| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When Pathfinder 2nd Edition released, one of the things it prided itself on was the much simplified mechanics that cut out needlessly excessive dice rolls.
Many of the gunslinger abilities are mechanically more complicated than they need to be. I thought we might be able to brainstorm some ideas for simplifying them with the goal of making gameplay faster, smoother, and more intuitive.
Take Cover Fire, for example. There's way more steps than necessary. First, expend an action. Then pick a target within range. Wait for the GM to decide if the target is going to duck or not. Wait for the GM to calculate AC modifiers if necessary. Resolve your attack. Hope the GM remembers to apply the attack penalty on the bad guy's turn.
Or we could just make it a reaction ability that spends a shot and functions like Nimble Dodge for an ally (rather than for yourself).
Requirements You’re wielding a loaded firearm or crossbow
Trigger A creature within range of your loaded firearm or crossbow targets an ally with an attack and you can see the attacker.
You lay down covering fire, expending a shot of ammunition. Your ally gains a +2 circumstance bonus to AC against the triggering attack.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I appreciate what Cover Fire is trying to do in its current form, but I'd never take it as a feat over the other level 1 options as is for the reasons you mentioned. Your suggestion is quite elegant and seems to achieve much the same goal. It does make the level 10 feat Deflecting Shot irrelevant, but then that's pretty weak for a level 10 feat anyway.
Could just be a shot with a -2 penalty that causes frightened or forces target prone. Or just use intimidate to trip one enemy within range, you know, suppressing the enemy. Could cause a hit on a critical success but that is up to the designers. They should try to use existing conditions
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the same vein, I'm inclined to think it might be worth simplifying the Sniper trait:
Sniper: When you hit a flat-footed creature, this weapon deals 1 precision damage in addition to its normal damage. The precision damage increases to 2 if the weapon is a +3 weapon.
By the time you have +3 weapons, you're not going to care about the extra point of damage.
It would be simpler to just have it add a flat +1 or +2 precision damage against flat-footed opponents, full stop.
Or, if you really want it to scale, have it scale in a way that's easier to remember; something like +1 precision damage per + of the weapon you're wielding (minimum +1).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Cover Fire
Requirements You’re wielding a loaded firearm or crossbow, and a foe you can see within the weapon’s maximum range has cover
You lay down suppressive fire to protect your allies and pin down your opponents. You make a firearm or crossbow Strike targeting the foe, who must decide whether to duck behind cover (no action required) or not before you roll your attack roll. If the target ducks, it Takes Cover against your attack, gaining a +4 circumstance bonus to AC from greater cover, but also takes a –2 circumstance penalty to ranged attacks until the end of its next turn. This greater cover applies only against your Strike, not to future attacks. If the target chooses not to duck, the Strike functions normally."
So, you spend a feat that is only *potentially* useful if:
1. You have a firearm or crossbow (no slings, thrown weapons, or bows)
2. Your enemy is near a source of cover
3. Your enemy has a ranged weapon or attack
4. Your enemy decides to make a ranged attack next turn
5. Your enemy decides to take cover against your Cover Fire ability
As a GM, there is a LOT of subconscious pressure to just ignore it and resolve as a regular attack. If my bad guy is already near cover, chances are they're using it, and won't feel like making a trade of +2 against one attack for -2 to all their next turn's attacks.