Towards a better gunslinger (also some stuff about reload weapons on other classes)


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

201 to 250 of 361 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Unicore wrote:
Feats available through archetypes are deliberately at least x2 the level that they are to the class itself. So when estimating that the reload feats are level 10 feats because that is when other classes can get them isn’t really looking at the inherent balance of the ability or feat to the initial class. Those are choices about niche protection, not balance.

The level x2 things is only for class feats via multiclass archetypes. Everything else just puts them into the next "tier", so usually 2 levels higher. Such as the archer archetype making Running Reload available at level 6. That is, if it is available at all, ofc. Actual class features are all over the place.

It would also match up with with when you can get significant features of some other classes. For example, the fighter gets basically a more limited version of the flurry edge at level 10 (Agile Grace) and you can get the monk's flurry of blows at 10 as well. That said, the champion just gives out its champions reaction at level 6 like it is no big deal.

And given how extremely expensive Running Reload already is, I wouldn't be surprised that this choice is significantly impacted by balance concerns. Of course, you are absolutely right that niche protection is a major factor as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Karmagator wrote:

Well, that went much faster than anticipated. Here is the link for the full Gunslinger Reloaded document.

Have fun :)

Did a quick read through and here are some opinions/questions:

The Spellslinger feat appears to be missing Spellslinger way requirement.

Would the bomb formulas from Munitions crafter be memorized like bullet formula or would you need a book?

I feel like the Durable Silencer should be increased to a 1st level item and maybe should gain the broken condition on a misfire.

Lastly part of me feels like Instant Reload should require the spell to be a non-cantrip, though that would definitely make the cost of Imbued Shot difficult to manage.


CookieLord wrote:
Karmagator wrote:

Well, that went much faster than anticipated. Here is the link for the full Gunslinger Reloaded document.

Have fun :)

Did a quick read through and here are some opinions/questions:

Thanks ^^

CookieLord wrote:


The Spellslinger feat appears to be missing Spellslinger way requirement.

That is not an error. The Spellslinger feat line has no relation to the Way of the Spellshot. It is an almost direct copy of the Eldritch Archer and Beastgunner archetypes, which (theoretically) everyone can take. This was mostly so that it is actually usable for guns and slings.

CookieLord wrote:


Would the bomb formulas from Munitions crafter be memorized like bullet formula or would you need a book?

Same as the ammunition formulas. Yeah, that part was really unclear, sorry.

CookieLord wrote:


I feel like the Durable Silencer should be increased to a 1st level item and maybe should gain the broken condition on a misfire.

Level 0 and 1 feel kinda interchangeable here, but I wouldn't mind. As far as becoming broken on misfire is concerned, I'd rather not. Yes, it would make sense, but this is already basically a gold tax to eliminate another weakness of firearms that isn't factored into the balance. I don't want to make it more difficult than it has to be.

CookieLord wrote:


Lastly part of me feels like Instant Reload should require the spell to be a non-cantrip, though that would definitely make the cost of Imbued Shot difficult to manage.

This is honestly the feat I feel like I should definitely remove entirely. It basically makes you a starlit span magus with a more limited and weaker spell selection, but legendary in attack rolls. And isn't that a terrifying image. Being able to use it every other turn, if you want to, is already extremely strong.


OK, that's enough homebrewing for now. This is the general discussion after all.

Balance talk aside, I think the biggest priority really should be adding a regular "person with gun" Way. That is the easiest addition (relatively) that would make a lot of people really happy.


Or I guess not, the whole topic is rather exhausted after all. So I might as well :)

I've nerfed my homebrew solution a bit. Getting your advanced alchemy level to be equal to your level was rather unnecessary overkill. I've also trimmed out a lot of the "new" additions, since some of it was hard to balance (the Way) and other stuff (Spellslinger) was just a copy anyway. But hey, the sniper can now actually use Fake Out!

A major tip for anyone GMing for a gunslinger - if they are interested in actually shooting spells, just reflavour the Eldritch Archer and change it to work for guns as well. You can already use it with crossbows and the Beastgunner is..... a bit special. It is a really fun combination, it is both very effective and breaks up the monotony!

Second tip - the taw launcher is a much more satisfying weapon to use than almost everything else you have access to. If your player is struggling and has an appropriate Way, Unconventional Weaponry is your friend. Or if you have no other way (heh), check with your group if it is ok to just give the proficiency to them. Just don't pay the 6th level feat for it, that's robbery and comes at a level you really need for other things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was eying up the taw launcher. It seems better than my sukgung but not enough to justify the feat on a kobold. And I may snag the modular trait from my inventor free archetype anyway.


Out of curiosity, I threw boomerang fighter into the calculator too. It's about equivalent to the shortbow while being slightly behind bows and guns with high de/buffs or level advantage, while equal to the bow and better than guns vs bosses. Can be used in a pinch for switch-hitting too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
gesalt wrote:
Out of curiosity, I threw boomerang fighter into the calculator too. It's about equivalent to the shortbow while being slightly behind bows and guns with high de/buffs or level advantage, while equal to the bow and better than guns vs bosses. Can be used in a pinch for switch-hitting too.

I hate the boomerang having free returning. Hunting boomerangs do not return back to you. The whole point is that they are a flying club.

It being better than a gun makes the whole thing worse, because if there is something that guns and crossbows should be absolutely better than it's boomerangs and thrown daggers.


Captain Morgan wrote:
I was eying up the taw launcher. It seems better than my sukgung but not enough to justify the feat on a kobold. And I may snag the modular trait from my inventor free archetype anyway.

Yeah, if you don't have Unconventional Weaponry via your ancestry or are a conrasu, then the cost is a little steep. Snagging modular from the inventor is definitely a decent alternative. What will you pick, modular head or segmented frame?


Karmagator wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
I was eying up the taw launcher. It seems better than my sukgung but not enough to justify the feat on a kobold. And I may snag the modular trait from my inventor free archetype anyway.
Yeah, if you don't have Unconventional Weaponry via your ancestry or are a conrasu, then the cost is a little steep. Snagging modular from the inventor is definitely a decent alternative. What will you pick, modular head or segmented frame?

Probably modular head for the Sukgung. I want to do a Segmented Frame on an orc barricade buster at some point though.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
Captain Morgan wrote:
I was eying up the taw launcher. It seems better than my sukgung but not enough to justify the feat on a kobold. And I may snag the modular trait from my inventor free archetype anyway.
Yeah, if you don't have Unconventional Weaponry via your ancestry or are a conrasu, then the cost is a little steep. Snagging modular from the inventor is definitely a decent alternative. What will you pick, modular head or segmented frame?
Probably modular head for the Sukgung. I want to do a Segmented Frame on an orc barricade buster at some point though.

The picture of collapsing what is (sort of) a portable 3 Bulk gatling gun down to light Bulk in 2 seconds (one action) is hilarious XD. I mean you can have a collapsible stock, but what do you about that massive chunk of metal up front?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Barricade buster is advanced so no segmented frame anyways.


Squiggit wrote:
Barricade buster is advanced so no segmented frame anyways.

Oh yeah, I forgot about that weirdness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Temperans wrote:
gesalt wrote:
Out of curiosity, I threw boomerang fighter into the calculator too. It's about equivalent to the shortbow while being slightly behind bows and guns with high de/buffs or level advantage, while equal to the bow and better than guns vs bosses. Can be used in a pinch for switch-hitting too.
I hate the boomerang having free returning. Hunting boomerangs do not return back to you. The whole point is that they are a flying club.

They can sometimes, hence the fantasy. In actual use no.

Temperans wrote:
It being better than a gun makes the whole thing worse, because if there is something that guns and crossbows should be absolutely better than it's boomerangs and thrown daggers.

I don't think it is better than a gun or crossbow in this system.

That is the practical outcome of this being a game. All the options have to have their place or it is not an interesting game. We don't want one tactic to dominate - like often happened at various times and places in real world history. We want to have choices.


Gortle wrote:
Temperans wrote:
gesalt wrote:
Out of curiosity, I threw boomerang fighter into the calculator too. It's about equivalent to the shortbow while being slightly behind bows and guns with high de/buffs or level advantage, while equal to the bow and better than guns vs bosses. Can be used in a pinch for switch-hitting too.
I hate the boomerang having free returning. Hunting boomerangs do not return back to you. The whole point is that they are a flying club.

They can sometimes, hence the fantasy. In actual use no.

Temperans wrote:
It being better than a gun makes the whole thing worse, because if there is something that guns and crossbows should be absolutely better than it's boomerangs and thrown daggers.

I don't think it is better than a gun or crossbow in this system.

That is the practical outcome of this being a game. All the options have to have their place or it is not an interesting game. We don't want one tactic to dominate - like often happened at various times and places in real world history. We want to have choices.

Yeah, I really don't see how this is better than the mainline crossbows and firearms either. D6 without any additional damage traits isn't that good as your main weapon. Especially as you only get it back when you [i]miss[/], not when you actually hit. So you're not actually saving on the returning rune or thrower's bandolier.

I also have to agree with Gortle, weapon categories generally shouldn't be plainly worse than others. Not everything can be top tier in general or even a specific build, but I think you get the idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

D6 with full str to damage (14 base assumed just like arquebus) and PBS is all it takes as it turns out. Just wear a gauntlet bow to qualify for PBS if your gm is being pedantic about thrown weapons only being ranged with an increment once thrown.

Also, thrower's bandolier and quick draw (we're already considering the gunslinger paying feat taxes so it doesn't hurt). Or, a very comical reading of

Quote:
The boomerang is a carved piece of wood designed to curve as it flies through the air, returning to the wielder after a successful throw.

that interprets successful throw as successful strike and the Recovery trait to also let it return on an unsuccessful throw/strike.


gesalt wrote:

D6 with full str to damage (14 base assumed just like arquebus) and PBS is all it takes as it turns out. Just wear a gauntlet bow to qualify for PBS if your gm is being pedantic about thrown weapons only being ranged with an increment once thrown.

Also, thrower's bandolier and quick draw (we're already considering the gunslinger paying feat taxes so it doesn't hurt). Or, a very comical reading of

Quote:
The boomerang is a carved piece of wood designed to curve as it flies through the air, returning to the wielder after a successful throw.
that interprets successful throw as successful strike and the Recovery trait to also let it return on an unsuccessful throw/strike.

Oh yeah, I haven't used thrown weapons in so long that I've forgotten that they get full str on damage rolls XD. Yeah, that makes the boomerang pretty good even without PBS. PBS seems like a heavy investment, since as a fighter I really have better prospects and going archer is weird as well.

As far as PBS is concerned, that isn't even the reason you need to wield something like the gauntlet bow. The boomerang is explicitly a ranged weapon, that is fine. The problem is that the second it leaves your hand, you violate the requirements of PBS, ending the stance.


Karmagator wrote:

Oh yeah, I haven't used thrown weapons in so long that I've forgotten that they get full str on damage rolls XD. Yeah, that makes the boomerang pretty good even without PBS. PBS seems like a heavy investment, since as a fighter I really have better prospects and going archer is weird as well.

As far as PBS is concerned, that isn't even the reason you need to wield something like the gauntlet bow. The boomerang is explicitly a ranged weapon, that is fine. The problem is that the second it leaves your hand, you violate the requirements of PBS, ending the stance.

Didn't even realize it was explicitly ranged. Guess it can't switch hit after all.

But, the gauntlet bow, which you are wielding on your other hand, or maybe even the same hand since you begin wielding it the moment your hand is empty while throwing, keeps you qualified for PBS.

You also aren't going archer. You can do this with gunslinger archetype itself, closing out by stealing fake out at 6. Or ranger but without hunted shot ehhh.


gesalt wrote:


You also aren't going archer. You can do this with gunslinger archetype itself, closing out by stealing fake out at 6. Or ranger but without hunted shot ehhh.

I meant going archer is an option on classes other than fighter, if you want to get PBS for your boomerang.

And maybe I'm misunderstanding you here, but why would you go gunslinger when you want to use a boomerang with PBS? Do you mean on the fighter for quickdraw and fake out?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah, fighter/gunslinger or fighter/ranger for quick draw and whatever else if you need to close out the archetype. Doesn't particularly matter, fake out just gives you a good reaction. Quick draw is a feat tax for thrown weapons and fighter doesn't have it natively so they need to get it from elsewhere. Does it make sense to go to the trouble when bow fighter is right there? No, not really. But, if you really wanted to, you could, and you'd be better than the gunslinger for the most part.


gesalt wrote:
Yeah, fighter/gunslinger or fighter/ranger for quick draw and whatever else if you need to close out the archetype. Doesn't particularly matter, fake out just gives you a good reaction. Quick draw is a feat tax for thrown weapons and fighter doesn't have it natively so they need to get it from elsewhere. Does it make sense to go to the trouble when bow fighter is right there? No, not really. But, if you really wanted to, you could, and you'd be better than the gunslinger for the most part.

Ah, ok. Yeah, that makes sense ^^


Also a possibly fun idea - as the gunslinger in a Free Archetype game, take the poisoner archetype. It would be more appropriate when using a crossbow, but you could poison literally all of your ammo during your daily preparations. You get your level x 2 doses, so by about level 5 or 6 you should be set for most days. Plus the simple poisons from Poison Weapon for when it absolutely has to work.

It's not great (low-ish DCs and poison immunity say hi) and you'll probably have to eventually buy your GM some snacks (rolling fort saves for every hit and tracking poison on everyone is a pain), but it might be cool :D


Shower thought - what about an Eldritch Archer/Beast Gunner equivalent for a new Way? I know that even on release, quite a few people were confused and disappointed when Spellshot didn't actually have anything to do with spells. I'm still of the opinion that the Way could do with a different name. Anyway, this could fill that particular void.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the idea myself, a regular archetype would be preferable for my Rip van Winkle character idea, but I think it is worth discussing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Karmagator wrote:

Shower thought - what about an Eldritch Archer/Beast Gunner equivalent for a new Way? I know that even on release, quite a few people were confused and disappointed when Spellshot didn't actually have anything to do with spells. I'm still of the opinion that the Way could do with a different name. Anyway, this could fill that particular void.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the idea myself, a regular archetype would be preferable for my Rip van Winkle character idea, but I think it is worth discussing.

Fun fact: You can go directly from Way of the Spellshot into Beast Gunner if you want.

"Special You can’t select another dedication feat other than Beast Gunner Dedication until you’ve gained two other feats from the spellshot or beast gunner archetypes."

So it's really encouraged to do so by the Way!


Ezekieru wrote:
Karmagator wrote:

Shower thought - what about an Eldritch Archer/Beast Gunner equivalent for a new Way? I know that even on release, quite a few people were confused and disappointed when Spellshot didn't actually have anything to do with spells. I'm still of the opinion that the Way could do with a different name. Anyway, this could fill that particular void.

I'm actually not a huge fan of the idea myself, a regular archetype would be preferable for my Rip van Winkle character idea, but I think it is worth discussing.

Fun fact: You can go directly from Way of the Spellshot into Beast Gunner if you want.

"Special You can’t select another dedication feat other than Beast Gunner Dedication until you’ve gained two other feats from the spellshot or beast gunner archetypes."

So it's really encouraged to do so by the Way!

Yeah, I know, but then I'd have to use a beast gun. And the as-written Spellshot. Sorry, but... yikes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
nicholas storm wrote:
I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

As far as I understand it was put in to prevent the gunslinger from having three weapon types on the legendary proficiency track, when the fighter can only do two for most of the game. Basically, niche-protection for the fighter, which is genuinely funny imo XD. It was a reaction to the fact that, during the playtest, everyone who played drifter did exactly that - chose Unconventional Weaponry, the mauler archetype or some other option that grants scaling proficiency in a melee weapon.

I also think that is a bit weird, as imo the triple proficiency issue is a complete paper tiger. The gunslinger is already really niche, but the number of people who pick both a crossbow and a firearm at the same time probably is somewhere in the double digits. Globally. There is no mechanical reason to do so and the themes clash heavily as well, so why would you?


Karmagator wrote:
nicholas storm wrote:
I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

As far as I understand it was put in to prevent the gunslinger from having three weapon types on the legendary proficiency track, when the fighter can only do two for most of the game. Basically, niche-protection for the fighter, which is genuinely funny imo XD. It was a reaction to the fact that, during the playtest, everyone who played drifter did exactly that - chose Unconventional Weaponry, the mauler archetype or some other option that grants scaling proficiency in a melee weapon.

I also think that is a bit weird, as imo the triple proficiency issue is a complete paper tiger. The gunslinger is already really niche, but the number of people who pick both a crossbow and a firearm at the same time probably is somewhere in the double digits. Globally. There is no mechanical reason to do so and the themes clash heavily as well, so why would you?

I am guessing you are right about why, they didn't wnat anyone to be more fighter-y than the fighter, its considered the upper limit of ledgendary weapon groups. That said they do have things in the build that make up for it, like this: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3159

The difference between mastery and ledgendary is just +2, and the difference between flat footed and nto is also +2, so they kind of cancel. It does lock you into using that action though.


i26c2 wrote:
Karmagator wrote:
nicholas storm wrote:
I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

As far as I understand it was put in to prevent the gunslinger from having three weapon types on the legendary proficiency track, when the fighter can only do two for most of the game. Basically, niche-protection for the fighter, which is genuinely funny imo XD. It was a reaction to the fact that, during the playtest, everyone who played drifter did exactly that - chose Unconventional Weaponry, the mauler archetype or some other option that grants scaling proficiency in a melee weapon.

I also think that is a bit weird, as imo the triple proficiency issue is a complete paper tiger. The gunslinger is already really niche, but the number of people who pick both a crossbow and a firearm at the same time probably is somewhere in the double digits. Globally. There is no mechanical reason to do so and the themes clash heavily as well, so why would you?

I am guessing you are right about why, they didn't wnat anyone to be more fighter-y than the fighter, its considered the upper limit of ledgendary weapon groups. That said they do have things in the build that make up for it, like this: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3159

The difference between mastery and ledgendary is just +2, and the difference between flat footed and nto is also +2, so they kind of cancel. It does lock you into using that action though.

Yeah, that seems to be the obvious idea behind the feat. I think that was even explicitly stated somewhere. That said, your melee weapon attacks will always suffer from MAP and it doesn't stack with other sources of flat-footed. So, pretty good, but it has serious limitations.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
nicholas storm wrote:
I was disappointed with singular expertise for ways that encourage melee. Why should a drifter encouraged in using a gun in one hand and a melee weapon in the other have to endure a lower accuracy with the melee weapon? The class is so underpowered as it is, that singular expertise should remove the penalty to other weapons.

During the playtest two issues came up and were talked about pretty significantly:

1) That drifters were almost required to find a proficiency advancement feat to get their melee weapons up to legendary.

2) That gunslingers with shortbows and archery dedication (to get bow proficiency on the fast track) were better at dealing damage than gunslingers using actual guns.

Rather than make guns competitive with other ranged weapons or give drifters support for their melee weapons, Paizo published singular expertise.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
i26c2 wrote:

... That said they do have things in the build that make up for it, like this: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3159

The difference between mastery and ledgendary is just +2, and the difference between flat footed and nto is also +2, so they kind of cancel. It does lock you into using that action though.

Point of note, Sword and Pistol is not an Action. It just makes shooting a target you just hit with melee not provoke reactions (but reloading still provokes AoO...) and shooting a target makes them flat-footed to your next melee attack. So, for a Drifter with Sword and Pistol, a Dueling Pistol and a Kukri, their turn might look like:

1st Action shoot
2nd Action Reloading Strike (make a melee strike against the target's flat-footed AC with a -4 MAP then interact to reload)
3rd Action ?

Even with Singular Expertise, their accuracy is not any worse on that second attack than any other non-Fighter martial with an Agile weapon.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pixel Popper wrote:
i26c2 wrote:

... That said they do have things in the build that make up for it, like this: https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=3159

The difference between mastery and ledgendary is just +2, and the difference between flat footed and nto is also +2, so they kind of cancel. It does lock you into using that action though.

Point of note, Sword and Pistol is not an Action. It just makes shooting a target you just hit with melee not provoke reactions (but reloading still provokes AoO...) and shooting a target makes them flat-footed to your next melee attack. So, for a Drifter with Sword and Pistol, a Dueling Pistol and a Kukri, their turn might look like:

1st Action shoot
2nd Action Reloading Strike (make a melee strike against the target's flat-footed AC with a -4 MAP then interact to reload)
3rd Action ?

Even with Singular Expertise, their accuracy is not any worse on that second attack than any other non-Fighter martial with an Agile weapon.

But their damage is significantly lower, because they are a dex class with no damage bonuses and your melee option realistically doesn't even get property runes until level 11. And your ranged attack has to hit. That is kinda fine on lower levels when enemies don't have a lot of health. But when monsters are rocking an easy 200 hp plus possible resistances by the midgame, a low-ish chance of dealing around 16-20 damage isn't exactly stellar. Not when the competition is pulling a good 50% more than that.

It isn't necessarily bad, but you have to consider that you are one of the squishiest martials in the game, even below a rogue, and this forces you to constantly engage in melee. Your "ranged" option also deals low damage to boot. The combination is still in "acceptable" territory, taking huge risks for mediocre gains ends up feeling kinda bad no matter how you frame it.

That said, I think the Drifter is quite fun, even if it is underpowered. Especially if you play a game that is reasonable with difficult combats, which our next adventure looks to be. I originally didn't want to play one, but one of my teammates has me reconsidering.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

About me reconsidering the Drifter... I've stopped and went right back whence I came. I've build a couple and unfortunately have come to the conclusion I expected previously - it is basically only capable of dealing damage and that damage is mediocre... on a good day. In return, you are forced into melee or you basically don't have a subclass. On an 8HP class with no additional defences. So you basically deal ranged damage without the benefits of being a ranged character and that's it. I don't get it, beyond the theme.

I get that having a ranged option as a melee character is very good, but the other way around seems borderline pointless. Certainly not worth the trade-off here.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
aobst128 wrote:
Pixel Popper wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

Where does this opinion comes from?

I'm reading that ability and it just says:

"You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

- That seems weaker that dual weapon reload as:

1. I can Interact to reload A weapon. Using THE hand holding THE implement.

- So I don't see anything saying I can reload the implement.
- And I don't see anything saying I could use this in combo with other reloads like a slinger's reload. It's it's own interact.
- I see no mention of creating a free hand. Which is what I would expect to see if this allowed other actions to interact to reload without needing a hand free.
- Since this does NOT say it frees up a hand, this is just making it's own interact, not changing the interact on other abilities.

RAW - I just see this as giving me an interact where I can use the hand that is holding an implement to reload a weapon.

And it's a logic leap to presume that would mean reloading the implement itself - when such things have occurred they have been specifically called out. Such as how you can reload a 2-hander by releasing.

Even dual-weapon reload doesn't say the hand that is holding a gun is the one that reloads that specific gun. The logic would be that you use your left hand to reload your right, or vice versa - probably dangling your held gun by a finger or two.

So the logical reading is that you can reload whatever's in the other hand from your implement.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
arcady wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Pixel Popper wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

Where does this opinion comes from?

I'm reading that ability and it just says:

"You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

- That seems weaker that dual weapon reload as:

1. I can Interact to reload A weapon. Using THE hand holding THE implement.

- So I don't see anything saying I can reload the implement.
- And I don't see anything saying I could use this in combo with other reloads like a slinger's reload. It's it's own interact.
- I see no mention of creating a free hand. Which is what I would expect to see if this allowed other actions to interact to reload without needing a hand free.
- Since this does NOT say it frees up a hand, this is just making it's own interact, not changing the interact on other abilities.

RAW - I just see this as giving me an interact where I can use the hand that is holding an implement to reload a weapon.

And it's a logic leap to presume that would mean reloading the implement itself - when such things have occurred they have been specifically called out. Such as how you can reload a 2-hander by releasing.

Even dual-weapon reload doesn't say the hand that is holding a gun is the one that reloads that specific gun. The logic would be that you use your left hand to reload your right, or vice versa - probably dangling your held gun by a finger or two.

So the logical reading is that you can reload whatever's in the other hand from your implement.

This is an incorrect interpretation. The weapon itself being the implement does not change the wording. It does exactly what it says it does. It's a passive that allows you to interact to reload without needing a free hand. Since it is not a specific action like dual weapon reload, it functions with every specific reload.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
arcady wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Pixel Popper wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

Where does this opinion comes from?

I'm reading that ability and it just says:

"You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

- That seems weaker that dual weapon reload as:

1. I can Interact to reload A weapon. Using THE hand holding THE implement.

- So I don't see anything saying I can reload the implement.
- And I don't see anything saying I could use this in combo with other reloads like a slinger's reload. It's it's own interact.
- I see no mention of creating a free hand. Which is what I would expect to see if this allowed other actions to interact to reload without needing a hand free.
- Since this does NOT say it frees up a hand, this is just making it's own interact, not changing the interact on other abilities.

RAW - I just see this as giving me an interact where I can use the hand that is holding an implement to reload a weapon.

And it's a logic leap to presume that would mean reloading the implement itself - when such things have occurred they have been specifically called out. Such as how you can reload a 2-hander by releasing.

Even dual-weapon reload doesn't say the hand that is holding a gun is the one that reloads that specific gun. The logic would be that you use your left hand to reload your right, or vice versa - probably dangling your held gun by a finger or two.

So the logical reading is that you can reload whatever's in the other hand from your implement.

1) Thaumaturge can have a weapon as an instrument and that feat allows you to reload a weapon with the hand holding your implement. The rules also are clear that you can only have a single weapon as a thaumaturge. So as written and as goofy as it might sound, yes a thaumaturge can reload their weapon with the same hand used to hold it.

2) All feats that grant an action tells you the number of actions that takes. Ammunition Thaumaturgy does not list how many action it takes as such it must be modifying how interact actions to reload work for you. That means that any time you would reload you can use that feat.

3) There is no need to mention a free hand because feats do exactly what they say. In this case a thaumaturge is able to reload any weapon using the same hand wielding an implement.

4) Yes the feats do not tell you how you are reloading the weapon. But that does not mean that you can assume that it must use the other hand. Because there is no mechanic or flavor text it is left up to the player and GM to determine. Here are two sample clips: Black Lagoon reloading using teeth and Grenadier reload using chest. Yes both of those are anime examples, no I don't care Thaumaturge is an anime class.

5) Finally, there is no leap in logic to read what the ability says and apply it as written. As written nothing is mentioned about reloading a weapon implement using the same hand. Nothing is written about using another hand. But there is the standard rules guidance of "specific > general" and "can reload a weapon with the hand holding an implement" is more specific than the general reloading rules.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
aobst128 wrote:
arcady wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Pixel Popper wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

Where does this opinion comes from?

I'm reading that ability and it just says:

"You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

- That seems weaker that dual weapon reload as:

1. I can Interact to reload A weapon. Using THE hand holding THE implement.

- So I don't see anything saying I can reload the implement.
- And I don't see anything saying I could use this in combo with other reloads like a slinger's reload. It's it's own interact.
- I see no mention of creating a free hand. Which is what I would expect to see if this allowed other actions to interact to reload without needing a hand free.
- Since this does NOT say it frees up a hand, this is just making it's own interact, not changing the interact on other abilities.

RAW - I just see this as giving me an interact where I can use the hand that is holding an implement to reload a weapon.

And it's a logic leap to presume that would mean reloading the implement itself - when such things have occurred they have been specifically called out. Such as how you can reload a 2-hander by releasing.

Even dual-weapon reload doesn't say the hand that is holding a gun is the one that reloads that specific gun. The logic would be that you use your left hand to reload your right, or vice versa - probably dangling your held gun by a finger or two.

So the logical reading is that you can reload whatever's in the other hand from your implement.

This is an incorrect interpretation. The weapon itself...

That's my point.

It does what it says it does.

No more.

So it doesn't give you a free hand, it doesn't change other reload actions. It doesn't let you reload itself.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Temperans wrote:
arcady wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Pixel Popper wrote:
aobst128 wrote:
Yeah, running reload is borderline a tax. Can only get away not taking it on a drifter that can't use it anyways if you aren't using a capacity gun...

Dual Weapon Reload should not be an action, but, rather, a blanket removal of the free-hand requirement to reload...

That's why thaumaturge is a popular choice for an archetype because thaumaturge ammunition does exactly that with a pistol implement.

Where does this opinion comes from?

I'm reading that ability and it just says:

"You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

- That seems weaker that dual weapon reload as:

1. I can Interact to reload A weapon. Using THE hand holding THE implement.

- So I don't see anything saying I can reload the implement.
- And I don't see anything saying I could use this in combo with other reloads like a slinger's reload. It's it's own interact.
- I see no mention of creating a free hand. Which is what I would expect to see if this allowed other actions to interact to reload without needing a hand free.
- Since this does NOT say it frees up a hand, this is just making it's own interact, not changing the interact on other abilities.

RAW - I just see this as giving me an interact where I can use the hand that is holding an implement to reload a weapon.

And it's a logic leap to presume that would mean reloading the implement itself - when such things have occurred they have been specifically called out. Such as how you can reload a 2-hander by releasing.

Even dual-weapon reload doesn't say the hand that is holding a gun is the one that reloads that specific gun. The logic would be that you use your left hand to reload your right, or vice versa - probably dangling your held gun by a finger or two.

So the logical reading is that you can reload whatever's in the other hand from your implement.

1) Thaumaturge can have a weapon as an instrument and that...

But all of this is... just added meaning beyond what the text actually says.

This Thaumaturge feat only says:

"You're so used to handling your implement, weapon, and esoterica in the heat of combat that adding a few bullets or arrows to the mix is no extra burden. You can Interact to reload a weapon using the hand holding your implement."

Letting that do anything beyond that is homebrew.

RAW:
- No using it to reload itself.
- No using it to allow dual wielders to use running reload.
- No using it to allow dual wielders to use gunslinger reload that require free hands.
- No using it to allow any other special reload that states it needs a free hand.

It just lets you use an interact to reload using that hand. Which is NOT the same thing as saying you have a free hand - what those above things require free hands and are their own actions.

If it meant to count as a free hand for the purpose of reload it would say so:

"You're so used to handling your implement, weapon, and esoterica in the heat of combat that adding a few bullets or arrows to the mix is no extra burden. The hand holding your implement counts as a free hand for the purposes of reload actions."

- But that is NOT the text we have.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

You keep listing off all these things you think you aren't allowed to do but you haven't really explained why that's the case.

just saying "RAW you can't" doesn't really mean anything because, as you said, the text says what it says. Trying to subtract or change that is homebrew.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Squiggit wrote:

You keep listing off all these things you think you aren't allowed to do but you haven't really explained why that's the case.

just saying "RAW you can't" doesn't really mean anything because, as you said, the text says what it says. Trying to subtract or change that is homebrew.

But where do you even possibly come up with the idea that it is possible?

That's not in the description, at all.

I might as well say that taking the magic missile spell gives me assurance on jump. The rules don't say it doesn't after all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It doesn't need to give you a free hand because it says "you can reload using the hand wielding your implement". You other hand can be whatever, you are holding your implement and so can use that hand to reload.

Nothing about reload prevents it from reloading using 1 hand except for the free hand requirement. Which that feat removes the requirement because "you can reload using the hand wielding your implement".

Here is an analogy: Imagine a rule that said "you can eat pizza using a free hand" and a feat that said "you can eat pizza using a hand holding your choosen food item". Well if you pick pizza then you can eat pizza with the same hand holding a pizza. If you pick soda then you can eat pizza with the hand holding a soda.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
arcady wrote:
But where do you even possibly come up with the idea that it is possible?

Because you're reloading a reload weapon using the hand holding your implement, which is what the feat says you can do.

Pretty straight forward.

If you believe there are additional restrictions on how the feat works, it would be helpful to point out how you believe that logic works, instead of making intentionally nonsensical analogies about jumping.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Temperans wrote:

It doesn't need to give you a free hand because it says "you can reload using the hand wielding your implement". You other hand can be whatever, you are holding your implement and so can use that hand to reload.

Nothing about reload prevents it from reloading using 1 hand except for the free hand requirement. Which that feat removes the requirement because "you can reload using the hand wielding your implement".

I didn't see the words 'free hand' in:

"you can reload using the hand wielding your implement"

Please point to where you saw it.

It gives you a reload yes.

But it doesn't open up all of the other reload actions in the game that have their own requirement of a free hand.

That makes it almost equivalent to 'dual-weapon reload' - save that dual-weapon reload doesn't limit what hand can reload what.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Are you holding your implement? Yes.
Are you trying to reload a weapon? Yes.
Does the feat say you can reload using the hand holding your implement? Yes.

Then you can reload the weapon using the hand holding your implement.

This is the whole Patrick "is this your wallet?" Meme.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

If it says you can reload, you can reload. Full stop. It removes the need of a free hand if you're holding an implement. It is very straightforward.


Does it matter if you can reload the implement with the hand holding the implement? I feel like the point is it lets you use things like Running Reload and Risky Reload, both of which just load one gun at a time anyway. If you need to reload the other weapon too you've got Dual Reload to fall back on.


Captain Morgan wrote:
Does it matter if you can reload the implement with the hand holding the implement? I feel like the point is it lets you use things like Running Reload and Risky Reload, both of which just load one gun at a time anyway. If you need to reload the other weapon too you've got Dual Reload to fall back on.

Being able to reload both weapons is kind of the point. That way you can avoid the slide pistol and - most importantly - the absolute scam that is Dual Weapon Reload. Even then, it is pretty damn expensive in terms of feats (2nd + 4th), so there's really no point to do this outside of Free Archetype.


Between the new Starfinder and playing some stuff like Synthetik 2, I'm now certain that the best gift we can get the Gunslinger is a choice of meaningful low-level active abilities. It is far too common until level 6 that you basically just regular Strike 95% of the time and then reload or some combination thereof.

And by that I don't mean risk-reward abilities like Risky Reload and Alchemical Shot, emphasis on the frankly excessive risk. They should be the exception not what feel like the norm.

No, the most important ones are abilities with some sort of limited on how often you can use them in return for being highly impactful, comparable to focus spells, unstable actions and Spell Strike. They do probably the best job in the entire system to break up the monotony of strict combat rotations, which is one of the two most common complaints the Gunslinger gets.

Less important but still cool would be actions and activities that are usable at-will, but are somewhat more situational than Strike, just not as much as Cover Fire. Feats like Power Attack come to mind. Making choices and feeling like having the tool for the job is fun.

Least in the order of priorities are straight Strike substitutes like Snagging Strike. They have their place in making inherently weak builds like melee-focused Ways or one-pistol viable, but should remain the absolute exception for obvious reasons. Especially as they don't solve the original problem I posed.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Given that Paizo was never going to let guns outperform bows or do something unique like target a different AC value, they really should have found a way to make gunslingers feel unique beyond just being the gun-using class. Gunslingers would have made sense as the called shot class or the special ammo class where they can, with a little time to aim/load their trick round, provide near caster level of debuffing and battlefield control. The choice to make them the crit fishing class but more so was always going to ensure that the class feels bland and that the best subclass to play is the one that gives the biggest bonus the most often.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
3-Body Problem wrote:
Given that Paizo was never going to let guns outperform bows or do something unique like target a different AC value, they really should have found a way to make gunslingers feel unique beyond just being the gun-using class. Gunslingers would have made sense as the called shot class or the special ammo class where they can, with a little time to aim/load their trick round, provide near caster level of debuffing and battlefield control. The choice to make them the crit fishing class but more so was always going to ensure that the class feels bland and that the best subclass to play is the one that gives the biggest bonus the most often.

They have the flavour already, the reactions and secondary abilities in the class already makes them feel unique.

201 to 250 of 361 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Towards a better gunslinger (also some stuff about reload weapons on other classes) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.