Just ban weapon cords, for pity's sake


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 507 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Instead of banning weapon cords, would it go a long ways to solving the problem if you said that reloading the second barrel of a weapon was not a free action? An archer only gets to use Manyshot on the first attack, all the rest are single arrows. Reloading one barrel as part of the attack or as a free action sounds like a class feature. Reloading the second sounds like an extra action.

4/5

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Maps, Rulebook, Starfinder Maps Subscriber

Weapon Cords aren't broken.

Two Weapon Fighting is a weird mechanic where you make all your attacks with one hand and then all your attacks with the other hand. The problem with this is that it allows a player to fight with two weapons even if you only have a weapon in one hand.

The solution to this problem is to add a note into two weapon fighting requiring you to have two weapons in your hands when using the ability. This would mean that players couldn't reload while two weapon fighting because both hands are being used. (Unless the get a third hand.)

And then adding a note into quick draw that allows you to still use quick draw to two weapon throw so that can still be allowed.

I'm not a rules developer so it would need to be better written then what I wrote, obviously.


Swiftbrook wrote:
Instead of banning weapon cords, would it go a long ways to solving the problem if you said that reloading the second barrel of a weapon was not a free action? An archer only gets to use Manyshot on the first attack, all the rest are single arrows. Reloading one barrel as part of the attack or as a free action sounds like a class feature. Reloading the second sounds like an extra action.

Actually reloading the barrel isn't part of the class feature, its actually not even free! That's why gunslingers take rapid reload and use alchemical cartridges to reduce the reload time to a free action. Its a standard action normally. The fact you can load both barrels individually as a free action is a part of that. They can't function very well without that feat tax.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Folks, I'm not writing or changing rules with how TWF works or what kind of action it takes to reload or to change the cost of something that is already printed. That is the responsibility of the rules team through errata. If you wish to discuss those things, please take that to the rules forum. We also aren't going to outright ban the entire gunslinger class. The same people have clamored for banning the entire class since the UC hit the shelves. The class isn't going to be banned so please stop asking for it to be banned.

We have to work within rules as they are here in PFS, and that restricts us pretty much to banning an item and the like. Of course, there are a lot of smart people here and perhaps someone has a better option than just banning that we can explore without creating anymore new rules seperate from what is currently in print. So, I'm looking for suggestions on how we can improve the play experience of PFS.

Dark Archive

As far as I'm concerned, someone going out of their way to break the game by gun juggling deserves to have the barrels of their +3 flaming cheese double barreled pistols sliced off. I agree with the wealth per level issue, but sometimes one must do what one must to preserve an encounter in the face of ridiculousness. Sunder for great justice.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Michael Brock wrote:

Folks, I'm not writing or changing rules with how TWF works or what kind of action it takes to reload or to change the cost of something that is already printed. That is the responsibility of the rules team through errata. If you wish to discuss those things, please take that to the rules forum. We also aren't going to outright ban the entire gunslinger class. The same people have clamored for banning the entire class since the UC hit the shelves. The class isn't going to be banned so please stop asking for it to be banned.

We have to work within rules as they are here in PFS, and that restricts us pretty much to banning an item and the like. Of course, there are a lot of smart people here and perhaps someone has a better option than just banning that we can explore without creating anymore new rules seperate from what is currently in print. So, I'm looking for suggestions on how we can improve the play experience of PFS.

I've watched and read as these things come up time and time again. I am 100% in agreement that rewriting rules is not the way to go. But, seeing as rewriting rules cannot happen, removing things that create abusive situations is the fallback position.

Seeing as the gunslinger keeps getting brought up, let's explore the options:

What would the game be like without gunslingers? Angrier. All kinds of players would be pissed beyond belief that this rug got pulled out from underneath them, and they would not have any other option that would make their character feel the way it should. I.E., this is not an option.

What would the game be like without guns? Again, very angry. There would be whole legions of players who would be weaponless, with nothing that makes their gunslinger a GUNslinger. I.E., bad idea.

What would the game be like without double-barreled guns? Probably better. But this fix is more expensive for the players involved and far more time consuming for everyone who has to do the paperwork. While this may still be on the table, it would be the final step after exploring other options, I would think.

What would the game be like without weapon cords? In my opinion, cleaner. No paperwork, no huge sums of money to return, no adjusting characters and trying to find a way to make them "feel" the same they used to feel. Plus, things like that FAQ become unnecessary and (maybe) can be taken down and the debate (hopefully) goes away for all the non-PFS players. Bonus side effects: disarm becomes a tactic that can be used more, and going unconscious/getting stunned becomes something that actually has to be dealt with strategically. Grease becomes useful vs objects, the command spell used to force dropped objects...all of this becomes more viable.

I, personally, don't see another choice, except continue on as-is.

PS - My voice has been silent on banning the gunslinger for years; ever since they got allowed in the first place. And I promise not to ever involve myself in one of them, either. It's just not a useful debate. (-:

Dark Archive 5/5 Regional Venture-Coordinator, Great Plains

I'll post it again since no one responded: banning weapon cords does not stop TWF double-barreled gunslinger attacks. Math done by previous VOs shows that you can still get 6+ attacks without them. The only way to prevent this is by limiting/banning any two of the following three items: weapon cords, alchemical cartridges and double-barreled firearms. The latter two are designed to make gunslingers viable at higher levels.

To eliminate the Semi-Auto Gunslinger (from now on called SAG) the powers that be decided to make guns tied to fame (IE, not always available). This limited double-barreled firearms to some extent, to where you need to be around level 5-6 to purchase one.

Maybe an alternative is to instead make double barreled firearms tied to twice the fame needed to make the base purchase amount. If firearms are rare enough to need fame, perhaps the double versions are that much more difficult to acquire. I haven't done the math but it may put the SAG more in line with Manyshot archers?

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

I guess I just don't see that, Todd. Doesn't it even take away one shot? I've never built a gunslinger, and have no desire to, so am completely unable to answer this question myself: if a weapon cord is a necessary component of a gunslinger build, then what do they do except allow faster reloading and more attacks? Look cool? They get mentioned every time someone starts building a gunslinger on the optimization threads. If they don't do anything, why do they get mentioned? I just don't get it.

If you think that banning or further limiting the double barrel is what's necessary, then sure; argue for that, as well. I still think starting small is the better way to go. And considering the "fringe" benefits of banning the weapon cord, what is wrong with starting there?

5/5 5/55/55/5

If you ban the weapon cords and ban the Double barreled pistols is there any real advantage to doing the two gun kid thing?

Silver Crusade

Mike, there is no reason to ban weapon cords. The whole problem with them is how some people are trying to cheese them to load pistols faster than is humanly possible. The real fix that world bring the gunslinger back into how I personally feel the devs intended the class to work is limit all firearms to one reload each round. Before I hear the people saying this would nerf the gunslinger, I would balance this by reducing the cost of firearms and increasing the damage. Pistolaros are supposed to have lots of pistols anyway. Look at Quantrils Raiders from the civil war the carried at least six pistols so they would never have to reload in an engagement .
The whole weapon cord thing as it is is just a pure exploit trying to cheat the system.

Weapon cords for pistols were mainly to prevent mounted troops from dropping their pistols if the missed their holster when they changed weapons. It had a nothing to do with reloading, just state that weapon cords have no affect on actions when reloading a weapon. This would solve the problem without having to ban a perfectly useable item for no reason.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

Todd Morgan wrote:
The math pointed out that you can still get 6 attacks per round without weapon cords so banning them doesn't necessarily solve the issue.

Weapon cords don't really do much for guns, in my view. They give you free action drop, swift retrieve functionality.

They do allow you the following:
1) Negate Disarms from DM.
2) Cast a spell with a weapon in one hand and shield in the other.
3) Lay on Hands with a weapon in one hand and shield in the other.
4) Walk around with adamantine, cold iron, and silver weapons and ignore DR by switching weapons mid Full Attack.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

BigNorseWolf wrote:
If you ban the weapon cords and ban the Double barreled pistols is there any real advantage to doing the two gun kid thing?

I imagine, if Todd is right, the answer is, "In the same way that banning the Synthesist took away the advantage to doing the whole Gundam Suit thing."

But, seeing as the two gun kid isn't an archetype that can be banned, why should we not consider doing this? Did anyone in the 1700s ever "two gun" it? That's the era of weaponry we're talking about, right? We don't have revolvers in PFS, afterall.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

James Risner wrote:
4) Walk around with adamantine, cold iron, and silver weapons and ignore DR by switching weapons mid Full Attack.

No.

Weapon cord rules.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Lou Diamond wrote:

Mike, there is no reason to ban weapon cords. The whole problem with them is how some people are trying to cheese them to load pistols faster than is humanly possible. The real fix that world bring the gunslinger back into how I personally feel the devs intended the class to work is limit all firearms to one reload each round. Before I hear the people saying this would nerf the gunslinger, I would balance this by reducing the cost of firearms and increasing the damage. Pistolaros are supposed to have lots of pistols anyway. Look at Quantrils Raiders from the civil war the carried at least six pistols so they would never have to reload in an engagement .

The whole weapon cord thing as it is is just a pure exploit trying to cheat the system.

Weapon cords for pistols were mainly to prevent mounted troops from dropping their pistols if the missed their holster when they changed weapons. It had a nothing to do with reloading, just state that weapon cords have no affect on actions when reloading a weapon. This would solve the problem without having to ban a perfectly useable item for no reason.

It would also be rewriting existing game rules. This isn't an option.

The Exchange 5/5 Venture-Agent, Kentucky—Lexington

Michael Brock wrote:
perhaps someone has a better option than just banning that we can explore without creating anymore new rules seperate from what is currently in print. So, I'm looking for suggestions on how we can improve the play experience of PFS.

Block the use of more than one Weapon Cord at a time.

Block the use of the hand when a Weapon is dangling for Spells or other integrate movement.
Block moving for any distance when a Weapon is dangling.

Drogon wrote:
James Risner wrote:
4) Walk around with adamantine, cold iron, and silver weapons and ignore DR by switching weapons mid Full Attack.
No. Weapon cord rules.

Actually Yes.

Each Weapon Cord can have one weapon. Nothing prevents a player from using 3 weapon cords to have 3 weapons dangling.

Arthur Perkins wrote:
mess of free actions to shift hands holding weapons

It may interest you that no where in the rules does it state what sort of action switching a weapon between 1 hand and 2 hands or swapping hands holding a weapon. So you could legitimately block a player from using a free action to switch hands and assert it sounds more like a move action or swift action.

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Avatar-1 wrote:
If we're really upset about weapon cords, let's talk about increasing the price for them in PFS rather than banning them. You can't do that with archetypes, but you certainly can with items, and it should please a lot of people on both sides of the coin.

You can't really increase their price to any amount that would make a meaningful deterrent, since they are simply a length of rope or leather.

You can't justify a price of more than a couple of gp, even if you assume they're a really well-made piece of rope or leather.

The weapon is tied to the wrist, like a mother ties her kid's mittens to their coat. It's therefore also a no-brainer idea, which you can't really justify telling people they can't do.

So if you can't tell people no-one would have invented them, and you can't justify pricing them off the market, what can you do?

What needs to change is the game effects of using such a cord.

Currently, people are using it to perform all kinds of complex digital manipulations, while having several pounds of free-swinging metal spinning from their wrist, and swinging between their legs.
And they're claiming to be able to do so on the run, while Tumbling, while flying, while falling, or in any situation, where having several pounds of free-swinging metal following you around would be a lethal handicap.
THAT is the abuse.

Weapon cords are designed to allow you to retrieve your dropped or disarmed weapon, before it gets stolen by an opportunistic enemy, or mage hand, or unseen servant. And that's it.

The person who just got disarmed has to cope with a sudden dead weight on their wrist, and has to get that dead weight back into their hand without knee-capping themselves or cutting off their own gonads, when they yank it up.
That is not a trivial maneuver.
So the rules need to reflect that, by reiterating that any hand with a weapon swinging from it is hampered, and therefore does not count as a 'free hand', for the purposes of casting, or digging out spell components, foci, scrolls, potions, wands or ammunition.

[EDIT]: realised I was in a PFS thread, and not the general rules thread, so the option for changing rules is limited.
I see that others have also made the same argument, to limit the actions that can be carried out by the empty hand.
Can we therefore point JB or SKR (or whoever else counts as a rules person these days) to the thread, since we seem to have a consensus looking for an official seal of approval.

Liberty's Edge 5/5 5/5 Venture-Lieutenant, Alaska—Anchorage aka Dragnmoon

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am going to admit straight out I am not a fan of the Weapon Cord or any cheap items that screw around with action economy.

That said I am against banning them only for one reason.

Most of the hype and anger on this particularly with Gunslingers is most likely from theory crafting and not due to a huge influx of dual barrel pistol wielders with weapon cords. Yes it can be abused, but no it is most likely not being abused to a height that it is causing a problem with PFS. If you are seeing it in your local area it is best to bring the issue with the person causing it.

There is no reason to Ban an item that is not abused by most likely the majority who use the item for the few who are abusing it. Especially because I don't see this becoming a larger issue at this time. If it was to become a larger issue in the future due to something else being added to the game that made this item a must have then I would be willing to rethink this. But currently it is not.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I gots me Josey Whales, Mr. Chain blue Lightning his self!

Scarab Sages

Drogon, as has been pointed out a few times, while weapon cord is one of the ways double barrel pistol users can achieve max fire rate, it is one of at least three ways to do this. Banning weapon cords won't solve the problem but it will cause collateral damage.

I'm guessing from your statement that you haven't made a gunslinger ,that you were simply not aware that this fix would not work as intended. Perhaps instead we can focus, as Mike suggests, on the core issue of finding some way to creatively solve this without outright banning double barrel pistols.

Silver Crusade

All I've ever used one for is to make my SO's pally with sword and board able to use LoH once in a while.

Dark Archive

The problem with the weapon cord isn't just with gunslingers. It can be used, within the confines of the rules, to perform all kinds of crazy jank to such an extent that what primarily weapon wielding class you choose to use it on is largely irrelevant. Yeah, it makes the rapid fire gunslinger a lot cheaper and easier to pull off, but that's just one problem. I've even seen a rogue have a ton of different daggers on weapon cords, each with a different poison on them, load even bosses down with such a stupid number of debuffs that the fight is pretty much over the second that halfling gets ahold of them. Not to mention the multiple weapons to overcome DR trick, and the fact that it simply invalidates practically all ways you could get a PC's weapon away from them short of breaking either it or the cord. And all for 1sp.

Why not just make having a weapon cord on one's arm slow the reloading process in the event of a firearm? The weapon cord's text already mentions that it could interfere with some of the finer uses of one's hands. Seems to me like it would be a pretty big pain to reload one hand's weapon with another weapon smacking around while you attempt to do so. Could also reduce the effectiveness of the weapon retrieval aspect. Perhaps have the action required vary depending on the size of the weapon attached to the cord.

5/5 5/55/55/5

Drogon wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
If you ban the weapon cords and ban the Double barreled pistols is there any real advantage to doing the two gun kid thing?
I imagine, if Todd is right, the answer is, "In the same way that banning the Synthesist took away the advantage to doing the whole Gundam Suit thing."

Well there's two differences there.

1) is that they banned the synthesist outright, not a backdoor nerf by changing something outside of the class that it relied on.

2) That gave folks a chance for a re write of their character to deal with the new reality of the gaming system

3) There was a clear cut "this is banned" not a suggestion of a limit on free actions that different dm's might take different ways giving you vastly different attack routines each time.

is dropping a free action?
can you drop both guns at once?

Quote:
But, seeing as the two gun kid isn't an archetype that can be banned, why should we not consider doing this? Did anyone in the 1700s ever "two gun" it? That's the era of weaponry we're talking about, right? We don't have revolvers in PFS, afterall.

The game is hardly built around realism or historical accuracy. It seems to be a popular style of play and I'm loath to either see it banned or see it rendered strictly inferior to other gun users.


Arthur Perkins wrote:

Drogon, as has been pointed out a few times, while weapon cord is one of the ways double barrel pistol users can achieve max fire rate, it is one of at least three ways to do this. Banning weapon cords won't solve the problem but it will cause collateral damage.

I'm guessing from your statement that you haven't made a gunslinger ,that you were simply not aware that this fix would not work as intended. Perhaps instead we can focus, as Mike suggests, on the core issue of finding some way to creatively solve this without outright banning double barrel pistols.

Can you explain (or link) how pistol users can get to the same rate of fire without weapon cords?

Maybe for a round, if they start with 2 loaded pepperboxes, but they can't keep it up.
You can do it by using many pistols, but then you start hitting serious cost issues if you want them enchanted.

Dark Archive

The Weapon cord description is very explicit that you cannot change weapons without first untying or cutting the cord, so multiple cords on 1 hand prevent the use of ALL of the weapons until they only have 1 cord with 1 weapon and are using that specific weapon.

Dark Archive

Caderyn wrote:

The Weapon cord description is very explicit that you cannot change weapons without first untying or cutting the cord, so multiple cords on 1 hand prevent the use of ALL of the weapons until they only have 1 cord with 1 weapon and are using that specific weapon.

Pretty much. But evidently there are some very cleverly thought up ways to work around that shortcoming. Very annoying, very cleverly thought ways.

Sovereign Court

James Risner wrote:
Each Weapon Cord can have one weapon. Nothing prevents a player from using 3 weapon cords to have 3 weapons dangling.

Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any further away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hp). Unlike a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

Doesn't the highlighted portion prevent having more than one weapon per hand?

Dark Archive

Todd Lower wrote:
James Risner wrote:
Each Weapon Cord can have one weapon. Nothing prevents a player from using 3 weapon cords to have 3 weapons dangling.

Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any further away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hp). Unlike a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

Doesn't the highlighted portion prevent having more than one weapon per hand?

Should, but that point has been argued till people are blue in the face, so to speak. It never seems to sink in no matter how hard people try to get it across.

Lantern Lodge

thejeff wrote:
Can you explain (or link) how pistol users can get to the same rate of fire without weapon cords?

The "easiest" method is to splash 2 levels of alchemist and grab the vestigial arm discovery.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

Whoa, folks. I am not the anti-gunslinger champion here. Read my initial post to see who is, and why gunslingers are even a part if this conversation.

And, James, yes they do. The rules on the weapon cord specifically say you cannot switch to a different weapon after dropping a weapon until that weapon is cut free or untied. What are you seeing that I'm not?


Lormyr wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Can you explain (or link) how pistol users can get to the same rate of fire without weapon cords?
The "easiest" method is to splash 2 levels of alchemist and grab the vestigial arm discovery.

Still pretty costly, that fifth level of gunslinger is pretty important! And so is that sixth BAB.

Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover aka Hayato Ken

Weapon Cord wrote:
Weapon cords are 2-foot-long leather straps that attach your weapon to your wrist. If you drop your weapon or are disarmed, you can recover it as a swift action, and it never moves any further away from you than an adjacent square. However, you cannot switch to a different weapon without first untying the cord (a full-round action) or cutting it (a move action or an attack, hardness 0, 0 hp). Unlike a locked gauntlet, you can still use a hand with a weapon cord, though a dangling weapon may interfere with finer actions.

At least one of the problems comes from people and also GM´s seemingly either not being able to read or not taking the time to do so.

One hand/arm, one weapon cord, one weapon. That´s it, not two or three weapons on several cords.
Also note the last sentence, which is totally a GM call.
Climbing with a reach weapon on a weapon cord? Have fun!

I´m not familiar with this uber pistolero build, but i´m pretty sure there is some questionable stuff in there. Can someone link or quote the build where it is described what to do with weapon cords and double-barreled pistols please?

Scarab Sages

Monkey Belt.

thejeff wrote:
Arthur Perkins wrote:

Drogon, as has been pointed out a few times, while weapon cord is one of the ways double barrel pistol users can achieve max fire rate, it is one of at least three ways to do this. Banning weapon cords won't solve the problem but it will cause collateral damage.

I'm guessing from your statement that you haven't made a gunslinger ,that you were simply not aware that this fix would not work as intended. Perhaps instead we can focus, as Mike suggests, on the core issue of finding some way to creatively solve this without outright banning double barrel pistols.

Can you explain (or link) how pistol users can get to the same rate of fire without weapon cords?

Maybe for a round, if they start with 2 loaded pepperboxes, but they can't keep it up.
You can do it by using many pistols, but then you start hitting serious cost issues if you want them enchanted.

Silver Crusade

The Simple fix is to rule that weapons cords have no effect on action economy in regards to reloading.

The way it stands now with how weapons cords in negates a feat Quick Draw
Why a 5 gp item would allow this to happen is beyond me. Quick draw should be a prime feature of the Pistolaro archetype it is what they are about and the current abuse of weapons cords needs to be fixed.

I think that some players need to realize that black powder fire arms are not revolvers or semiautomatic pistols. A musket or a rifled musket takes 24 actions to reload. Folks I am not making this up this are taken from the British manual for infantry in the Napoleonic era a highly skilled Rifleman could only get off four shots a minute and that is tap loading his rifle. If you want to see a demonstration there are videos on you tube. Also Sean Bean gives a fine demonstration of quick loading a rifled musket in Sharpes Rifles. Even a skilled police officer using a speed loader would be pressed to fire six shots accurately and reload in six seconds. [That is what the length of melee round is supposed to be.]
That is why police departments went to semiautomatic pistols.

Grand Lodge 5/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lou Diamond wrote:

The Simple fix is to rule that weapons cords have no effect on action economy in regards to reloading.

The way it stands now with how weapons cords in negates a feat Quick Draw
Why a 5 gp item would allow this to happen is beyond me. Quick draw should be a prime feature of the Pistolaro archetype it is what they are about and the current abuse of weapons cords needs to be fixed.

Michael Brock wrote:
Folks, I'm not writing or changing rules with how TWF works or what kind of action it takes to reload or to change the cost of something that is already printed. That is the responsibility of the rules team through errata. If you wish to discuss those things, please take that to the rules forum.

Dark Archive

Lou Diamond wrote:

The Simple fix is to rule that weapons cords have no effect on action economy in regards to reloading.

The way it stands now with how weapons cords in negates a feat Quick Draw
Why a 5 gp item would allow this to happen is beyond me. Quick draw should be a prime feature of the Pistolaro archetype it is what they are about and the current abuse of weapons cords needs to be fixed.

I think that some players need to realize that black powder fire arms are not revolvers or semiautomatic pistols. A musket or a rifled musket takes 24 actions to reload. Folks I am not making this up this are taken from the British manual for infantry in the Napoleonic era a highly skilled Rifleman could only get off four shots a minute and that is tap loading his rifle. If you want to see a demonstration there are videos on you tube. Also Sean Bean gives a fine demonstration of quick loading a rifled musket in Sharpes Rifles. Even a skilled police officer using a speed loader would be pressed to fire six shots accurately and reload in six seconds. [That is what the length of melee round is supposed to be.]
That is why police departments went to semiautomatic pistols.

Be that as it may, it isn't a question of what is realistic in this case. It's question of whether or not an item is providing far more benefits than it actually should, and the general consensus by a landslide is that yes, it is.

Besides, I'd say if a sorcerer can fire meteors out of their fingertips, a gunslinger can (as janky as it is) currently get off an obscene number of shots per round. Even sans weapon cord, that will continue. ... But the weapon cord does continue to confer seemingly unintended benefits, gunslinger or no.

Silver Crusade

I would also note that I don't think the gunslinger class needs many changes it works very well IMO. The only problem I see is people trying to bend the rules into a pretzel to try to fire a pistol faster than humanly possible.

If you want to fire a black powder fire arm with full attacks I suggest that you use some form of magic, Reloading hands abundant ammunition get the devs to add endless ammunition for firearms.

The only fault that I see in the class is a very minor one is as a GM I do not like the ricochet shot deed as written. And that is only because one of my players was very inventive in its use.

Lantern Lodge

MrSin wrote:
Lormyr wrote:
thejeff wrote:
Can you explain (or link) how pistol users can get to the same rate of fire without weapon cords?
The "easiest" method is to splash 2 levels of alchemist and grab the vestigial arm discovery.
Still pretty costly, that fifth level of gunslinger is pretty important! And so is that sixth BAB.

Absolutely. Doing this before getting to 5th level is not advised. Dex to damage is more important.

Just for clarity, I am definitely not in the "ban gunslingers" party. I am not even really in "dual wielding pistols is the end of the world" party. It's a fantasy game. Let people have their fantasy within reason.

I comment only because I believe the faq entry is misleading in it's phrasing, and if someone was to simply view it and decide to use it for their games, and then view actions required to draw arrows and bolts as it is stated in the CRB without knowing to reference SKR's post saying "this is not intended to affect bows and crossbows" then archer characters would also be getting the frustration.

I personally believe the gunslinger class itself as well as firearm rules are pretty well out of alignment with weapon-based combat balance with the other classes, but I definitely believe that simply calling to ban them is not the right way to address those issues.

I never really got the two gun concept anyhow. Isn't nearly 700 damage a round before criticals from just the one double-barrel pistol by level 20 enough overkill?

Lantern Lodge

Lou Diamond wrote:
I think that some players need to realize that black powder fire arms are not revolvers or semiautomatic pistols. A musket or a rifled musket takes 24 actions to reload. Folks I am not making this up this are taken from the British manual for infantry in the Napoleonic era a highly skilled Rifleman could only get off four shots a minute and that is tap loading his rifle.

While that sentiment is accurate to life, this is also a fantasy game man. Gotta let some semantics slide for balance, flavor, and/or fun.


Lormyr wrote:
I never really got the two gun concept anyhow. Isn't nearly 700 damage a round before criticals from just the one double-barrel pistol by level 20 enough overkill?

I always liked the concept of guns akimbo and Gunkata. I blame years of anime and action films. However, Pathfinder doesn't really support dual wielding guns that well. The best way to do it is to grow a 3rd arm, support yourself with magic, or to juggle your gun with weapon cords though. It was never about overkill when I wanted it, it was about the concept and being awesome. That said, I'll never go out of my way to do it in PF personally.

Two guns is cooler than one?

Lantern Lodge

MrSin wrote:
Lormyr wrote:
I never really got the two gun concept anyhow. Isn't nearly 700 damage a round before criticals from just the one double-barrel pistol by level 20 enough overkill?

I always liked the concept of guns akimbo and Gunkata. I blame years of anime and action films. However, Pathfinder doesn't really support dual wielding guns that well. The best way to do it is to grow a 3rd arm, support yourself with magic, or to juggle your gun with weapon cords though. It was never about overkill when I wanted it, it was about the concept and being awesome. That said, I'll never go out of my way to do it in PF personally.

Two guns is cooler than one?

Too each their own bud, to each their own. I can see why someone might like the concept of two gun mojo. You are right that this system doesn't support it well without jumping through hoops though.

I will be the first to say that I have only a general concept of what is involved with deciding upon errata, publishing that errata, and getting that info out there in a game design setting. That said, I just can't understand how this effort to focus on free action control is superior to firearm errata. In fairness, I am baffled it passed balance concerns during playtesting either though, so I must just be entirely out of the loop. :p

Give firearms better range. Remove their targeting of touch AC. Remove double-barrel firearms or make them a standard action for 2 shots (thus making them a niche low level item or slightly superior to mobility based builds). Problems solved!

Dark Archive

Two guns should be something that's available but not inherently broken. I've seen it done well with Quick-Draw and dagger pistols (the best part being that the gunslinger also threw his empty guns as daggers!). However, with this FAQ even he would be limited because each Quick-Draw is a free action.

Weapon cords are broken as they are. It should always have been a move action to retrieve, but one that did not provoke with the cord. Since we aren't going to change them, they shouldn't be in the campaign.

Shadow Lodge

Drogon wrote:
Avatar-1 wrote:

I hate the big-bad pistolero build (though I've never seen it in play), the FAQ about free actions seems to resolve that build

You're right. It does. But it creates a mess of other issues. Two years from now, when a new GM is starting to try to figure things out, he's going to see that FAQ and think, "Oh, hey. That zen archer player can't actually shoot 10 times per round. I can point at this and tell him he can do it three times, and that's it." He will be unaware of Sean's clarification in that thread, and will be applying the (not)rule in a way that Sean was not intending.

I don't want to derail the thread by talking about whether the FAQ on free actions was legit (I think it was, you seem to think it wasn't) - is that the argument here? Weapon cords vs GM limits on free actions?

Shadow Lodge

Michael Brock wrote:
We have to work within rules as they are here in PFS, and that restricts us pretty much to banning an item and the like. Of course, there are a lot of smart people here and perhaps someone has a better option than just banning that we can explore without creating anymore new rules seperate from what is currently in print. So, I'm looking for suggestions on how we can improve the play experience of PFS.

Is price increase an option here?

(this probably falls into the same category as spring loaded wrist sheathes, too)


Price increase doesn't change power level.


CWheezy wrote:
Price increase doesn't change power level.

It doesn't, but ideally it could reflect the value and put the weapon cords on a level closer to the gloves of storing. Many mundane items that do nice things, especially the ones that change action economy or let you do new things, are views as overpowered.

Mundane items ideally shouldn't be too expensive though, so it would be weird to buy a leather strap that easily broken for 5000gp for instance.

Sovereign Court Owner - Enchanted Grounds, President/Owner - Enchanted Grounds

That argument is being presented as the MAJOR problem in that other thread, Avatar-1. Those feelings are a direct result of the FAQ. Seems like a legitimate reason to dislike it, especially when gunslingers and weapon cords are being pointed at as one of the big reasons for the FAQ. So, I'm saying address the actual issue instead of creating more problems. Is that not a valid position to take in this?

For proof of what I said read the original post in that other thread. Sean even had to say that the intent was not to limit things like drawing arrows. Thus clarifying a clarification. Bleh. Fix the real issue, instead.

The Exchange

I am all in favor of banning weapon cords. I have never liked them to begin with and it just seems rife with abuse.

/My favorite was the "adamantine weapon cord" at GenCon 2013.
//Wish I could find what source that comes from.

Dark Archive

Joseph Caubo wrote:

I am all in favor of banning weapon cords. I have never liked them to begin with and it just seems rife with abuse.

/My favorite was the "adamantine weapon cord" at GenCon 2013.
//Wish I could find what source that comes from.

... Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait.

Adamantine weapon cord? I think reading your post just caused me to suffer a minor stroke.

Shadow Lodge

Whether you like it or not, the rule on free actions was always there though - that's the point the dev team are trying to make. It doesn't affect all those other things unless they appear similarly unreasonable.

By saying weapon cords are the reason for that FAQ and that because of weapon cords, the new FAQ breaks other things requiring free actions, you're also saying that the free action rule is now broken (or at least misunderstood).

Even if they removed the FAQ and banned weapon cords, nothing changes with free actions being limited like that - and there goes your reason for banning them at all.

5/5 5/55/55/5

For PFS there are three options that I can see

Ban weapon cords
Ban Double pistols
Ban both
Ignore the FAQ completely because it is a suggestion to the DM and Mike Brock is functionally the DM of PFS.
Let the FAQ stand with no change.
Let individual dms decide

Ban weapon cords: Either the gun slinger has to invest in a way of getting a third hand, or fires the pistol on the first round and thats it. Makes using that second pistol VERY cost and feat intensive to very little benefit. More gunslinger mutant freaks but hey.. there's definitely something in the water in alkanstar anyway. It will delay the pistol insanity till higher levels i THINK.

Ban double pistols: This makes the really insane 14 shot a round insanity go away (and possibly collapses the economy of chessex). if the weapon cords are banned without these being banned these will take its place with the weapon cords leading back to almost where I think we are.

Ban both: This puts "get a third hand" into the necessary category for the two gun kid.

If we ignore the FAQ nothing changes because well nothings changed

If we let the faq stand a few details need to be hammered out

-The clarification that its not supposed to stop archers and crossbow types needs to be up in neon lights.
- As written it needs to be clarified where exactly shennanigans end and intent begins. A rapid shotting musketeer will technically violate the three free actions limit.

Let individual DM's decide

This would cause too much variation and a lot of anger at the individual DM's from gunslingers and a LOT of erasing of the attack lines as folks tried to figure out how their attack routines worked from round to round.

51 to 100 of 507 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Just ban weapon cords, for pity's sake All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.