Because it's a touch-attack archer, that's why.Then with all due respect, if Paizo didn't intend for the gunslinger to have 4 iterative attacks (+1 haste, +2 dual wielding), then the class should not have been a full BAB class.Cue, "but if it's supposed to be a main combat class, why doesn't it have the fighter BAB?" complaints that the rogue gets all the time.
+1
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This FAQ, and this whole thread, is really just a caster/martial disparity thread in disguise.
Moral of the story: In Pathfinder, play casters. If you want to play a gunslinger, or a dex-fighter, or a monk, or a rogue, do it in a different system.
Well, it is known as a caster edition for a reason. I don't think its a martial-caster disparity thread atm though.
Then why didn't you just change the reloading rules?Because we'd rather empower GMs to make calls appropriate for a campaign than issue errata a book that affects all campaigns.
How are they going to know how much is enough though? Should they be responsible for balancing their own games mechanically without any direction?
Direction, like was suggested in the FAQ?
Either you want the rules to give GMs direction, or you don't. Pick one.
Characters can already do a LOT of unrealistic things in the game without magic.
I doubt anybody could swing a polearm around 4 times in six seconds with any kind of accuracy. Or fire a bow accurately 4 times in six seconds (much less the seven or so you can get via feats). Heck, one feat lets you reload a light crossbow as fast as a bow. I'm pretty sure you can get a character who can leap 30' or more from a standing start every time. People can swim in plate mail. The DC 35 check for climbing a slippery overhang can be hit.
Then with all due respect, if Paizo didn't intend for the gunslinger to have 4 iterative attacks (+1 haste, +2 dual wielding), then the class should not have been a full BAB class.Cue, "but if it's supposed to be a main combat class, why doesn't it have the fighter BAB?" complaints that the rogue gets all the time.
Then why didn't you just change the reloading rules?Because we'd rather empower GMs to make calls appropriate for a campaign than issue errata a book that affects all campaigns.
So, this FAQ is thereby completely meaningless, because the book already says that. If an individual GM doesn't like free-reloading Gunslingers, he already has the ability to change it. If it doesn't bother him, then he can leave it as is.
Much ado about nothing, folks.
So, this FAQ is thereby completely meaningless, because the book already says that.
It's not meaningless. Redundant, perhaps, but not "meaningless."
Direction, like was suggested in the FAQ?
Either you want the rules to give GMs direction, or you don't. Pick one.
Well your current directions make it look like I can't talk and reload 3 times in the same round and doesn't actually talk about gunslingers and balance. It doesn't tell me "well around level 11 you really should be able to fire four shots but sixteen is way out!" or somethings similar. Its not like CR. Outside of the examples, it only says something akin to "You can limit free actions per round if you feel the need".
As others have said it doesn't look targeted at gunslingers beyond the example, and the example doesn't give actual direction but does make it appear that using your full BAB is a little much, and talking should actually penalize you for the number of bullets you can fire.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |