| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here me out, firearm ace is so good that all builds my players have done includes it. Probably because the other level 1 feats feels underwhelming but it does make the game in lower levels just be "strike, reload, strike. It is also less needed as there will be martial weapon choices in comparison to crossbows. If anything, this feat belongs to the ranger or be meshed in with crossbow ace into a reload ace.
What I am trying to say is that 'fireatm ace' is too good for its own good even if the class will not use it too often due to quick draw or similar.
One pistolero build went like this @ level 4
Firearm ace
Quick draw
Running reload
Turn 1, draw 2 pistols, shoot both, drop, quick draw a MUSKET, turn 2 reload shoot reload and cue in the rotation. Mostly because of firearm ace. Considered dropping the pistols higher levels just because of runes, retraining quick draw to risky reload.
If we must have a "flat damage boost" put in point blank shot or something else but I'd rather have this circumstance bonus be a part of the guns themselves or a class feature somehow. I want the level 1 choice be a choice.
On a ranger, firearm ace would be a choice compared to its other feats.
I have done 3 short scenarions and 1 slightly longer as a GM
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
From a design standpoint, I've always disliked "fixer" feats like this. If your class gives you martial weapons, being able to use a simple weapon to deadlier effect should just be a freebie. It's something I noticed with the ranger as well; a crossbow using ranger has to spend a feat to do about as much damage as a bow using one (technically, the crossbow does a little bit more on a successful strike, but the bow user gets deadly, so I count it as a wash), and the bow user still doesn't have to spend a turn to reload.
I agree, the entire class is built around guns, you might as well just give them a feat for +2 damage to all strikes.
I feel like this should be broken down into various playstyles if it remains at all. The ranger analog represents a ranger specializing with crossbows instead of bows or melee. If this feat were to remain maybe it's separated into pistols and rifles or something.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
technically, the crossbow does a little bit more on a successful strike, but the bow user gets deadly, so I count it as a wash
With composite bows being a thing, eventually the crossbow + feat doesn't even do more damage without a critical success :/
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As it is, I see some builds with Firearm Ace are going around with their guns unloaded, so they can 'reload' in the first turn to get the benefits of F.A. on the first turn of combat.
Yeah, I saw someone do this today. I agree that giving Firearm Ace on a shot immediately after drawing a weapon would help. It could also apply to the different abilities the Ways have to draw a gun to start an encounter.
I ran my first gunslinger test with keeping the weapon loaded, so no Firearm Ace on the first shot. It was a short, single encounter bounty, and it didn't ultimately matter, because I rolled a 1 on the first attack anyway. At least no misfire.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I also just don't love small damage bonuses like this that sometimes apply and sometimes don't. Especially when it comes to using macros to roll damage-- little situational bonuses like this are a pain to track. Rangers don't really have this problem because the bonus will apply on virtually every attack. Adding an "after you draw a weapon" bit would do a lot to fix this.
From a design standpoint, I've always disliked "fixer" feats like this. If your class gives you martial weapons, being able to use a simple weapon to deadlier effect should just be a freebie. It's something I noticed with the ranger as well; a crossbow using ranger has to spend a feat to do about as much damage as a bow using one (technically, the crossbow does a little bit more on a successful strike, but the bow user gets deadly, so I count it as a wash), and the bow user still doesn't have to spend a turn to reload.
The trick is you need Crossbow + 1 feat invested to be as good as bow + 1 feat invested, which is doable if the crossbow feat is stronger. The crossbow style doesn't do as much damage compared to a bow in optimal circumstances, but it does offer more flexibility: twice the range of a shortbow and no volley penalty, no strength investment, and Running Reload favors staying mobile and avoiding cover penalties more. Whether that is a fair trade? Your mileage may vary, but I dig it.
I really want 2 separate abilities. One that gives a bonus (I don't care if it is damage or something else) for reloading , and one for after you draw a weapon.
Although neither one really makes any sense for the sniper, who should have their weapon out and be lining up the shot that is going to pack the biggest punch. Eventually the Sniper gets that with shooter's aim, But it makes no sense that the sniper is best off setting up with an unloaded gun so they can load it and then fire in their first turn to have the biggest sniper shot possible.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The issue that comes up with breaking things into multiple abilities (if those abilities are going to be feats) is the same issue we have now with Risky Reload, Running Reload, Quick Draw, and Reloading Strike. If you need to improve something like reloading or damage in order for the class to be functional, and you split the things that address that issue into multiple feats, then all of those feats become necessary in order to fix the problem. So now you've got 1/3 of your class feats devoted to just making your class playable and no room to take anything else.
I mean, the class functions ok without firearm ace, you just have to make sure you are using a martial firearm. Once you have runes and cool shots, a +2 to damage is not really a must have ability, especially as it doesn’t scale. The bigger problem is how essential it feels at level one, especially with how expensive martial firearms are.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the bonus isn't that big of a deal, then just give them the bonus. Why create multiple feats for something that isn't valuable? Without firearm ace and with weapons that are already behind on die size and have reload 1, the Gunslinger will fall far behind other martial classes in damage. No, Firearm Ace doesn't fix that entirely, but it's a step towards making up the difference. The issue is that all of the steps are small, and you're taking them to reach the baseline while other classes are getting actual additional abilities that improve them beyond the baseline.
Yes, crossbow is in the same position as guns in a lot of ways. No, crossbows are not a good option unless you're taking a lot of the same feats, so that shouldn't be an argument that firearms are fine without those feats.
If the bonus isn't that big of a deal, then just give them the bonus. Why create multiple feats for something that isn't valuable? Without firearm ace and with weapons that are already behind on die size and have reload 1, the Gunslinger will fall far behind other martial classes in damage. No, Firearm Ace doesn't fix that entirely, but it's a step towards making up the difference. The issue is that all of the steps are small, and you're taking them to reach the baseline while other classes are getting actual additional abilities that improve them beyond the baseline.
Yes, crossbow is in the same position as guns in a lot of ways. No, crossbows are not a good option unless you're taking a lot of the same feats, so that shouldn't be an argument that firearms are fine without those feats.
Because fire arm ace is essential if you plan on using simple fire arms. It is an ability that scales usefully if you choose those cheaper weapons. That is why I’d like to see a version that does trigger off of drawing a weapon as it makes for an interesting and cool build for a dual wielding pistolero who draws new guns instead of reloading them.
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really feel like firearms should:
(1) do enough damage that you would want to use them even if you didn't have a feat that gave them bonus damage. Maybe you need to make them Martial for that - fine.
(2) don't actually have feats that boost damage. Math enhancer feats are lame. Especially fiddly ones that make life harder in a VTT.
(3) reloading should be the regular price for firearms just being kinda strong.
(4) the gimmick of gunslingers would be that they make working with Reload weapons more altogether interesting. That could be because they can do it hands-full, do it effectively for two guns at a time, or because they get side effects while doing it (Recall Knowledge, re-save against ongoing condition like Sickened, reduce Frightened, give a Demoralizing stare..).
Regarding (4); I play investigators with Known Weaknesses and combining RK and Devise Stratagem feels really GOOD. It's essentially as if you're doing RK and you also know what kind of attacks you could do with that knowledge. Maybe you just heard the monster is weak to fire, but your attack preview is so-so. But that alchemist fire you carry will still splash the enemy and trigger the weakness. Now that feels like devising strategy!
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Because fire arm ace is essential if you plan on using simple fire arms. It is an ability that scales usefully if you choose those cheaper weapons. That is why I’d like to see a version that does trigger off of drawing a weapon as it makes for an interesting and cool build for a dual wielding pistolero who draws new guns instead of reloading them.If the bonus isn't that big of a deal, then just give them the bonus. Why create multiple feats for something that isn't valuable? Without firearm ace and with weapons that are already behind on die size and have reload 1, the Gunslinger will fall far behind other martial classes in damage. No, Firearm Ace doesn't fix that entirely, but it's a step towards making up the difference. The issue is that all of the steps are small, and you're taking them to reach the baseline while other classes are getting actual additional abilities that improve them beyond the baseline.
Yes, crossbow is in the same position as guns in a lot of ways. No, crossbows are not a good option unless you're taking a lot of the same feats, so that shouldn't be an argument that firearms are fine without those feats.
A feat, any feat, being essential for a class to function at the main thing that the class does should not be a thing. A gunslinger who wants to quick draw flintlock pistols is going to need both Firearm Ace and your proposed quick draw feat (edit: and the actual Quick Draw feat). A gunslinger that shoots things should be able to keep up with what other classes do before adding in their additional feats. I get why we might not want guns on their own to keep up with other weapons, because of balance issues around another class picking up a gun and adding their class features on top. But a gunslinger picking up a gun shouldn’t automatically be starting from a worse position than other classes. And no, the accuracy bonus does not fix that issue.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A feat, any feat, being essential for a class to function at the main thing that the class does should not be a thing. A gunslinger who wants to quick draw flintlock pistols is going to need both Firearm Ace and your proposed quick draw feat (edit: and the actual Quick Draw feat). A gunslinger that shoots things should be able to keep up with what other classes do before adding in their additional feats. I get why we might not want guns on their own to keep up with other weapons, because of balance issues around another class picking up a gun and adding their class features on top. But a gunslinger picking up a gun shouldn’t automatically be starting from a worse position than other classes. And no, the accuracy bonus does not fix that issue.Because fire arm ace is essential if you plan on using simple fire arms. It is an ability that scales usefully if you choose those cheaper weapons. That is why I’d like to see a version that does trigger off of drawing a weapon as it makes for an interesting and cool build for a dual wielding pistolero who draws new guns instead of reloading them.If the bonus isn't that big of a deal, then just give them the bonus. Why create multiple feats for something that isn't valuable? Without firearm ace and with weapons that are already behind on die size and have reload 1, the Gunslinger will fall far behind other martial classes in damage. No, Firearm Ace doesn't fix that entirely, but it's a step towards making up the difference. The issue is that all of the steps are small, and you're taking them to reach the baseline while other classes are getting actual additional abilities that improve them beyond the baseline.
Yes, crossbow is in the same position as guns in a lot of ways. No, crossbows are not a good option unless you're taking a lot of the same feats, so that shouldn't be an argument that firearms are fine without those feats.
Unicore's point is that gunslinger's only really need Firearm Ace if they use simple firearms. Gunslingers who use martial weapons don't need it (or at least, need it as much) and a martial class using martial weapons is the default assumption. That is why martial weapons are better. When you start trying to make simple weapons competitive, that is where feats tend to enter it.
The only exception I can think of is Champions who get Diefic weapon.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
To further clarify, Unicore is both arguing that the bonus from Firearm Ace is so small as to not be significant, but large enough for a simple weapon build to be essential. But also arguing that the feat shouldn't give the bonus when both reloading or drawing a weapon, and instead there should be an entirely separate feat that gives the bonus when drawing a weapon (that presumably is not just adding that benefit onto the actual Quick Draw feat).
If it's a small and relatively insignificant bonus, then just roll it all into Firearm Ace and be done with it. You take Firearm Ace, you get a +2 (plus whatever benefit to simple weapons). Don't create additional underpowered feats so that you have to collect them all if you want to actually catch up to everyone else.
If it's essential for the class to function, then build it into the class and don't make "optional" feats that are actually required.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I really feel like firearms should:
(1) do enough damage that you would want to use them even if you didn't have a feat that gave them bonus damage. Maybe you need to make them Martial for that - fine.
(2) don't actually have feats that boost damage. Math enhancer feats are lame. Especially...
Agreed on all counts, but specifically in regard to the first two:
I think being simple weapons is really what put crossbows in such a strange position. Most simple melee weapons have some sort of martial upgrade with the same playstyle, so if you get martial proficiency, you'll use that instead.
Crossbows, on the other hand, have a unique playstyle that only exists in simple weapons (in the core book), so there had to be some way for martial classes to keep competitive damage if they wanted to pursue that playstyle.
Since we're getting simple and martial firearms in this book, I'd be fine if a gunslinger would never want to pick up a simple firearm. Ideally, there should have been martial crossbows in the CRB that would have been the go-to for crossbow Rangers, in the same way a Barbarian or Fighter will always want a martial polearm over a longspear, and Crossbow Ace wouldn't have needed to be printed in the first place.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Captain Morgan made my point very effectively.
However people are looking at fire arms for level one characters, where fire arm ace is a very good feat, and not at higher levels, where it becomes a minor damage boost most of the time, but only in specific situations. Situational damage bonuses are a good thing to tie to a class feat because they largely shape play style.
I would be perfectly fine with adding the extra damage die boost for simple weapons to quick draw for a cool pistolero specific level 2 feat.
I am fine with splitting up some of the abilities currently attached to feats along more thematic lines of what different kinds of gunslingers are going to do in battle.
I don't think firearm ace is a necessary damage equalizer for the class as a whole though that just needs to be baked in for every character. '
Wasting an action to load your Arquebus at level 13 before using shooter's aim to deliver your one shot one kill is a big mistake because you desperately want to hide for your next action as a sniper. a +2 to damage at that point is joke compared to setting yourself up to take 2 shooter's aim shots from hiding. Even if the enemy takes cover from your firing position, that level 8 feat is much, much better.
The problem I have with firearm ace, is that it is specifically not helpful to the draw and drop gunslinger build that specifically really needs the simple weapon damage boost to make the brace of flint lock pistols work.
Its just the wrong overall feat for the class, and not tying damage boosting feats exclusively to the reload mechanic would be a better choice.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Sniper doesn’t rely as much on Firearm Ace because Sniper has a way to get bonus damage (the thing we were told couldn’t happen, because of Legendary proficiency). And at higher levels, of course the +2 isn’t going to be as important. But it’s a level 1 feat, and it shouldn’t be expected to be hugely impactful at high levels. I’s very important for at least 1/3 of your levels, and the other level 1 feats just don’t give you anything close to the same benefit. Without Firearm Ace, a gunslinger is arguably more effective taking a 14 STR and using a shortbow than they are using a dueling pistol for levels 1-6 (roughly equal at 4). Other feats help and only work with guns, of course, but there’s something very underwhelming about using your class’s focus making you worse. It’s a lot like Magus all over again, just that the differences in the damage aren’t quite as big.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you run the numbers, Firearm Ace is almost doubling the damage for simple firearms. (1d6=3.5 vs 1d8+2=6.5) With no flat damage from anywhere else it's 100% the must-take feat.
No, it isn't.
If you run the numbers, most of the damage from firearms comes from crits.
And crits are Fatal, thus do not benefit from Firearm Ace dice increase. Yes, they have that +2, moving a pistol from 1d4/3d8 to 1d6+2/3d8+4, but in practical terms the increase in damage from Firearm Ace is much smaller than the increase from Crossbow Ace (1d8/2d8 to 1d10+2/2d10+2), despite the text being extremely similar. Remember that critical frequency for Gunslinger is much higher than most other martials, especially when you factor how reloading weapons tend to not use iteratives as much.
Further, the flat bonus is not dice-dependant so at higher levels it'll still be 3d4/7d8 vs 3d6+2/7d8+4, or 3d6/7d10 to 3d6+2/7d10+4 for martial guns (which is risible).
All it does is making you less swingy. It's not as good as it seems.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As mentioned, it’s been clarified that Firearm Ace lasts until the end of your next turn. It’s in the playtest clarification thread.
If you are critting, then more of your damage comes from fatal. But in situations where you’re less likely to crit (bosses), Firearm Ace makes a bigger difference.
Though, no, it isn’t as good of a feat for guns as crossbow Ace is for crossbows.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Imagine instead of Firearm Ace, guns were martial with somewhat higher base damage, and there were some reload-themed feats, such as:
Double Reload - 1 action
You Interact to reload a weapon in each hand.
(Suddenly 2-pistol fighting is interesting because it's a way of shooting a little bit faster.)
Guarded Reload - 1 action
Requires: you have a free hand, or are wielding a melee weapon in your other hand.
You interact to reload. This interact loses the Manipulate trait.
(You can reload without provoking and with your other hand full of weapon.)
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
The problem I have with firearm ace, is that it is specifically not helpful to the draw and drop gunslinger build that specifically really needs the simple weapon damage boost to make the brace of flint lock pistols work.
The problem is, NOTHING really works with a "draw and drop gunslinger build" unless you're using Automatic Bonus Progression. The playtest and the core rules just do not support that style of play: even improvised weapons needed an archetype [Weapon Improviser] to keep up with the expected hit and damage numbers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The problem I have with firearm ace, is that it is specifically not helpful to the draw and drop gunslinger build that specifically really needs the simple weapon damage boost to make the brace of flint lock pistols work.The problem is, NOTHING really works with a "draw and drop gunslinger build" unless you're using Automatic Bonus Progression. The playtest and the core rules just do not support that style of play: even improvised weapons needed an archetype [Weapon Improviser] to keep up with the expected hit and damage numbers.
Y'know, I often find myself disagreeing with you, but right now? Here, hold this end of the banner and let's march together up to paizo's HQ.
|
|
Without Firearm Ace, a gunslinger is arguably more effective taking a 14 STR and using a shortbow than they are using a dueling pistol for levels 1-6 (roughly equal at 4).
I realized I was running that comparison against moderate AC. Against high AC, things look a little better for the gun. A shortbow is still a better option for levels 1-3. When striking kicks in, dueling pistol is slightly higher, then shortbow gets a slight advantage again at 5, and they are about equal at 6th. This is firing 3 times over 2 rounds without Firearm Ace vs firing 6 times over 2 rounds with a shortbow and 14 STR (taking effectively a -2 due to trained vs expert).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Without Firearm Ace, a gunslinger is arguably more effective taking a 14 STR and using a shortbow than they are using a dueling pistol for levels 1-6 (roughly equal at 4).I realized I was running that comparison against moderate AC. Against high AC, things look a little better for the gun. A shortbow is still a better option for levels 1-3. When striking kicks in, dueling pistol is slightly higher, then shortbow gets a slight advantage again at 5, and they are about equal at 6th. This is firing 3 times over 2 rounds without Firearm Ace vs firing 6 times over 2 rounds with a shortbow and 14 STR (taking effectively a -2 due to trained vs expert).
Don't forget Gunslingers will be able to take an Archer Dedication for that sweet sweet Legendary proficiency with bows. Looking forward to the optimal Gunslinger build being shoot twice with a bow and then draw your pistol to use with your reactions.
It will be interesting to see if a musket with a bayonet is a two handed weapon for mauler dedication.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh god, I hadn't even considered this. More reasonably, Martial Artist dedication gives you legendary unarmed and good stances... but sword and pistol requires a melee weapon strike :(.Don't forget Gunslingers will be able to take an Archer Dedication for that sweet sweet Legendary proficiency with bows. Looking forward to the optimal Gunslinger build being shoot twice with a bow and then draw your pistol to use with your reactions.Without Firearm Ace, a gunslinger is arguably more effective taking a 14 STR and using a shortbow than they are using a dueling pistol for levels 1-6 (roughly equal at 4).I realized I was running that comparison against moderate AC. Against high AC, things look a little better for the gun. A shortbow is still a better option for levels 1-3. When striking kicks in, dueling pistol is slightly higher, then shortbow gets a slight advantage again at 5, and they are about equal at 6th. This is firing 3 times over 2 rounds without Firearm Ace vs firing 6 times over 2 rounds with a shortbow and 14 STR (taking effectively a -2 due to trained vs expert).
Sword and Pistol works with Unarmed attacks. It's in the clarification post.
2) Sword and Pistol should say "melee weapon or unarmed attack" in the third sentence.
One of the jokes from a local playtest was how the gunslinger kept running up to people to punch them to reload, because that's the image you think of when you think of a gunslinger. Full disclosure, I wasn't in that game, so heard it second hand, and I'm not sure exactly how the mechanic played out. Still funny.
|
Martial Artist dedication gives you legendary unarmed and good stances... but sword and pistol requires a melee weapon strike :(.
You might want to check the Welcome to the Gunslinger Class Playtest thread.
Oh god, I hadn't even considered this. More reasonably, Martial Artist dedication gives you legendary unarmed and good stances... but sword and pistol requires a melee weapon strike :(.
Unarmed attacks do work with Sword and Pistol (although not with Rebounding Assault)
If you want something which does work, there are Pirate and Mauler who do have the same effect but for a few melee weapons. Pirate gives you Legendary in Whips, Rapiers, Scimitars and Hatchets, and Mauler gives you Legendary in Katanas, Staves and Bastard Swords (and two-handed melee weapons, but you can't really use them well).
Oh god, I hadn't even considered this. More reasonably, Martial Artist dedication gives you legendary unarmed and good stances... but sword and pistol requires a melee weapon strike :(.Unarmed attacks do work with Sword and Pistol (although not with Rebounding Assault)
God that would be hilarious. "I shoot my fist to punch him harder."
I feel like I like firearm ace for simple weapons, because it makes something that's generally not very good (simple weapons vs martial) and makes it an option. I can do something new I couldn't before (make a viable gunslinger with simple weapons).
I don't like it for martial weapons because those are the weapons that are meant to already be standard effective options, and just makes them stronger (which seems like a weapon tax). I still do exactly the same thing I was already going to do, but better.
Dueling Pistol. This one actually seems maybe in the right spot, being a 1h version of the musket. Range suffers, gains concealable. But no longer being simple means no Firearm Ace die increase, so... not sure it's actually an upgrade.
Firearm Ace flintlock is 1d6+2 fatal d8.
Firearm Ace duelist is 1d6+2 fatal d10.Even skipping range and traits, it’s still an upgrade. Firearm Ace does not fill the gap when Fatal is involved.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It mostly just seems to come down to Firearm Ace being a bandage for guns not doing enough damage to make up for the Reload. We aren't just testing a class, we're testing an entire family of weapons as well and knowing which is the one that needs work when it doesn't jive is tough.
|
|
I feel like I like firearm ace for simple weapons, because it makes something that's generally not very good (simple weapons vs martial) and makes it an option. I can do something new I couldn't before (make a viable gunslinger with simple weapons).
I don't like it for martial weapons because those are the weapons that are meant to already be standard effective options, and just makes them stronger (which seems like a weapon tax). I still do exactly the same thing I was already going to do, but better.
As written it doesn't apply to martial firearms - it just pulls simple firearms into the competitive range of martial ones (awkwardly).
The problem with that is that it only works that way if you have the feat - if you are a gunslinger. Effectively, simple firearms available for other classes, but not really worth taking. Like crossbows for non-rangers.
I think it'd be better for firearms to be Martial, have reasonable damage without feats, and there not be damage-boosting feats to push them further.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like I like firearm ace for simple weapons, because it makes something that's generally not very good (simple weapons vs martial) and makes it an option. I can do something new I couldn't before (make a viable gunslinger with simple weapons).
I don't like it for martial weapons because those are the weapons that are meant to already be standard effective options, and just makes them stronger (which seems like a weapon tax). I still do exactly the same thing I was already going to do, but better.
As written it doesn't apply to martial firearms - it just pulls simple firearms into the competitive range of martial ones (awkwardly).
The problem with that is that it only works that way if you have the feat - if you are a gunslinger. Effectively, simple firearms available for other classes, but not really worth taking. Like crossbows for non-rangers.
I think it'd be better for firearms to be Martial, have reasonable damage without feats, and there not be damage-boosting feats to push them further.
I disagree. Plenty of classes make some use of crossbows, even if they aren't martials. Leaving some as simple, even if they are clearly less valuable, is one of my favorite changes to firearms.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. Plenty of classes make some use of crossbows, even if they aren't martials. Leaving some as simple, even if they are clearly less valuable, is one of my favorite changes to firearms.
But what does firearms bring to the table for those characters that now "make some use of crossbows"? Does the extra cost get them anything? Not that I can see. It just kind of clogs up the weapon charts for little gain much like the old days d&d when you had 30 polearms who's main difference was how their name was spelled. [is that a Bec De Corbin, Bill-Guisarme, Fauchard, Fauchard-Fork, Glaive, Glaive-Guisarme, Guisarme or Guisarme-Voulge?]
If you're unlikely to crit, a sling is better than a flintlock pistol [and MUCH cheaper including ammo] and the 2 handed simple gun is JUST barely better than the 1 handed hand crossbow [just +10' range] let alone the crossbow... Really as it stands, only the hand cannon has a real reason to stay on the simple list as it adds something new [modular], though even that needs reworked needing 2 actions to reload different ammo is just wrong.
I disagree. Plenty of classes make some use of crossbows, even if they aren't martials. Leaving some as simple, even if they are clearly less valuable, is one of my favorite changes to firearms.But what does firearms bring to the table for those characters that now "make some use of crossbows"? Does the extra cost get them anything? Not that I can see. It just kind of clogs up the weapon charts for little gain much like the old days d&d when you had 30 polearms who's main difference was how their name was spelled. [is that a Bec De Corbin, Bill-Guisarme, Fauchard, Fauchard-Fork, Glaive, Glaive-Guisarme, Guisarme or Guisarme-Voulge?]
If you're unlikely to crit, a sling is better than a flintlock pistol [and MUCH cheaper including ammo] and the 2 handed simple gun is JUST barely better than the 1 handed hand crossbow [just +10' range] let alone the crossbow... Really as it stands, only the hand cannon has a real reason to stay on the simple list as it adds something new [modular], though even that needs reworked needing 2 actions to reload different ammo is just wrong.
Note: Ascalaphus's point was that NO class could make any worthwhile use of a crossbow except rangers. That was what I was objecting to.
Besides, white room consideration and number crunching does not really apply to this. If you have to have it explained to you why using a crossbow is a different feel from using a gun, we're not having the same conversation in the first place, and there's really no point in arguing about it simply to clog the playtest forum.
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Note: Ascalaphus's point was that NO class could make any worthwhile use of a crossbow except rangers. That was what I was objecting to.
Except for a subclass of ranger, it's mostly true. The fact that simple guns don't match up to them even in those situations is an issue IMO. If someone doesn't think a crossbow is worth it, they REALLY aren't going to pick a simple gun.
Besides, white room consideration and number crunching does not really apply to this.
What white room/number-crunching? A simple look tells you guns don't even match up to other simple ranged weapons and you don't need to calculate anything to know you're chances to crit go down the lower your weapon prof is. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to tell the off user isn't going to get much use out of a low base/high crit damage weapon.
If you have to have it explained to you why using a crossbow is a different feel from using a gun, we're not having the same conversation in the first place, and there's really no point in arguing about it simply to clog the playtest forum.
But they don't "feel" very different IMO: I'd "feel" better if simple guns where a reskin of current crossbows so they'd be at least that good. If ALL we're looking for is "feel", we #1 don't need different stats for that and #2 even if we did, the ones we got don't do that for me. The bee stings they turn into blown off heads with a crit isn't the "feel" I'm looking for with guns. Much like a shotgun effect doesn't inflict boo-boos on everyone else in the blast but really hurts just one person. :P
So I'll agree they crossbows SHOULD feel different from guns, and in a way they do but not in a good way IMO.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is disappointing to me that for all classes bar Fighter/Gunslinger, guns are just a flat inferior option with no reason to use bar 'I want a gun for the flavour despite it meaning I'm objectively shooting myself in the foot'.
Firearm Ace being a band-aid for simple firearms means that the people who will be using simple firearms wont have access to it, and that if you do gain access to the feat that you can probably just use a martial firearm instead.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A wizard won't be able to use a flint lock unless something about proficiencies change, but a sorcerer with true strike as a spell might be pretty well served carrying a flint lock pistol instead of a one handed crossbow to use as a back up weapon, especially at lower levels.
Having a back up way of inflicting 2 damage types, and really hitting hard when you crit is pretty useful. With true strike, even when your accuracy is bad, and you need a 20 to crit, you maintain a near 10% chance of criting.
I am also thinking that crit fishing ranged Magi are going to really, really like using fire arms. Probably more so martial ones than simple ones, but if there is a brace of pistols rune sharing option, then I think the fire arm looks better for the magus than even a bow.
Staff of divination and a brace of pistols will be a strong option.
This is why I think Firearm ace or something like it is good as a level 1 feat option for the gunslinger, instead of a built in feature of the class. It is situational when it will be the best thing ever, ESPECIALLY if it is limited to just triggering when you reload. There will be builds for which it is essential, but there will be lots of builds where it won't be better than other feats it could compete with. Sword and pistol could be an example of this, but it depends upon how a number of things shake out for the drifter. A sword and brace of pistols gunslinger is going to have no use for firearm ace.