|
| 18 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was searching to find a ruling on this. So far with my lvl 6 PFS gunslinger it hasn't come up but I'm curious what the official ruling is. My question: Does the misfire chance count when confirming a critical hit and if so does it mean the attack automatically misses or a misfire occurs? Thanks!
No it does not. The confirmation roll is used just to see if the crit confirmed. It is not a roll to attack, but the misfire rule may need to be rewritten to make that more apparent.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No it does not. The confirmation roll is used just to see if the crit confirmed. It is not a roll to attack, but the misfire rule may need to be rewritten to make that more apparent.
That's what I figured, but on pfsrd they list a critical hit confirmation as another attack roll and misfires modify attack rolls.
I don't think there is anything on that. They still call the critical confirmation an attack roll and misfire works on an attack roll so by RAW it would be.....HOWEVER....this is one of those cases where we really should go by RAI instead.
Misfire states that you miss even when you may hit based on the pure numbers. It seems counter intuitive to automatically hit based on rolling a 20 and then automatically miss based on a misfire when rolling the confirmation. So....no, my OPINION is that a misfire on a confirmation does not cause an automatic miss and is not actually a misfire at all. Please note that there is no RAW to back this up as I see it and is more of an RAI interpretation.
I would think that it's a normal hit but that the gun still gains the broken condition could be used as a rule.
crit conf is another roll that uses the same base as an attack, but I dont think it IS an attack.
If the confirmation roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.
Based off the last sentence there, I would say that a "misfire" roll on the confirmation would do nothing to the gun, its already going to be a "regular hit" and not a misfire.
If you missfire on a critical success, all of your bullets automattically fire at your taget, dealing damage based on your gun, which means that you will likely kill something, but then you will be out of ammo
Critical confirmation rolls are attack rolls -- that's why you can automatically hit on a 20, and automatically confirm on a 20, even if you're a commoner with +1 trying to attack an AC 22 creature that you normally couldn't hit or critical.
If the attack roll falls within the misfire value, that shot misses even if you would have otherwise hit the target.
Looks like misfires override the automatic hit from rolling 20.
specific > general...>.>
The critical confirmation roll in general is not to determine whether or not an attack hits, it's to determine whether or not an attack that's already determined to be a hit, hits critically. So, I'd rule that a misfire result on a critical confirmation roll just counts as a general miss on a confirmation roll.
I don't make the rules, except at my own table, but I think it's the RAI interpretation.
That's what I was trying to say...the attack already hits...that line from the misfire description is for this:
If you have a +25 to hit and the AC to hit is 27, then even if normally you would hit on that 2 you rolled the shot misses IF its in your misfire range...if you rolled a 20 then you have now hit and misfire no longer applies
If gunslingers misfire off a confirmation roll then from now on melee characters miss if they roll a one on the confirmation (sarcasm)and kill themselves
There's also this to consider if you have misfires rolled on critical confirmation rolls count as actual misfires that damage a weapon and make the shot miss altogether:
Firing at a target that's immune to critical hits would be less likely to damage your weapon than firing at a target without that immunity, because you wouldn't have to make the confirmation roll when the immunity applies.
Something that absurd clearly can't be what's intended.
No no no. The gunslinger suffers from enough issues don't make it worse by making their already horrible auto-hit to auto-miss ratio come up twice on a crit
Just understand if you run it with built in misfires your gimping the gunslinger even further every time he touched a d20. He already is between 2-3 times more likely to fail any attack roll than to crit and now when he does he is running a 10-15% auto miss rate after roliling a natural 20. In addition to now losing an action or a grit point to not be at a 30-35% auto miss on all rolls plus explosions.
If you roll a nat 1 on a confirm roll, that's an auto-fail to confirm no matter what. It's still a regular hit, but not a crit. I don't see the problem with applying the same rule to guns that auto-miss on a 2.
Applying the broken condition to guns on a confirm roll is a bit harsh, and perhaps not how the rule was intended.
|
I don't know for sure what the RAW is (it could potentially go either way if you rule hard enough), but I'm pretty sure the intent of the critical confirmation is just to determine if it's a critical hit or not, and nothing else.Remember the rules literally say that it uses all the same modifiers of the original attack roll, and it is an attack roll
Crit Deck and Fumble deck. If I possible crit then roll a 1 to confirm I do or do not check to see if I fumbled? I don't believe you do so I don't see why the gun could misfire due to a confirmation roll. So if I use a Dogslicer and crit with it the weapon will break on a 1 confirmation? ridiculous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Throwing in my own two cents here.
'If the confirmation roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.'
I think this bit here would supersedes the misfire rules given that even if you do rule that a gun could misfire (an automatic miss, yes?) on a confirmation roll, this bolded part here would just circle it around again and rule it as a regular hit in the end. So just like a normal failed confirmation roll.
Besides, why would you want to punish a player for failing a crit of all things?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uh I don't think the fumble and crit deck have anything to do with it, since those are just flavour options, ALSO they have their own specific rules.
Gun misfire is very specific so I am wondering if this interpretation is intended.
I already posted the rules earlier in the thread, but I will post them again for you
Misfires: If the natural result of your attack roll falls within a firearm's misfire value, that shot misses, even if you would have otherwise hit the target
to “confirm” the critical hit—another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made. If the confirmation roll also results in a hit against the target's AC, your original hit is a critical hit. (The critical roll just needs to hit to give you a crit, it doesn't need to come up 20 again.) If the confirmation roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.
You can see how this is different from rolling a 1 using the fumble/crit deck
I'd put the emphasis on a different part of the wording:
Misfires: If the natural result of your attack roll falls within a firearm’s misfire value, that shot misses, even if you would have otherwise hit the target.
The critical confirmation roll isn't a shot, so everything based on the premise that it is a shot, instantly becomes irrelevant.
But you can't have one without the other.
The 'that' in 'that shot' has to refer to something. There isn't a 'shot' that it can refer to, so the entire sentence becomes meaningless.
Which leads me to conclude that it's not possible to arrive at a correct RAW interpretation at all. That being the case, I always go with what I perceive to be the RAI interpretation, and even that is debatable.
Having said that, the notion that guns misfire less often when aimed at things that are immune to criticals seems wholly absurd. That can't be intended. So, I'll pick the side where a target's immunity to criticals doesn't influence the way a gun processes its ammo, and that is the side that ignores misfires on criticals.
I'm not arguing that misfires on critical confirmation rolls is the intent of the ruling. I'm stating that by a strict reading, that's how it seems to operate to me.
I would think that it's a normal hit but that the gun still gains the broken condition could be used as a rule.
This is how the rule reads.
2cp...
RAW: it seems that a misfire on a crit would miss/break due to specific > general...
RAI: I doubt it was meant to do more than any other attack...
conclusion: variable results.
And I'll restate that RAW implies no such thing.
"If the natural result of your attack roll falls within a firearm's misfire value, that shot misses"
A critical confirmation roll is an attack roll used to determine critical status. It doesn't apply to the attack itself. The above quote refers to attack rolls that are attacks ("that shot").
Since a critical confirmation roll is not an attack or more specifically a shot, and the misfire rule explicitly states that it refers to shots, the misfire rule can't apply to critical confirmation rolls.
Critical confirmation rolls may be attack rolls that take all modifiers to the original roll into account, but they aren't actual attacks. If they're not attacks, they're certainly not shots, and the misfire rule only refers to shots.
And I'll restate that RAW implies no such thing.
"If the natural result of your attack roll falls within a firearm's misfire value, that shot misses"
A critical confirmation roll is an attack roll used to determine critical status. It doesn't apply to the attack itself. The above quote refers to attack rolls that are attacks ("that shot").
Since a critical confirmation roll is not an attack or more specifically a shot, and the misfire rule explicitly states that it refers to shots, the misfire rule can't apply to critical confirmation rolls.
Critical confirmation rolls may be attack rolls that take all modifiers to the original roll into account, but they aren't actual attacks. If they're not attacks, they're certainly not shots, and the misfire rule only refers to shots.
{Bold emphasis mine}
I agree with your interpretation of intent, hands down, no argument.
However. until an errata (which i believe should reference this, so FAQ it away):
the misfire does not say attack. it says 'attack roll', so in theory could also force a reroll of this if you could force reroll attack.
This is a near guaranteed houserule fix, I think, similar to damaged items from spells. Similar to how confirming with a nat1 with a different type of weapon will vary GM to GM, so will misfire.
But, generic rule:nat20 autohit and threat < specific rule misfire=broke and actual wording force me to conclude RAW this way. RAW cannot imply anything. it is explicitly stated.
If I allowed slingers, I think I would have no problem saying it does not confirm, but still hits.
But the misfire rules say "that shot" in reference to the attack roll. There is nothing else in the sentence that "that shot" could refer to. A shot is an attack, so, the misfire rules do in fact imply that they only apply to shots.
"If the natural result of your attack roll falls within a firearm's misfire value, that shot misses" is in fact a very clumsy expression to begin with. Attack rolls are never shots, they're rolls required to resolve shots. Shots/attacks are actions, not rolls.
Very clumsy, certainly. I don't believe anywhere is 'shot' an actual ingame term. I am guessing it was in the case of multiple shots per attack (BAB > 4, Rapid Shot, etc) multi-barrel gun. so that it wasn't interpreted that ALL the shots from that attack miss.
certainly, mark the top post as FAQ, I just did.
Simple and straight forward: No, it's a confirmation roll on a crit. If you misfire on the confirmation roll then you just miss. The only reason it says roll as a separate attack on confirmation rolls is so that you get your other bonuses attached to it like critical focus.
Simple and straight forward: No, it's a confirmation roll on a crit. If you misfire on the confirmation roll then you just miss. The only reason it says roll as a separate attack on confirmation rolls is so that you get your other bonuses attached to it like critical focus.
That makes sense, but where does it say that. It says in RAW it is an attack roll, not a check with the same modifier as the triggering attack.
It's an attack roll only insomuch that you have to roll it again with your regular modifiers + critical modifiers (such as the feats/traits that add more bonuses) to confirm whether you were able to actually do more damage with the hit.
Critical Hits: When you make an attack roll and get a natural 20 (the d20 shows 20), you hit regardless of your target's Armor Class, and you have scored a “threat,” meaning the hit might be a critical hit (or “crit”). To find out if it's a critical hit, you immediately make an attempt to “confirm” the critical hit—another attack roll with all the same modifiers as the attack roll you just made. If the confirmation roll also results in a hit against the target's AC, your original hit is a critical hit. (The critical roll just needs to hit to give you a crit, it doesn't need to come up 20 again.) If the confirmation roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit. This is all from the Pathfinder RPG Reference Document.
Then we go back to the standby. a general rule is overridden by a specific rule. Wish I could remember where that is...
it is an attack roll.
firearm more specific than weapon.
again, RAI I agree with you 100%.
I think you are getting hung up on the rule where is says 'roll another attack roll.' This isn't ANOTHER attack, it's still the first attack you made with your weapon (or spell if you have to roll to hit with it). The confirmation roll is only called 'another attack roll' to have you roll to see if it was a crit. Otherwise a miss on a crit is a miss and not subject to a misfire or fumble. It'd be beyond stupid/silly to roll a natural 20 to crit then on the confirmation roll a natural 1 and actually miss and fumble your weapon. The same holds true to spells and firearms. An attack is an attack, a crit is a crit, a confirmation hits or misses, but NEVER FUMBLES OR MISFIRES. Stop trying to read too much into it is all.
I am not reading too much into it, just reading what is there.
EDIT:I agree that it would be beyond stupid for a nat20, nat1 to be a miss/fumble. no argument on that.
This forum is for RAW. Rules As Written.
See the way you need to read it is this:
1) Roll attack + modifiers
2) Attack roll = 20
3) Roll for confirmation of either critical hit or normal hit
4a) Confirmation roll + modifiers = Confirmation. This is a CRIT, you get multiplied damage.
4b) Confirmation roll + modifiers = Miss. This is a NORMAL hit, you get normal damage.
On a confirmation roll, you have ALREADY hit. It's just checking to see if you hit for the multiplied damage or normal damage. It's really that simple. It doesn't matter if you are using a firearm, sword, or spell (which requires an attack roll). They all operate under the same rules when going into the confirmations.
Your confusion sounds like it stems from the "make another attack roll" from the confirmation language and firearms language where the misfire range is ___ to ___.
As long as you hit, the confirmation is only that, it's to confirm that you crit or did not crit. It's a yes or no scenario where misfires are no longer in play because you have no chance to misfire due to having hit with that critical threat roll and hitting the target already, it's just to account for the damage multiplier.
EDIT: This is all RAW as I quoted a few posts above. See: If the confirmation roll is a miss, then your hit is just a regular hit.
It is not the confirmation rules themselves I find your logic flawed.
-the "make another attack roll" while certainly poorly worded, as written, is an attack roll, and subject to effects effecting attack rolls.
-misfire happens on a roll of x
-firearms are more specific than 'weapons'
-specific > general
-if misfire->attack misses.
This is also all RAW.
This is also rather pissy of a DM/player to use, and I would personally not.
as to aid another vs mirror image... same thing. stupid gameplay-wise. I would houserule that, but RAW I guess it fits, unless they have erratta'd that...
It's not flawed logic if the RAW do not state anywhere that firearm critical attacks are different than weapons/spells. A firearm is a weapon and by extension is is subject to attack rolls/confirmation rolls.
Now the only remote place I can see based off firearm rules is that if you have a misfire OVERLAPPING on the actual crit threat range.
Example:
1) Misfire range is 1 to 17, crit range of 17 to 20.
2) Roll a 17 (with modifiers).
3) Roll on your misfire.
4) Resolve your misfire, you either hit or the gun blows up in your face.
5a) If you resolved and the gun didn't blow up, you roll to confirm your crit.
5b) If you resolved and the gun blew up in your face, then it's a miss and you get damaged.
Make sense?
The other side of the equation would NEVER happen. Why? Because the confirmation of a critical is just that, a confirmation of multiplied damage on a HIT. You can't miss on a hit, it has already hit. You are beyond the misfire range because you rolled a natural 20 already to hit.
Example RL on a gun range:
1) You fire, hit your target.
2) Don't know WHERE you hit your target, but you heard the "plink" sound and know you hit, but not WHERE.
3) Go check the target:
4a) If you hit it dead center at the bulls-eye - a critical hit, subject to multiplied (deadly damage).
4b) If you hit it off to the side say the arm, it's not a critical hit, but it is still a hit and subject normal damage.
well at least we are on the same page as far as what we would rule it. and yes, if the wording did not say 'attack roll' or the misfire said 'attack roll to hit' we would be just fine.
Yeah, to me it's absolutely above question actually. It's an impossibility to miss retroactively on a hit.
So the attack roll/misfire thing is now moot since you've already hit. You can't miss or misfire on it because you aren't attacking again, you are simply using the rules as per an attack roll to confirm the damage via a roll of the dice. This is done without using the misfire rules since the gun isn't going to blow up in your face when you are checking your target to see if you hit it in the head/heart rather than the arm/leg for damage.