There is also access to think about. They are ALL uncommon, so it's up to the GM whether you can get your hands on one, unless you have a feat or class feature that grants it, as in the case of gunslinger and inventor.
The same can be said for many weapons that are region bound.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
They're not class locked, no. They use the same weapon rules as every other weapon, except for misfire.
Which I am very pleased by.
Designer
|
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
They're not class locked, no. They use the same weapon rules as every other weapon, except for misfire.
Which I am very pleased by.
If you're playing in Golarion, there's also a list of the places in Golarion that grant access to them on the first page of the playtest.
Go forth with your musket-wielding warpriests! I'll try and make sure a god or two has options to use them as favored weapons when the final book comes out.
They're not class locked, no. They use the same weapon rules as every other weapon, except for misfire.
Which I am very pleased by.
If you're playing in Golarion, there's also a list of the places in Golarion that grant access to them on the first page of the playtest.
Go forth with your musket-wielding warpriests! I'll try and make sure a god or two has options to use them as favored weapons when the final book comes out.
Dang! A deity or two with guns as favored weapons would be nice! Thanks for even considering that, Michael.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Am I missing something with the firearms rules? They seem worse than bows or crossbows without any corresponding upside. A flintlock pistol is twice the price of a hand crossbow, does less damage and has a third of the range. Plus it misfires. Why would I ever want to use it? How is it a technological step forward?
The cleaning option is a nice way of handling/negating misfires, but that’s still an hour a day that other weapon users don’t have to spend. Or if they had to prepare spells too, or had more than one gun, that’d be a problem.
Either way it is still a downside that doesn’t seem warranted. In 1e misfires were there to try an balance the touch AC targeting, but firearms don’t seem to have any upside that I can see so far.
To me the real concern I suppose would be if they are a better option for the gun slinger class then say the crossbow or going melee. if a non gunslinger uses a gun and it's not as good as a bow I'd be ok with that as long as the gunslinger is better off with a gun.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Crossbows will be better for most characters, but there are a number of crit fishing builds that might prefer to have a weapon that really packs a wallop on a crit.
It is a part of the elegance of their design in my opinion that they are a functional, but finicky, weapon for any class with out requiring an archetype, but they are not just an obvious superior option. Someone will be along to show the math on guns, but I am sure that a tuned up fire arm crit is going to hurt enough for some true striking or precision ranger, ignoring cover builds to be pretty powerful.
They're still open to change, so the balance point of guns might shift.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Crossbows will be better for most characters, but there are a number of crit fishing builds that might prefer to have a weapon that really packs a wallop on a crit.
I'm as excited with crit fishing guns as I was with crit fishing magus mechanics... For those that don't recall, the excitement wasn't there... :P
Gunslingers have the accuracy and actions to warrant a crit focused play style
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Am I missing something with the firearms rules? They seem worse than bows or crossbows without any corresponding upside. A flintlock pistol is twice the price of a hand crossbow, does less damage and has a third of the range. Plus it misfires. Why would I ever want to use it?
Someone will be along to show the math on guns, but I am sure that a tuned up fire arm crit is going to hurt enough for some true striking or precision ranger, ignoring cover builds to be pretty powerful.
I was initially feeling pretty good about guns, but my back of the envelope calculations have started to make me worry. (Disclaimer: I'm sure Michael and Mark have done these themselves, so it's likely there's something I'm missing. But I'm not sure what it is!)
To make things simple, let’s compare the 1st-level expected damage of a crossbow (simple two-handed weapon) to a flintlock musket (simple two-handed weapon).To further tilt things in favor of the musket, I’ll assume:
1. The target is within 40’ (allowing us to ignore the range advantage of the crossbow),
2. The weirder has a maxed out to-hit bonus for a 1st level gunslinger (+9) (increasing crit chances to allow us to take maximum advantage of the gun’s fatal trait),
3. The opponent has the normal AC for a 1st level opponent (15), instead of something higher (again allowing us to take maximum advantage of the gun’s fatal trait).
I’ll assume that they’re doing nothing by firing and reloading. So if we start by putting aside misfires, they’ll be in a two round cycle of: fire, reload, fire; reload, fire, reload.
The expected damage of an attack without MAP is:
= 4.5*.55 + 9*.25 = 2.475 + 2.25 = 4.725 (crossbow)
= 3.5*.55 + 11*.25 = 1.925 + 2.75 = 4.675 (musket)
The expected damage of an attack with MAP is:
= 4.5*.45 + 9*.05 = 2.025 + 0.45 = 2.475 (crossbow)
= 3.5*.45 + 11*.05 = 1.575 + 0.55 = 2.125 (musket)
So the average damage is 11.925 (crossbow), 11.475 (musket) over two rounds. Or 5.96 (crossbow), 5.74 (musket) per round.
Now we factor in a flat 20% chance of a misfire, independent of your attack roll. This does two things: it gives a flat 20% decrease in expected damage of that attack, and makes you lose a round in your routine clearing the misfire, roughly making you lose 1/6 of your 2 round routine.
Factoring the 20% flat miss-chance gives us: 5.96 (crossbow), 4.59 (musket)
And approximating the extra turn cost of clearing as 1/6 of your routine gives us: 5.96 (crossbow), 3.83 (musket)
TLDR: In relatively optimal circumstances for the musket, and ignoring misfires, it looks like the musket is a bit behind the crossbow (though they're pretty close). But once when we factor in misfires, it looks like the musket is much worse than the crossbow.
Bumping firearm damage dice would swing that pretty hard though. Do we think they should stay built as they are but maybe snag another trait maybe?
Am I missing something with the firearms rules? They seem worse than bows or crossbows without any corresponding upside. A flintlock pistol is twice the price of a hand crossbow, does less damage and has a third of the range. Plus it misfires. Why would I ever want to use it?Someone will be along to show the math on guns, but I am sure that a tuned up fire arm crit is going to hurt enough for some true striking or precision ranger, ignoring cover builds to be pretty powerful.I was initially feeling pretty good about guns, but my back of the envelope calculations have started to make me worry. (Disclaimer: I'm sure Michael and Mark have done these themselves, so it's likely there's something I'm missing. But I'm not sure what it is!)
To make things simple, let’s compare the 1st-level expected damage of a crossbow (simple two-handed weapon) to a flintlock musket (simple two-handed weapon).To further tilt things in favor of the musket, I’ll assume:
1. The target is within 40’ (allowing us to ignore the range advantage of the crossbow),
2. The weirder has a maxed out to-hit bonus for a 1st level gunslinger (+9) (increasing crit chances to allow us to take maximum advantage of the gun’s fatal trait),
3. The opponent has the normal AC for a 1st level opponent (15), instead of something higher (again allowing us to take maximum advantage of the gun’s fatal trait).
I’ll assume that they’re doing nothing by firing and reloading. So if we start by putting aside misfires, they’ll be in a two round cycle of: fire, reload, fire; reload, fire, reload.
The expected damage of an attack without MAP is:
= 4.5*.55 + 9*.25 = 2.475 + 2.25 = 4.725 (crossbow)
= 3.5*.55 + 11*.25 = 1.925 + 2.75 = 4.675 (musket)The expected damage of an attack with MAP is:
= 4.5*.45 + 9*.05 = 2.025 + 0.45 = 2.475 (crossbow)
= 3.5*.45 + 11*.05 = 1.575 + 0.55 = 2.125 (musket)So the average damage is 11.925 (crossbow), 11.475 (musket) over two rounds. Or 5.96...
Where are those misfires coming from?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Gunslingers have the accuracy and actions to warrant a crit focused play style
I have NO issue if there is a build you can make that is focused on crit fishing: My issue is when the entire class, or in this case the entire weapon category, hinges on it when I have a problem.
Yeah, a gunslinger who did their daily prep doesn’t need to roll flat checks.
Gunslingers have the accuracy and actions to warrant a crit focused play styleI have NO issue if there is a build you can make that is focused on crit fishing: My issue is when the entire class, or in this case the entire weapon category, hinges on it when I have a problem.
I’m glad that crossbow support is built-in, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the average damage is 11.925 (crossbow), 11.475 (musket) over two rounds. Or 5.96 (crossbow), 5.74 (musket) per round.
Now we factor in a flat 20% chance of a misfire, independent of your attack roll. This does two things: it gives a flat 20% decrease in expected damage of that attack, and makes you lose a round in your routine clearing the misfire, roughly making you lose 1/6 of your 2 round routine.
Factoring the 20% flat miss-chance gives us: 5.96 (crossbow), 4.59 (musket)
And approximating the extra turn cost of clearing as 1/6 of your routine gives us: 5.96 (crossbow), 3.83 (musket)
Are you just adding in the misfire stuff for the sake of completeness or am I misunderstanding the way that misfire works? It seems like as long as you maintain your weapons, that misfire shouldn't factor into this attack/reload routine all that much unless you use a feat that adds misfire on a failure (but at that point you're not talking about the level 1 attack/reload routine anymore).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bumping firearm damage dice would swing that pretty hard though. Do we think they should stay built as they are but maybe snag another trait maybe?
The expected damage numbers without misfire chances are *so* close that it almost makes me think that these numbers were set without taking misfires into account. So the simplest solution would be to just drop misfires, which would make their expected damage almost identical. (Though granted, that's in this situation, which is admittedly titled in favor of muskets.)
But if we put that option aside, it's not obvious to me what traits would make up for it. As is, it looks like the musket needs to increase its expected damage by about 50% to break even with a crossbow, even in this musket-favoring situation. It's not easy for me to think of a trait good enough to make up for that!
I’m glad that crossbow support is built-in, too.Gunslingers have the accuracy and actions to warrant a crit focused play styleI have NO issue if there is a build you can make that is focused on crit fishing: My issue is when the entire class, or in this case the entire weapon category, hinges on it when I have a problem.
You are then limiting yourself to simple weapons. I'd rather see these type of options not silo-ing off entire classes or equipment options: it seems harsh to lock the class out of martial weapon use to avoid crit fishing. This, of course, could change if they add martial crossbow options into the new book.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are you just adding in the misfire stuff for the sake of completeness or am I misunderstanding the way that misfire works? It seems like as long as you maintain your weapons, that misfire shouldn't factor into this attack/reload routine all that much unless you use a feat that adds misfire on a failure (but at that point you're not talking about the level 1 attack/reload routine anymore).
Looking back, I think I'm the one misreading the misfire clause. I was reading the misfire clause as effectively saying "if you use a gun that hasn't been cleaned since it was last fired", which would mean you're in danger of misfiring most of the time.
Your suggested reading (which I now think is correct) is that the clause is effectively just "if you use a gun that hasn't been cleaned today", allowing us to effectively ignore misfires for the purposes of these calculations. That would explain the discrepancy!
Fatal changes the die size AND adds 1 extra die (after crit doubling).
Good catch! That puts us at 5.96 (crossbow) and 7.25 (musket) in the musket-favoring scenario I was considering. And it looks like the expected damage of the two will move to be about on a par when we increase the AC to the "high" range for a creature of one's level.
So big-picture-wise, it looks like firearms will be better than crossbows against nearby, low level, and relatively easy to hit targets. Whereas crossbows will be better than firearms against higher level and difficult to hit targets, and will be better at long ranged engagements.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If Guns are balanced against Crossbows then Gunslingers are going to be suboptimal without some pretty good math fixing feats. Crossbows are already much worse than Bows, having Guns be slightly higher damage Crossbows with much lower range is going to leave them significantly worse than bows.
Given that Gunslingers are meant to be dealing damage (that's their only real role) leaving their damage below Archers (a low damage option to begin with, supposedly made up for with the big range) is going to make them a weak option.
I don't think anyone's going to complain if Firearms end up being more powerful than Crossbows given their lack of viability (outside of maybe precision ranger). Guns should be balanced against the more powerful weapons, not just Crossbows because they have similar mechanics.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The dueling pistol is a very strong firearm for the gunslinger because of that fatal D10. There is no other one handed ranged weapon that will hit as hard on a crit, which plays very well with the gunslinger build.
Good catch! That puts us at 5.96 (crossbow) and 7.25 (musket) in the musket-favoring scenario I was considering. And it looks like the expected damage of the two will move to be about on a par when we increase the AC to the "high" range for a creature of one's level.
So big-picture-wise, it looks like firearms will be better than crossbows against nearby, low level, and relatively easy to hit targets. Whereas crossbows will be better than firearms against higher level and difficult to hit targets, and will be better at long ranged engagements.
Which i think is good.
The weapons end up having their own niches. To a point where a higher level Gunslinger might keep a secondary weapon of the other type for certain situations.
Being able to gun down mooks feels right.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The dueling pistol is a very strong firearm for the gunslinger because of that fatal D10. There is no other one handed ranged weapon that will hit as hard on a crit, which plays very well with the gunslinger build.
You can't just look at the best case scenario. No one-handed melee weapon hits as hard as a Pick on a crit, that doesn't mean that it would be worth it to use over the competition if it had Reload 1.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think that with guns overall:
Simple firearms should probably be better than crossbows for raw damage, with crossbows having the edge on range. In a vacuum, I'm okay with simple firearms being better than crossbows most of the time.
Martial firearms are currently quite a bit behind the shortbow and the longbow. While the composite longbow should probably remain the best for DPR, there's a lot of space to improve martial firearms such that they're barely behind.
Advanced firearms can afford to be slightly better than the composite bows currently are.
Firearms as a whole seem to be leaning towards rewarding higher accuracy, which is a niche that I very much support for them.
That said, I think making simple firearms a bit more generally reliable and less crit focused (thus making them a better choice for the classes other than Gunslinger and Fighter) while leaving the martial and advanced firearms with the high fatal values (which reward the accuracy of the Gunslinger and Fighter) would be an interesting direction to move in.
The idea is that almost anyone can pick up a simple firearm and make it work well enough, but martial firearms really demand a higher degree of skill to make shine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the idea of introducing a trait for adding DEX to damage for firearms (or baking it into the Gunslinger class) is starting to look like an appropriate fix.
Looking at the white room numbers, the amount that firearms lag behind bows by is not too far from the DEX values of a Gunslinger at those levels.
Given their somewhat lower defenses and HP, it's reasonable to make the argument that Gunslingers should be able to do more damage than a bow-wielding Fighter.