the same action.
Sean responded to criticism that the speaking example given was "unrealistic" by giving a realistic explanation. When some argued that this is fantasy and some things shouldn't be constrained by reality, Sean responded to that argument with the we have to allow fantastic elements argument.
This is not inconsistent. This is in keeping with a balance that has always existed in all forms of fantasy. Some realism is required to help suspend disbelief of the unrealistic. The game has had to deal with this balance from the very start. It doesn't always get it right, but there has to be a combination of reality and unrealistic throughout the game.
Ultimately it is up to the GM to make a call. I've always considered it a part of the skill-set required to be a GM to be able to handle rules lawyers and stop them from interfering with the flow of the game. It is a difficult skill to master so as to not hurt peoples' feelings, but it is one that is very critical to learn. This guideline is there to help develop the confidence a GM needs to make these sort of rulings. Nothing more.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that, again, the developpers answered the problem in the wrong direction.
The initial problem : "You can fire 15 times a round with 2 double barrel pistols"
Developpers' answer : "Free actions are the problem ! Fix it ! Now, free actions are not free... how should we call that... swifter actions !"
The real problem : "Reloading a pistol as a free action is the problem. Fix it. Reloading a pistol is now a move action."
A secondary problem : "The Double barrelled gun is a problem. Delete or modify it."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I mentioned in another thread, perhaps limiting how many times per round Alchemical Cartridges can reduce reload time might have been a cleaner fix. I’m guessing that maybe the design team wanted to suggest guidelines for enforcing an existing rule instead of making a rules change. I suppose that this approach also helps to close off any potential “loopholes” somebody might find in rule like that (perhaps due to new material).
I don’t see any reason why somebody using early firearms should expect to be able to fire them as many times per round as they could use some other weapon or weapons. Other weapons mostly can’t make touch attacks, and if they could they wouldn’t qualify for use with Deadly Aim. Early firearms are different from other weapons in a lot of regards, and in general they take longer to use (both in game terms and in real life). Firearms start out as something you can shoot once per round or maybe once per two rounds. If you can eventually get them up to 3-4 shots per round maybe that's enough considering their other advantages. Sure, they have some disadvantages too, but most of those stop working as effective controls by higher levels.
If a 16th level Gunslinger really wants to make 4 BAB based attacks per round plus one from Rapid Shot and another from Haste he or she is free to pick up a longbow and do so since the class is proficient with all martial weapons. I suspect that very few Gunslingers would frequently make that choice though. Guns and bows are different, and each one has some advantages in game terms. Being limited to 3 reloads per round with pistols isn't really so terrible. You can still do well over 100 DPR with touch attacks. Monsters will still die. Things will be a little better balanced. Maybe the DM will get less grey hair.
@Avh - I've ruled for my games that firing both barrels of the double barreled pistol at once requires a standard action. It can still be nice for firing two shots when you can't make a full attack, and when you can it lets you shoot one more time before reloading. I like the idea that "advanced" revolvers should be superior to "early" double barreled pistols and feel there's a place for early firearms in many games which wouldn't want Wild West style action with 6 shooters.
|
The guideline of "3" as the maximum number of shots you can take with a gun has not been on the books for 10 years.And it still isn't the guideline. The FAQ actually states:
The FAQ isn't limiting how many shots you can take with a gun, it's suggesting a reasonable limit to how many times you can reload a gun if you have the combo that allows you to reload as a free action. Stating otherwise ("3 is the max number of shots") is false and just muddles the discussion.
Oh I see, so if you can shoot your gun without reloading then you're fine.
Oh wait you can't.
Because there are no multi-cartridge firearms in the game...
|
|
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.Yeah...they kinda do. Especially in fantasy where you get stuff like "I threw my bullets in the air, emptied my chamber, and then swiped my gun through the air so the bullets all went in perfectly".
And you can. If you are using one handgun.
If you have a gun, a free hand, and the feats, you can reload to your hearts content.
If you are using two hand guns, you don't have a spare hand to toss all those bullets in...unless your GM allows the "I drop mah gun and then do these long series of free actions then have it again" cheese.
Which is part (but not all) that this FAQ intended to address.
Revolvers and repeating hand crossbows exist for a reason. That you actually have to pay the expense to do the cool thing isn't a problem, it is a feature.
|
|
Because there are no multi-cartridge firearms in the game...The guideline of "3" as the maximum number of shots you can take with a gun has not been on the books for 10 years.And it still isn't the guideline. The FAQ actually states:
The FAQ isn't limiting how many shots you can take with a gun, it's suggesting a reasonable limit to how many times you can reload a gun if you have the combo that allows you to reload as a free action. Stating otherwise ("3 is the max number of shots") is false and just muddles the discussion.
Oh I see, so if you can shoot your gun without reloading then you're fine.
Oh wait you can't.Well, if you stick with early firearms (Advanced are often not allowed and there are other issues reloading them), you can get more attacks on your first round, but once you've emptied the thing once, you're going to be limited to 3/round for the rest of the fight. Or less if you want to talk.
Assuming your GM decides to follow the example given.
The issues reloading them are intentional design limitations on a weapon that does more damage against touch AC.
I get it, people don't like being nerfed.
But calling for common sense on the weapon cord cheese didn't seem to work, so they gave GMs a reminded that they actually can say no to free action abuse.
|
|
I've commented earlier in another thread that this negatively impacts 6th level archers of all types.While this is a total non-issue for me, I suspect, as my typical gaming group has no more issue with a gunslinger able to fire six times than a wizard that can summon creatures composed entirely of fire, I imagine it's going to cause some tears in PFS play.Not to anyone who most of us will lose sleep over.
If you have a concept that depended on cheese, you may have to not use that cheese anymore, because the GM's authority to limit free actions, which was always in the book, has been restated and given some guidelines.
Boo. Hoo.
When you ignore what the Dev actually said on the matter to continue throwing out hyperbolic stuff, sure.
If you don't, it has zero impact on archers.
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.Yeah...they kinda do. Especially in fantasy where you get stuff like "I threw my bullets in the air, emptied my chamber, and then swiped my gun through the air so the bullets all went in perfectly".
Hmmm. Okay. Yeah, that totally explains where the hell one of my players came up with an aspect for his female gunslinger in an upcoming Fate Core game. I'd been trying to figure out where he was sourcing that from. Thanks Rynjin
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And you can. If you are using one handgun.
Actually you can't, if you are using the specific suggested reasonable number of Free actions (3).
You can reload 3 times. 3 reloads, 3 Free actions.
Yes, it's no issue if you ignore the suggestion, which I and any reasonable GM will likely do.
But the suggestion itself is an ill thought out example.
And unnecessary. There was absolutely ZERO ambiguity in the rules on this, why not have this one be marked "No Reply Required" like so many other suggestions (some of which WERE actually ambiguous)?
It just seems like a colossal waste of time, is all. Both on the part of the devs (for "clarifying" something that is already perfectly clear using almost verbatim the wording in the book but with an example) and on the part of the players (for deigning to acknowledge its existence and trying to puzzle out possible "implications" of the suggestion that literally changes nothing).
And unnecessary. There was absolutely ZERO ambiguity in the rules on this, why not have this one be marked "No Reply Required" like so many other suggestions (some of which WERE actually ambiguous)?
This.
This so frakkin' hard.|
|
Think of all the depictions of gunslingers, none of then reload that fast.Yeah...they kinda do. Especially in fantasy where you get stuff like "I threw my bullets in the air, emptied my chamber, and then swiped my gun through the air so the bullets all went in perfectly".
And you can. If you are using one handgun.
If you have a gun, a free hand, and the feats, you can reload to your hearts content.
If you are using two hand guns, you don't have a spare hand to toss all those bullets in...unless your GM allows the "I drop mah gun and then do these long series of free actions then have it again" cheese.
Which is part (but not all) that this FAQ intended to address.
Revolvers and repeating hand crossbows exist for a reason. That you actually have to pay the expense to do the cool thing isn't a problem, it is a feature.
Except by the example given you can't "reload to your hearts content". The example is "reload a single pistol 3 times with rapid reload and cartridges". No mention of another pistol or weapon cords interfering.
Do you think the intent is for Gunslingers to be that limited unless the GM allows advanced firearms? Which don't exist in Golarion?
Or is the intent just to curb the crazy abuse, in which case the example goes way to far.
This was not done to address one issue. This was done to remind GMs that free actions have limits, because some of the cheesier sections of this board have been coming up with rather ridiculous free action abuses for awhile now and shouting down anyone who suggests that you can't do that many free actions at once, and how dare anyone say otherwise.
I don't think the intent was to limit a one handed gunslinger with the proper feats from firing off as many shots as the attack limit allowed if that all they are doing. SKR or JB can correct me if I am wrong.
I do think it was partially intended to deal with the weapon cord issue, as well as a ton of other free action abuses without going Doctor Seuess and naming of "You cannot do it in a box, you cannot do it with a fox..."
There is a MAJOR issue on the boards with players who have decided that if they can figure out a technicality in the rules, they can then demand the GM allow it.
The fact that this small FAQ stating that GM's can enforce a rule that is already is in the books has blown up like this, illustrates why this FAQ is needed and frankly why I'm hoping they ignore the vocal minority and keep putting out more FAQs like this.
|
|
And you can. If you are using one handgun.
Actually you can't, if you are using the specific suggested reasonable number of Free actions (3).
You can reload 3 times. 3 reloads, 3 Free actions.
3 to 5 , As a guideline which SKR took his Saturday night to say didn't apply to standard reloading, but was intended toward cheesing a way to get a free hand (as one example).
But don't let what the FAQ actually said get in the way of working people into a frenzy because a GM might say you can only do so many free actions in a round...as they have always been able to do...
|
|
I've commented earlier in another thread that this negatively impacts 6th level archers of all types.While this is a total non-issue for me, I suspect, as my typical gaming group has no more issue with a gunslinger able to fire six times than a wizard that can summon creatures composed entirely of fire, I imagine it's going to cause some tears in PFS play.Not to anyone who most of us will lose sleep over.
If you have a concept that depended on cheese, you may have to not use that cheese anymore, because the GM's authority to limit free actions, which was always in the book, has been restated and given some guidelines.
Boo. Hoo.
When you ignore what the Dev actually said on the matter to continue throwing out hyperbolic stuff, sure.
If you don't, it has zero impact on archers.
Only because SKR is changing core rules in forum comments, in order to deal with the fallout from this suggestion. By saying that drawing an arrow really isn't even a free action and thus not limited.
So you don't want Dev input...
Seriously dude, you are just looking for a reason to be pissed off at this point.
The real problem : "Reloading a pistol as a free action is the problem. Fix it. Reloading a pistol is now a move action."/QUOTE]How exactly is that a problem?
|
|
And you can. If you are using one handgun.
Actually you can't, if you are using the specific suggested reasonable number of Free actions (3).
You can reload 3 times. 3 reloads, 3 Free actions.
3 to 5 , As a guideline which SKR took his Saturday night to say didn't apply to standard reloading, but was intended toward cheesing a way to get a free hand (as one example).
But don't let what the FAQ actually said get in the way of working people into a frenzy because a GM might say you can only do so many free actions in a round...as they have always been able to do...
Look, I appreciate that SKR took time to clarify the FAQ, but that just emphasizes that the FAQ was poorly thought out.
The example given in it was of standard reloading. If that's not the intent, then it was a horrible example to use.
And, per both the FAQ and the examples, it's 5 if they're all different actions. Only 3 if any of them are the same. The example specifies 2 reloads and 1 free action speech. On a standard single pistol.I'm glad that SKR has tried to clear it up, but he shouldn't have to. The FAQ just added more confusion.
Though I'm nowhere near as sure as you are that he doesn't intend to limit reloading for standard single firearms. I may have missed something in the flurry. Can you point that post out?
When I posted about being able to reload a single weapon with a free hand he favorited it.
And if they have decided that there is a cap for how many times you can reload a gun or crossbow, that bothers me less than the weapon cord shenanigan people keep trying to pass off as RAI.
The FAQ doesn't come out of nowhere.
Changing hands on your weapons is in fact a free action. If you were using the bow, which is two-handed, you needed to remove your hand from it as a free action to draw ammunition.
Unless you're one of those munchkins who is using a spring-loaded wrist sheath or has grown an extra arm.
Let's not get overly pedantic here. People have discussed things like shifting grips on a two-handed weapon before when shifting from carrying it to being ready to attack with it as a free action. But let's not overcount routine actions involved in regular use like reloading as a bunch of separate actions. That way lies madness and utter unplayability.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow...
It seems pretty clear that the intent is "Hey DM's, don't forget you can limit silliness!"
That's how the FAQ reads.
Perhaps the entire game would be better if people parsed the rules the way human beings parse text, as opposed to trying to read as computers.
I'll go back to my corner now, where "it is reasonable" means you can choose to do something or not, as you will.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Perhaps the entire game would be better if people parsed the rules the way human beings parse text, as opposed to trying to read as computers.
Beep boop does not compute.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The proper way to fix this would have been to state that a free hand with a weapon dangling via a weapon cord can't be used to reload weapons due to the weight (regardless of weapon), nor can a hand with a weapon cord attached with a dangling weapon be used to wield another weapon. This would have stopped the juggling guns, juggling crossbows, dangling longswords or bows while using the other, etc.
The real issue is the weapon cords. Sheesh.