Guns & Gears Remastered

[Ravingdork]

What the heck!? The remastered PDF file size is more than six times the the original!

They must not have compressed it at all.

[Helvellyn]

One thing they seem to have done with Gunslingers is remove the blanket ban on achieving the highest proficiency on non firearms. Also when making an attack with the melee aspect of a combination firearm you can use your firearm/crossbow proficiency.

[CookieLord]

Is the mention of Quick Vial in the Munitions Machinist feat a typo?

[ssims2]

I notice the new failure effect for Overdrive doesn't have a duration (unlike the success and critical success effects, which last 1 minute). Something like "for 1 round" or "until the end of your turn" would be what I'd expect, especially since there's no mention of what happens if you get a success / critical success on a later round after failing.

[Ravingdork]

ssims2 wrote:

I notice the new failure effect for Overdrive doesn't have a duration (unlike the success and critical success effects, which last 1 minute). Something like "for 1 round" or "until the end of your turn" would be what I'd expect, especially since there's no mention of what happens if you get a success / critical success on a later round after failing.

It never goes away. It continues to accumulate additional fire damage every time you fail until the eventual end of your adventuring career (or you decide to explode the planet with a Strike).

[NorrKnekten]

ssims2 wrote:

I notice the new failure effect for Overdrive doesn't have a duration (unlike the success and critical success effects, which last 1 minute). Something like "for 1 round" or "until the end of your turn" would be what I'd expect, especially since there's no mention of what happens if you get a success / critical success on a later round after failing.

I would guess it lasts 1 minute or 1 round, We will probably see an errata either adding the line "As critical success but" or just adding the 1 round to it.

I am probably going to play it as 1 minute at my table until then as they might've just aswell copy pasted the other lines of text and we just arent going to know until errata arrives.

[Perpdepog]

I'm also inclined toward it working for one minute. It reads like the value of damage is meant to change, not the time. It's largely moot, I suppose, since outside of triggering a weakness it's never going to be optimal to accept a failure, and instead try again.

[YuriP]

CookieLord wrote:

Is the mention of Quick Vial in the Munitions Machinist feat a typo?

Probably, makes no sense that you use Quick Vials to be transformed into other bombs and ammo once that even alchemist can't use Quick Vials outside of "versatile vial option from your research field" limits. I'm certain that the correct is Versatile Vial.

Can someone confirm if this is wrong in the PDF too or if it is a Nexus' typo?

Anyway but you still can create Quick Vials to use as bomb once that Quick Alchemy Benefits doesn't restricts its creation (some people thing that alchemist archetype cannot use Quick Vials at all but they can, they just can't transform it in another thing). But part of the blame for this mistake lies with AoN and Nexus for placing links to Quick Alchemy in Quick Alchemy Benefits instead of point to the Quick Alchemy Benefits rule.

So long life to an additional acid damage option to thrown against trolls... wait trolls no more have acid weakness! Oh S$#$! :P

Ravingdork wrote:

ssims2 wrote:

I notice the new failure effect for Overdrive doesn't have a duration (unlike the success and critical success effects, which last 1 minute). Something like "for 1 round" or "until the end of your turn" would be what I'd expect, especially since there's no mention of what happens if you get a success / critical success on a later round after failing.

It never goes away. It continues to accumulate additional fire damage every time you fail until the eventual end of your adventuring career (or you decide to explode the planet with a Strike).

Kkkk would be fun if it work like this. But a same ability cannot stack it's a duplicated effect:

Game Conventions - Duplicate Effects - Source Player Core pg. 399 2.0 wrote:

When you're affected by the same thing multiple times, only one instance applies, using the higher level or rank of the effects, or the newer effect if the two are equal. For example, if you were using mystic armor and then cast it again, you'd still benefit from only one casting of that spell. Casting a spell again on the same target might get you a better duration or effect if it were cast at a higher rank the second time, but otherwise doing so gives you no advantage.

Probably the duration is 1 minute or less and the designer forgot to add it because make 0 sense that when a normal/critical overdrive (that can't get its duration extended by new overdrives checks) ends in 1 minute but failure not. Anyway it's a 1 damage fire damage it isn't like it was a super powerful extra damage anyway (yet this fire damage in a failure bugs me, can I voluntarily choose to fail to use the fire damage vs a fire weak creature or to disable the troll regeneration? kkk).

[NorrKnekten]

There is an argument for 1 round since some feats require overdrive to be active when using them, And the special entry does say it doesnt end on a failure, but may just be CTRL+C, CTRL+P shenanigans going on.

The change in most likelyhood was made just to give a slight bump to a class that otherwise has a -1 to both hit and damage in the early levels. So even on a failure the difference in damage is negated to a regular martial is negated. To my knowledge you cannot voluntarily fail checks unless an effect tells you that you can.

[Conscious Meat]

YuriP wrote:

CookieLord wrote:

Is the mention of Quick Vial in the Munitions Machinist feat a typo?

Probably, makes no sense that you use Quick Vials to be transformed into other bombs and ammo once that even alchemist can't use Quick Vials outside of "versatile vial option from your research field" limits. I'm certain that the correct is Versatile Vial.

Can someone confirm if this is wrong in the PDF too or if it is a Nexus' typo?

The PDF text reads

Quote:

You’re adept at crafting ammunition. You gain the Quick Alchemy benefits (Player Core 2 174) and 4 versatile vials, but can only use Quick Vial to create bombs or alchemical ammunition.

"Quick Vial" presumably refers to the *use* rather than the resource. QAB section:

Quote:

Quick Vial: You create a versatile vial that can be used only as a bomb or for the versatile vial option from your research field (it can’t be used to create a consumable, for example). This item has the infused trait, but it remains potent only until the end of your current turn.

[YuriP]

Yes it could be both Quick Alchemy or Versatile Vial but both will have the same effect in this description:

fixed with Quick Alchemy wrote:

You’re adept at crafting ammunition. You gain the Quick Alchemy benefits (Player Core 2 174) and 4 versatile vials, but can only use Quick Alchemy to create bombs or alchemical ammunition.

fixed with Versatile Vial wrote:

You’re adept at crafting ammunition. You gain the Quick Alchemy benefits (Player Core 2 174) and 4 versatile vials, but can only use Versatile Vial to create bombs or alchemical ammunition.

[moosher12]

Okay, so I just read the Inventor's weapon innovation, and this is insane.

An inventor can choose to pick an advanced weapon that is Level 0 at the cost of their initial weapon modification. Thing is, rarity is omitted from this condition.

What this indicates to me is that they can pick any advanced level 0 weapon, potentially even those from Starfinder, as a Numerian weapon would likely be considered Rare. The GM can of course override, but I think you see where I'm going with this. An Aeon Rifle and a Card Slinger, for example, are both Level 0 Advanced Weapons.

And this feels like it'd be well worth the cost of an initial modification if this possibility is intended.

But the other thing is, if an Advanced Weapon is available, an uncommon or rare level 0 simple or martial weapon would likely be allowed too, like, say, a semi-auto pistol or a machine gun.

[SuperBidi]

moosher12 wrote:

An inventor can choose to pick an advanced weapon that is Level 0. Thing is, rarity is omitted from this condition.

No, rarity is not omitted. The basic rule is: If it has a rarity tag, you see with your GM. No need to rewrite the rarity rule everywhere.

[Tridus]

moosher12 wrote:

An inventor can choose to pick an advanced weapon that is Level 0. Thing is, rarity is omitted from this condition.

Only the requirement that it is Level 0.

What this indicates to me is that they can pick any advanced weapon level 0 weapon, potentially even those from Starfinder (of which I'd imagine numerian weapons would qualify as rare in the Lost Omens timeline) unless the GM overrides, like say, an Aeon Rifle or a Card Slinger, which are both strictly level 0 advanced weapons.

This feels well worth the cost of an initial modification if this possibility is intended.

But the other thing is, if an Advanced Weapon is available, an uncommon or rare level 0 simple or martial weapon would likely be allowed too, like, say, a semi-auto pistol or a machine gun.

You're going to be searching for a long time to find any GM that is going to read "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon" and accept that means "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon from another game system."

[NorrKnekten]

He does have a point though, If Starfinder is supposed to be compatible and we recieve more Numeria content there might just be such a scenario.

Considering that most other classes do state that the starting equipment from features has to be common

Giant Instinct Barbarian wrote:

You can use a weapon built for a Large creature if you are Small or Medium (both normally and when raging). If you’re not Small or Medium, you can use a weapon built for a creature one size larger than you. You start with one such weapon, which you receive for free. It must be a common melee or ranged weapon, it must have a Price of 9 gp or less (not including the Price adjustment for being a larger weapon), and it must be common or you must otherwise have access to it.

(Though as said just because it omits the text about rarity doesn't mean you actually get to ignore the rarity trait)

[moosher12]

Tridus wrote:

You're going to be searching for a long time to find any GM that is going to read "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon" and accept that means "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon from another game system."

Funny enough, I already told my players I'll be leaning that direction for it. So I am that GM.

Though I told em I'd reserve the right to veto ones I simply don't like. But for the most part, a lot of the ones they'd actually want are as weak or weaker than a shortbow at the moment. Least until the next patch on Starfinder.

Ultimately I only wanna allow stuff that can reasonably be obtained Numeria side, especially since in my Kingmaker game, they'll be visiting Numeria in time.

[moosher12]

NorrKnekten wrote:

He does have a point though, If Starfinder is supposed to be compatible and we recieve more Numeria content there might just be such a scenario.

Considering that most other classes do state that the starting equipment from features has to be common

(Though as said just because it omits the text about rarity doesn't mean you actually get to ignore the rarity trait)

Quite true, devs have also voiced in the streams that they are musing the idea of a return to Numeria after Starfinder is released. Considering Starfinder release would be prerequisite, I'm assuming that would probably imply the utilization of Starfinder assets. Additionally, Pathfinder 1E already shows us what items are available in Numeria via the Technology Guide. So any of those mentioned weapons can already exist with a Rare tag.

[thenobledrake]

NorrKnekten wrote:

Considering that most other classes do state that the starting equipment from features has to be common...

Some authors choosing to be redundant does not mean that any that do not were actually writing statements that specifically counter the general rules established elsewhere in the book.

There's even a passage of text in the book, though I can't recall exactly where at this moment, that covers this kind of misplaced expectation that "it doesn't say I follow the general rule" is the same as "it says exactly what way in which I don't follow the general rule."

This is likely a significant part of the reason why Paizo chose to write this edition in the "to be read as casual language" style that they did; because it's absolutely a pain to make sure everything doesn't just convey the same meaning, it does it with the exact same phrasing, so no one thinks they caught a special exception just because one author picked not saying you get to do something special as their method of conveying they didn't say that while some other author used extra steps to reach the same result.

[Ravingdork]

Get off my lawn you space-faring varmint!

*waves pitchfork threateningly*

[moosher12]

Phrasing is important though

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

If the intent was more restrictive, it should have been

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice to which you have access; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

[NorrKnekten]

thenobledrake wrote:

Some authors choosing to be redundant does not mean that any that do not were actually writing statements that specifically counter the general rules established elsewhere in the book.

There's even a passage of text in the book, though I can't recall exactly where at this moment, that covers this kind of misplaced expectation that "it doesn't say I follow the general rule" is the same as "it says exactly what way in which I don't follow the general rule."

This is likely a significant part of the reason why Paizo chose to write this edition in the "to be read as casual language" style that they did; because it's absolutely a pain to make sure everything doesn't just convey the same meaning, it does it with the exact same phrasing, so no one thinks they caught a special exception just because one author picked not saying you get to do something special as their method of conveying they didn't say that while some other author used extra steps to reach the same result.

Didnt I write just that?

NorrKnekten wrote:

Considering that most other classes do state that the starting equipment from features has to be common.

...
(Though as said just because it omits the text about rarity doesn't mean you actually get to ignore the rarity trait)

Its the "Specific overrides General" Convention

Conventions Sidebar wrote:

A core principle of Pathfinder is that specific rules override general ones. If two rules conflict, the more specific one takes precedence. If there's still ambiguity, the GM determines which rule to use. For example, the rules state that when attacking a concealed creature, you must attempt a DC 5 flat check to determine if you hit. Flat checks don't benefit from modifiers, bonuses, or penalties, but an ability that's specifically designed to overcome concealment might override and alter this. While some special rules may also state the normal rules to provide context, you should always default to the general rules presented in this chapter, even if effects don't specifically say to.

[YuriP]

moosher12 wrote:

Okay, so I just read the Inventor's weapon innovation, and this is insane.

An inventor can choose to pick an advanced weapon that is Level 0 at the cost of their initial weapon modification. Thing is, rarity is omitted from this condition.

What this indicates to me is that they can pick any advanced level 0 weapon, potentially even those from Starfinder, as a Numerian weapon would likely be considered Rare. The GM can of course override, but I think you see where I'm going with this. An Aeon Rifle and a Card Slinger, for example, are both Level 0 Advanced Weapons.

And this feels like it'd be well worth the cost of an initial modification if this possibility is intended.

But the other thing is, if an Advanced Weapon is available, an uncommon or rare level 0 simple or martial weapon would likely be allowed too, like, say, a semi-auto pistol or a machine gun.

Well with the exception of Starfinder weapons isn't like we have a high number of fantastic overpowered level 0/1 advanced weapons laying around. You probably just find something better than most basic weapon innovation's modifications. But as well pointed by Justnobodyfqwl:

Justnobodyfqwl wrote:

...

BEHOLD! My masterwork! My ultimate example of my genius! My greatest invention: a weapon that already exists, but now no one else can use!

I know that as inventor you could reach the same result by yourself using your own methods but honestly this still thematically sucks! kkkkk

About Starfinder 2e weapons. Many of them are Simple and Martial and could be used by PF2e classes normally without extra training (basically a char will take an martial energy sword swing it a little and say "OK, I understood I just need to fight using it like any other sword"). The point is to these weapons comes to Golarion or they come from Numeria or other technological advanced civilization ou they come from the future. In any case they will be just rare.

Tridus wrote:

moosher12 wrote:

An inventor can choose to pick an advanced weapon that is Level 0. Thing is, rarity is omitted from this condition.

Only the requirement that it is Level 0.

What this indicates to me is that they can pick any advanced weapon level 0 weapon, potentially even those from Starfinder (of which I'd imagine numerian weapons would qualify as rare in the Lost Omens timeline) unless the GM overrides, like say, an Aeon Rifle or a Card Slinger, which are both strictly level 0 advanced weapons.

This feels well worth the cost of an initial modification if this possibility is intended.

But the other thing is, if an Advanced Weapon is available, an uncommon or rare level 0 simple or martial weapon would likely be allowed too, like, say, a semi-auto pistol or a machine gun.

You're going to be searching for a long time to find any GM that is going to read "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon" and accept that means "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon from another game system."

I would allow but the player will have to deal with all the maintenance and upgrade by themselves using Craft vs rare DC (weapons level DC +5) once this technology is almost non-existent in Golarion. These things not even works with runes!

moosher12 wrote:

Phrasing is important though

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

If the intent was more restrictive, it should have been

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice to which you have access; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

Yet not mention doesn't change the general recommendation. It still valid and the general recommendation is that is rare so ask your GM before take it unless it have an explicitly access entry giving you a way to access it.

[NorrKnekten]

Return of the Timeworn Trait!

~Glitchy~ Get those D100s out.

[Tridus]

moosher12 wrote:

Phrasing is important though

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

If the intent was more restrictive, it should have been

Quote:

It begins with the same statistics as a level 0 common simple or martial weapon of your choice, or another level 0 simple or martial weapon to which you have access. You can instead use the statistics of a level 0 advanced weapon of your choice to which you have access; you treat this as a martial weapon for the purposes of profjciency, but you do not gain an initial weapon modifjcation.

Except that's literally the default. That's what the tags mean. The fact that something doesn't mention "that you have access to" doesn't mean it overrides what Rare means and you now have access to everything.

In order to do that, it would have to say something to the effect of "this includes rare weapons to which you would not otherwise have access."

Literally this entire argument hinges on "it doesn't specify that the default rule applies explicitly, therefore the default rule doesn't apply." It's absolutely not how the game works. Rare says this: "A rare feat, spell, item or the like is available to players only if the GM decides to include it in the game"

Nothing here overrides that, and the omission of redundant text certainly doesn't.

moosher12 wrote:

Tridus wrote:

You're going to be searching for a long time to find any GM that is going to read "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon" and accept that means "you can have a level 0 advanced weapon from another game system."

Funny enough, I already told my players I'll be leaning that direction for it. So I am that GM.

Though I told em I'd reserve the right to veto ones I simply don't like. But for the most part, a lot of the ones they'd actually want are as weak or weaker than a shortbow at the moment. Least until the next patch on Starfinder.

Ultimately I only wanna allow stuff that can reasonably be obtained Numeria side, especially since in my Kingmaker game, they'll be visiting Numeria in time.

Well, you're welcome to do it as the GM. But nothing in the class actually enables that through class features, so it's strictly a house rule to do so.

[HammerJack]

The idea that "from another game" is just a rarity level to ignore is the wildest part of this theory. It surpasses even "not saying anything about a general rule is a specific rule that overrides it."

[Perpdepog]

That's a fun idea. I'd never expect it to fly in PFS but I do like the idea of giving a weapon inventor in my game the option of being the first person to invent stacked magazines, or try to find ways to make Numerian tech work outside Numeria for any length of time.

Getting the ammunition and batteries, or rare minerals and alloys to craft them, will be a challenge, but that's what adventures are for.

[Powers128]

Really happy with the gunslinger changes. Singular expertise didn't do anything with the changes to archer and mauler and other similar abilities. Are there any left that I haven't thought of? Or is it just combination weapons that can reach legendary?

In any case, drifter and triggerbrand are a lot more appealing now, even if drifter is kinda stuck with piercing wind or dagger pistol

[Ravingdork]

YuriP wrote:

About Starfinder 2e weapons. Many of them are Simple and Martial and could be used by PF2e classes normally without extra training (basically a char will take an martial energy sword swing it a little and say "OK, I understood I just need to fight using it like any other sword"). The point is to these weapons comes to Golarion or they come from Numeria or other technological advanced civilization ou they come from the future. In any case they will be just rare.

That's all well and good, right up until you plunge your light sword into a scabbard and the scabbard catches fire. XD

[BotBrain]

Ravingdork wrote:

Get off my lawn you space-faring varmint!

*waves pitchfork threateningly*

The future is now old man!

(Zooms away om a hoverboard)

[TheTownsend]

Skimmed through PDFs of both versions last night scanning for differences--it was a lot of little formatting things and updating for remaster terminology (though I did find one "tiefling" reference in the Arcadia section that slipped under the radar). Art that depicts Owlbears, Sahuagin, or Intellect Devourers was also replaced.

Most things people have pointed out, changes to innovations (Momentum Enhancer can now make any weapon agile, and lets you reload as a free action once per turn). Spellshot is more casting focused and gives a 3 action spellstrike. Automaton's Reinforced Chassis is now the first natural armor feat that actually works for characters without medium armor proficiency. Couple Gunslinger upgrades.

A lot of the archetypes now have blurbs at the end of the flavor text about which classes would benefit from them, which is nice.

Couple differences in the Dongun Hold Dwarf feats: Explosive Savant updates to current Familiarity rules, treating bombs and martial firearms as simple and advanced firearms as martial; since that makes the old Explosive Expert redundant it now makes you immune to your own splash damage; and Blast Resistance now gives resistance to fire as well as sonic.

Inventor Multiclass now has a prerequisite of +3 INT, which I think it's safe to assume is a typo.

And the World Map was fixed so the Impossible Lands and Katheer aren't a thousand miles south of their actual location anymore!

[Powers128]

I think the three peaked tree has some solid use case now that your thrown attacks are using your firearm proficiency. More ranged options are pretty good with reloading in mind

[Perpdepog]

Powers128 wrote:

Really happy with the gunslinger changes. Singular expertise didn't do anything with the changes to archer and mauler and other similar abilities. Are there any left that I haven't thought of? Or is it just combination weapons that can reach legendary?

In any case, drifter and triggerbrand are a lot more appealing now, even if drifter is kinda stuck with piercing wind or dagger pistol

Or the triggerbrand. You could also use the other one-handed weapons, as long as you don't mind being maybe a point lower depending on how high your strength is.

[Powers128]

Perpdepog wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

Really happy with the gunslinger changes. Singular expertise didn't do anything with the changes to archer and mauler and other similar abilities. Are there any left that I haven't thought of? Or is it just combination weapons that can reach legendary?

In any case, drifter and triggerbrand are a lot more appealing now, even if drifter is kinda stuck with piercing wind or dagger pistol

Or the triggerbrand. You could also use the other one-handed weapons, as long as you don't mind being maybe a point lower depending on how high your strength is.

Yeah, although the mace multipistol is just a better triggerbrand rn. They only updated the combo weapons in guns and gears which did not include the triggerbrand unfortunately. I'm looking forward to the changes to the one's in TV since they're remastering that too.

[Powers128]

The funny thing about the three peaked tree build now is you can use your melee for your ranged attacks and your firearm for your melee attacks with salvo lol.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Wait Treasure Vault is getting Remastered!?

[Blave]

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

Wait Treasure Vault is getting Remastered!?

Yes it is.

[ElementalofCuteness]

Cool, now where is our Secrets of Magic Remasted/Rework? Paizo has basically remastered everything else. Watch as the new Academy book will have Remastered Magus and Summoner.

[OrochiFuror]

Ravingdork wrote:

It never goes away. It continues to accumulate additional fire damage every time you fail until the eventual end of your adventuring career (or you decide to explode the planet with a Strike).

Smoke wins.

FATALITY

[Blave]

ElementalofCuteness wrote:

Cool, now where is our Secrets of Magic Remasted/Rework? Paizo has basically remastered everything else. Watch as the new Academy book will have Remastered Magus and Summoner.

Last word was that they remaster books sell put their copies. Whoch may or may not happen to books like SoM or DA.

I'm still not sure a remastered SoM is ever going to happen since there's quite a lot of lore stuff in there that's obsolete with the remaster. A complete replacement book like divine mysteries seems more likely.

And Rival Academies is a Lost Omens book. Those never had classes before. I doubt they would start something like that now.

[Ravingdork]

TheTownsend wrote:

Skimmed through PDFs of both versions last night scanning for differences--it was a lot of little formatting things and updating for remaster terminology (though I did find one "tiefling" reference in the Arcadia section that slipped under the radar). Art that depicts Owlbears, Sahuagin, or Intellect Devourers was also replaced.

I'm really going to miss the that little gonk droid in the owlbear nest.

[Dragonborn3]

I'm quite surprised Munitions wasn't nerfed into the ground. Now if only you didn't have to spend an action to activate alchemical ammunition for some reason...

[Red Griffyn]

Powers128 wrote:

The funny thing about the three peaked tree build now is you can use your melee for your ranged attacks and your firearm for your melee attacks with salvo lol.

What do you mean?

Best I can come up with is using the piercing wind in 2H. You can stab and blast, drop a hand, reload strike (from drifter and using a gauntlet bow in the other hand), regripping it in 2H for the next round.

You can always free hand drop a hand to toss a bomb with quick draw.

Long term you could even take inventor with a weapon innovation to get the 2H trait to make it a 1D8 finesse weapon in two hands.

[Red Griffyn]

Dragonborn3 wrote:

I'm quite surprised Munitions wasn't nerfed into the ground. Now if only you didn't have to spend an action to activate alchemical ammunition for some reason...

The activation requirements are pretty bad. At best it might be useful on your first strike since it is preloaded with the ammunition.

[moosher12]

I'll concede I got a bit excited about the prospect of expanding the advanced weapon for Inventors to uncommon and rarer types. But I do feel this rule should be clarified, as I am likely not the only person who would have read through that entry and got similarly excited. While I might willfully be lenient as a GM in my interpretation, Pathfinder is a game praised for its specificity. So I'll submit an errata suggestion to clarify that bit to reduce the instances of folks getting their hopes up with the ability.

As for Starfinder and Pathfinder being completely separate systems to the point of compatibility not being commonly intended. After what news I've seen, I do find that sentiment dubious. I at least don't feel that the Paizo devs feel this sentiment.

From Paizo's January Stream.

Jenny Jarzabski 15:53 wrote:

...Everything compatible with Pathfinder 2E? And yes it is. If you have not heard the good news. Starfinder Second Edition and Pathfinder Second Edition are fully compatible!

Dustin Knight 17:08 wrote:

In fact, in the GM Core...we have a section being written up called anachronistic adventures. Will have a bunch of great guidelines to help you use Starfinder content in Pathfinder and Pathfinder content in Starfinder.

Jenny Jarzabski 33:33 wrote:

This is again just more previews of what you can find in the Galaxy Guide. Ways to make cool characters for Starfinder or Starfinder and space-themed characters that you can play in a Pathfinder game.

Dustin Knight 1:30:49 wrote:

When we did the playtest, we had some Pathfinder classes alongside the Starfinder classes, and it worked very well. There's minor changes that you might wanna do and so much of it is campaign dependent. So much of it is the kind of stuff that you should work out before and during your session zero, and the guidelines that we have in the book will really help smooth over that process.

Alex Speidel and Dustin Knight 1:34:13 wrote:

Alex: What are the team's thoughts on Pathfinder content interacting with Starfinder stuff. Like, are you expecting people to mix them together. Are they build and sort of balanced to be working really well together. Obviously people can do whatever they want at their tables but what's your thoughts as you're the ones who are here?

Dustin: I'm going to be allowing the two at my tables as appropriate. There will always be certain games where no you won't be using a laser pistol or if you wanna play a soldier we're going to construct this new, I'll say it's a bunch of wands taped together into a flamethrower or something. I don't know why use flamethrowers when we probably have those in Ustalav. But you know, there are creative options. There are other classes just function like Solarion. Like, cool, you've got a solar weapon on Golarion, that's not gonna mess too many things up... But yes, you'd be fine playing a Skittermander Operative Red Mantis Assassin in either setting...It should work just great. 1:38:48: To finalize your question about Starfinder and Pathfinder and vice versa. In fact, if you still play our awesome playtest scenarios and download the tracking sheet at StarfinderPlaytest.com, you can unlock the Contemplative and Dragonkin ancestries from Starfinder Galaxy Guide and play them in Pathfinder Society. So, right there, there's your compatibility.

Rue Dickey and James Jacobs 1:43:28 wrote:

Rue: I wanted to open the floor to James talking about crossovers with Pathfinder and Starfinder in terms of like, what does that look like from the Pathfinder side of things as well.

James: Well that's kind of where it all started back with the Iron Gods adventure path and the Technology Guide. That was kind of the birth of a lot of Starfinder stuff cause people liked it. And from there we took a lot of that content and kind of exploded it up into the heavens into the future post beyond the Gap etc. We haven't been able to go back to Numeria because we didn't have Second Edition rules for that content. And so once those rules are available and once you know, we don't wanna jump right in immediately, because Starfinder getting a new edition is a big deal and it needs to be front and center awesome. That is something that I am personally really excited about. I've been talking here and there with people about Iron Gods for ages. And an adventure path I've had in the back of my head since the previous edition. But it's not on the schedule yet, so... But it can be now.

[GokaiSanyu]

So this is more of a PFS question than anything, but according to PFS rules, can remastered Gunslinger actually use Way of the Triggerbrand?

[dirkdragonslayer]

Powers128 wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

Really happy with the gunslinger changes. Singular expertise didn't do anything with the changes to archer and mauler and other similar abilities. Are there any left that I haven't thought of? Or is it just combination weapons that can reach legendary?

In any case, drifter and triggerbrand are a lot more appealing now, even if drifter is kinda stuck with piercing wind or dagger pistol

Or the triggerbrand. You could also use the other one-handed weapons, as long as you don't mind being maybe a point lower depending on how high your strength is.

Yeah, although the mace multipistol is just a better triggerbrand rn. They only updated the combo weapons in guns and gears which did not include the triggerbrand unfortunately. I'm looking forward to the changes to the one's in TV since they're remastering that too.

That Mace Multipistol change happened with the last big errata and wasn't part of this Remaster. It's funny how a little change can make a combination weapon go from terrible to better than the best finesse combo weapon. I would probably still use the Triggerbrand for style points though.

[Perpdepog]

dirkdragonslayer wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

Powers128 wrote:

Really happy with the gunslinger changes. Singular expertise didn't do anything with the changes to archer and mauler and other similar abilities. Are there any left that I haven't thought of? Or is it just combination weapons that can reach legendary?

In any case, drifter and triggerbrand are a lot more appealing now, even if drifter is kinda stuck with piercing wind or dagger pistol

Or the triggerbrand. You could also use the other one-handed weapons, as long as you don't mind being maybe a point lower depending on how high your strength is.

Yeah, although the mace multipistol is just a better triggerbrand rn. They only updated the combo weapons in guns and gears which did not include the triggerbrand unfortunately. I'm looking forward to the changes to the one's in TV since they're remastering that too.

That Mace Multipistol change happened with the last big errata and wasn't part of this Remaster. It's funny how a little change can make a combination weapon go from terrible to better than the best finesse combo weapon. I would probably still use the Triggerbrand for style points though.

Ah, that answers my question; I was gonna ask if it was some other alteration I didn't know about. I'm not at that section yet. And agreed, I also prefer the triggerbrand on pure style points.

Maybe it'll get a remaster looking over in whatever book the Impossible Playtest was for. It appeared in Impossible Lands, after all.

[lemuelmassa]

Not sure if this is deep lore or something but Instant Spy says it has the same mechanism as a "clockwork spy (Monster Core 2 70)." (P71)... The original Clockwork Spy listing is Bestiary 3, page 48, so ... is there a Monster Core 2 partially lain out somewhere in the depths of Paizo with Clockwork Spy on page 70? That makes for almost twice as many A-C entries as Bestiary 3 to push it to page 70... hmmm ... exciting

[YuriP]

GokaiSanyu wrote:

So this is more of a PFS question than anything, but according to PFS rules, can remastered Gunslinger actually use Way of the Triggerbrand?

If the rules aren't clearly incompatible because depends from something legacy that changed you can use any legacy content with the remaster content.

[25speedforseaweedleshy]

mace multipistol sound far more stylish than triggerbrand

just imagine one of those ridiculous weapon that always have gun muzzle at weird place in broken blade

if only there are good repeating combination weapon

or even bad one