|
It's unclear what the Gunner's Saddle does. It includes the following line:
"Just like a normal tripod, you Interact to deploy the tripod to stabilize the firearm, and then again to retract the tripod to move it."
Does that mean:
A) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the tripod from the square in which it was deployed unless you take an interact action to retract it. Meaning that the Mount could not move to another square unless you take the Interact action to retract the tripod.
B) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the tripod from the square in which it was deployed unless you take an Interact action to retract it, but the Mount can move to another square, leaving the tripod (and potentiay the gun) where it was deployed.
C) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the gun separate from the tripod unless you take an Interact action, but the mount can move to another square, bringing the deployed tripod along with it, and you don't need to spend an Interact action to either retract the tripod or deploy it in the new square.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's unclear what the Gunner's Saddle does. It includes the following line:
"Just like a normal tripod, you Interact to deploy the tripod to stabilize the firearm, and then again to retract the tripod to move it."
Does that mean:
A) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the tripod from the square in which it was deployed unless you take an interact action to retract it. Meaning that the Mount could not move to another square unless you take the Interact action to retract the tripod.
B) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the tripod from the square in which it was deployed unless you take an Interact action to retract it, but the Mount can move to another square, leaving the tripod (and potentiay the gun) where it was deployed.
C) Once it is deployed, you cannot move the gun separate from the tripod unless you take an Interact action, but the mount can move to another square, bringing the deployed tripod along with it, and you don't need to spend an Interact action to either retract the tripod or deploy it in the new square.
After reading the fluff section of it "The saddle uses complex hydraulics to protect the steed from the firearm's recoil." C is my assumption, and the way I would run it. The tripod in IN the saddle ("this clockwork saddle comes with a retractable weapon mount that can be used as a tripod to stabilize a weapon with the kickback trait.") and thus it being left behind in a square seems nebulous. It could use better wording, but RAI A and B sound like bad design, while C is something you WOULD actually pay money for.
|
|
Why call out actions to deploy and retract the tripod, then? Whether or not I think an item is worth the cost doesn’t affect how it works. Nothing in the flavor text says that you can move while the tripod is deployed, and something in the rules text says that you have to spend an interact action to be able to move it. If you are meant to be able to move with it deployed, then that needs clarified. Otherwise, I’m going to have no confidence that it would be allowed to work that way at a table.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why call out actions to deploy and retract the tripod, then? Whether or not I think an item is worth the cost doesn’t affect how it works. Nothing in the flavor text says that you can move while the tripod is deployed, and something in the rules text says that you have to spend an interact action to be able to move it. If you are meant to be able to move with it deployed, then that needs clarified. Otherwise, I’m going to have no confidence that it would be allowed to work that way at a table.
Then say screw the editor and confidently say that A and B both sound bad and not fun, and thusly houserule that C is the way it SHOULD work and thusly it shall... until such time Paizo clarifies in what form this is intended to function.
Unfortunate it has to be done, but editorial work isn't easy and they don't catch every weird happenstance a player is interested in or someone alters a phrase for consistency's sake and then bork! Doesn't make sense anymore.I will say, how/why would a saddle extend a tripod into the ground while you're actively riding the animal the saddle is attached to? That's my main reason for thinking C is the only non-nebulous answer, since we don't have a picture of it in the book we don't see what the gun mount on it looks like
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Again, that’s not a discussion about the rule. Ignoring the rules isn’t an option in every situation or the point of asking the question in the rules forum. In particular for PFS where you see a large number of different GMs, having clear rules avoids a lot of issues. It takes an action, because it says that it takes an action. What exactly that looks like is unclear, but ultimately also not that important. C might make sense as the most useful version of the item, but it’s also assuming a lot that isn’t in the text of the rules. A seems the most direct interpretation, but creates some weirdness around the mount not being able to move at all. Normally with a tripod you could just walk away from it and leave it in the square if you don’t want to take the interact action.
There are still benefits to the item, even if it doesn’t function like C. They just aren’t huge. Primarily, it removes the Hands 2 requirement and the bulk applies to your Mount instead of you.
If the intent of the item is to remove the need for the actions to set up or pick up the tripod, then why add a line saying that you need to take the actions to deploy or retract the tripod? If that’s not the intent, the item could still use clarification/errata to make that clear.
This isn’t as widely affecting as something like whether or not finesse weapons let you use dex on Athletics checks was, but it’s a similar situation in that the justification for it working is based on how people think the item should work and not what is actually in the rules or stated by the designers.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, that’s not a discussion about the rule. Ignoring the rules isn’t an option in every situation or the point of asking the question in the rules forum. In particular for PFS where you see a large number of different GMs, having clear rules avoids a lot of issues. It takes an action, because it says that it takes an action. What exactly that looks like is unclear, but ultimately also not that important. C might make sense as the most useful version of the item, but it’s also assuming a lot that isn’t in the text of the rules. A seems the most direct interpretation, but creates some weirdness around the mount not being able to move at all. Normally with a tripod you could just walk away from it and leave it in the square if you don’t want to take the interact action.
There are still benefits to the item, even if it doesn’t function like C. They just aren’t huge. Primarily, it removes the Hands 2 requirement and the bulk applies to your Mount instead of you.
If the intent of the item is to remove the need for the actions to set up or pick up the tripod, then why add a line saying that you need to take the actions to deploy or retract the tripod? If that’s not the intent, the item could still use clarification/errata to make that clear.
This isn’t as widely affecting as something like whether or not finesse weapons let you use dex on Athletics checks was, but it’s a similar situation in that the justification for it working is based on how people think the item should work and not what is actually in the rules or stated by the designers.
I would say it is C because the item is attached to the mount and the item moves just as the mount moves. Even if it's attached to yourself, the transitive property will still have it move with you, it's not on the ground or anything.
The actions being listed is because you might need to activate it mid-combat, but also likely because complex hydraulics in use all the time isn't healthy for the item's operation, meaning it would be smart practice to keep it unemployed until needed.
Of course, it's largely conjecture, but A and B interpretations don't factor the initial argument, which just makes no sense, meaning C is the only sensible interpretation left.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have to agree with Darksol. C makes the most internal sense consistently across the whole reading. It's also, before this thread, literally the only way I've ever seen people read, interpret and use the item.
|
|
I understand that’s how people want the item to work, and maybe even how it should work. I still have a hard time reconciling that the item contains a line stating that it works just like a normal tripod and requires an interact action to move it, and the item does not contain a line stating that it allows you to stabilize the gun while moving. I’m also unsure why the line about preventing the Mount from taking damage needs to be there, since kickback never causes damage to the wielder or whatever the tripod is placed on. Under this interpretation it easily becomes one of the best gun related items by cost (provided you have a Mount), as it more or less lets you use a gun with kickback without any of the drawbacks. Small gunslingers with arquebuses/harmony guns and cavalier dedication ftw, I guess.
If everyone is ruling it like C, then maybe there won’t be an issue at a table. I wouldn’t rule it like C given the current text of the item, but this thread has probably convinced me not to bother to argue it and just let the players do whatever. I still would not count on it working at every table.
What I’d ask for, then, and the reason I linked to this thread from the errata thread is some eventual clarification that this is intended. Because I don’t think we can assume that based on what is in the item. After so many times where the player base has said some version of “but of course it works this way,” only to find out that it doesn’t work that way, I’m very hesitant to make a leap that appears to be counter to the rules text.
|
A or B. It’s probably intended to just be a Tripod that is worn on your mount instead of carried by yourself. Likely the whole “deployed in your square” thing on the tripod might have been a source of internal confusion on if it would work with mounts, as, iirc you don’t have a square when mounted only your mount does.
Think of it this way - is it intended that a class feat (beastmaster dedication) or ancestry feat (corgi familiar) lets you ignore all the drawbacks of kickback? Probably not. The tripod does but comes with its own penalty, the Gunner’s saddle would remove that penalty if C was the official ruling.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In the Guns and Gears errata thread :
Yes. The firearm and tripod are affixed to the mount via the saddle, so while the gun and tripod can't move from the mount while deployed, the mount can move wherever it wants and the saddle tripod and gun maintain their position relative to the mount.
Does the Gunner's Saddle allow your mount to move without retracting the saddle first?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The tripod is fixed to the saddle, not fixed to the ground.
