| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think everyone is overly hyped on Exemplar when a cleaner solution exists: Soulforger Archetype
Manifest Soulforged Armament [one-action] (concentrate, conjuration, divine, extradimensional) Requirements If summoning a weapon or shield, you have the hands free to wield it; if summoning armor, you aren't wearing any armor; Effect You immediately wield or wear the soulforged armament bound to you. The soulforged armament remains manifested until you Dismiss this effect.And Special Armament Types says:
Ammunition
If a soulforged weapon requires ammunition, that ammunition appears with the weapon when you Manifest it. You can choose the way it appears, such as in a magical quiver that appears on your body, or simply floating in the air where you can pluck it to load or shoot your weapon. The form doesn't change how many or what type of actions reloading takes or any other functions of the ammunition. If you want anything other than basic ammunition for your weapon (such as a sleep arrow), you must attain and carry that ammunition separately.
Until Soul Arsenal at level 6, it's not quite as good on the action economy as the hypothesized Shadow Sheath exploit since dismissing a soulforged item is a single action. Free-action Drop doesn't work; it just drops the weapon and does not demanifest it back to the extradimensional storage.
Start battle with your loaded, soulforged Crescent Cross manifested.
But with Soul Arsenal at level 6, you can bond a second, loaded Crescent Cross and get the same action economy as the Shadow Sheath.
Start with your Soul Arsenal (two, loaded Crescent Crosses) manifested:
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does the Soulforger give you a fully loaded weapon though?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does the Soulforger give you a fully loaded weapon though?
Given that both examples of provided ammo (in a quiver or floating) come unloaded, I'd say no. It sounds like you summon the weapon, and the ability's kind enough to give you a stash of ammo so you can use the weapon, but I don't see the weapon coming in preloaded from the info given.
I imagine this would've become a must-have for many Gunslingers w/ Capacity weapons if it were preloaded.
I concur, you summon a not loaded weapon.
So this doesn't work.
I think we can be safe to assume none of this cheese works and as such we are back to to reloading 3 actions. Even if you could reload 3 for 2 action that would actually be huge until you realize all that does it give you 2 Crescent sprays in 3 rounds, and the 3rd round is you simply dismissing the empty gun, conjuring a new gun, 2 Actions since you would...
It would look like this.
Round 1
2 Action Crescent Spray
1 Action Dismiss
Round 2
1 Action Conjure
2 Action Crescent Spray
Round 3
1 Action Dismiss
1 Action Conjure
1 Action ??? This action doesn't matter UNLESS you strike
Round 4
1 Action Reload OR 2 Action Crescent Spray
1 Action Dismiss (If you did not Reload)
Which is the same as before in my previous rotation but all you are doing is moving Round 3 Crescent Spray to Round 2 and putting in the extra Strike on Round 3 instead of Round 2. Which is the exact problem with Twin Star Exemplar. You are basically trying to squeeze 4 Actions in a 3 Action rotation.
Again... if you are really presuming one is limited to a single set of runes, there's potency crystals for whenever you need more than 2 bursts via a doubling method, or swapping to a non-reload backup.
.
At some point, you've got to stop looking at ways to crowbar in more bursts, and instead check if a prep / buff to enhance the bursts is a better idea.
Such as 1A means to make the foe offguard, putting all 3 shots at +2, for a +6 roll benefit.
(Invisibility potion, etc.)
Even something like the Elemental Betrayal hex imposing weakness (or an inflammation bomb imposing 3 weaknesses at once) can start to look like a good idea when we are talking about 6 shots across 2 rounds.
Because most tables play with the (imo incorrect) ruling that single shots can proc a weakness for each damage type, a CC loaded with acid & fire runes could proc that bomb's weakness twice per hit. That inflammation flask's debuff is already comparable to, if not outright better than, an extra striking rune.
.
And this is a 0 feat* example here.
If you spend a de/buff turn casting bless/heroism and chucking an inflammation flask, then bursting twice during rounds 2 & 3, it's quite likely you could get more damage than a different build trying to squeeze 3 bursts into 3 rounds.
(especially if you are trading reloads for Hide/ invisibility quaffing)
A Champion could precast Draconic Barrage (if the party's patient enough to pause to Refocus between door breaches) or cast it during combat while positioning (because range is short). Then Smite, shoot 3 with one hand. Next round shoot 3, Smiting if necessary, perhaps dismissing the Barrage (if they have decent Charisma) or beginning shift to alternate weapon, or parrying. That's a hefty damage spike (especially for a Champion) and they should remain competitive for the rest of the fight even if a Rune behind. Load up with mix of silver & cold iron ammo.
If they do have Charisma, they might pick up an offensive innate Cantrip for off-rounds.
I think the main cost is the feats. It's pretty easy to get value out of the actions/buffed nova blast. One might even carry crescent cross as one's Parry weapon for such builds then surprise (!), it also shoots.
Does the Soulforger give you a fully loaded weapon though?Given that both examples of provided ammo (in a quiver or floating) come unloaded, I'd say no. . .
The examples are just descriptive for the "You can choose the way it appears" text. And while the examples are quite obviously not loaded (in a quiver or floating in the air), they are examples and, as such, are not exclusive. No language precludes bonding a loaded weapon, manifesting it loaded and having extra ammo appearing however you choose for reloading.
Our table's reading of Soulforger would allow it, which is why I described it. However, none of our table would ever do this. The, minimum, three actions (total) to keep up means that either you're doing almost nothing but juggling manifestations and spraying or you're only getting one spray a combat because the situation requires moving, recall knowledge, or other actions. While interesting, it is ultimately a sub-par trick.
/shrug YMMV
See no matter what build you try to do you stop at round 4 to be fair. I mean a dead stop at round 4. No matter how you do this you can't seem to reload enough on round 4 and maybe with the new reload spell from BattleCry! just maybe you could try to get another spray but even that is a questionable, you would need a Commander and a spell caster and that is 2 Reload actions which means with full support you CAN fire on round 4 by 1 action reload and then Crescent Spray however.
You are requiring a minimal of either 2 characters or a free archetype game where your ally is spending feats sololy to helping you reload 2 out the 3 barrels which is just enough to keep spraying.
I am surprised no one commented after the fact I figured out how to fire the Crescent Cross every turn. Well use the Crescent Spray action, it is just resource intensive but would be hella fun to try to optimize this in any given campaign even if it is a short one. It is pretty funny that in the same book Paizo gave options to do this which no one seemed to find. So yeah enjooy!
To be fair Thaumaturge would actually be incredible since it doesn't have deadly or fatal of any kind. Increasing every shot's damage would be nice because it does not say trigger weaknesses only once. A bit of a typo but if you use that as anything then Thaumaturge i the go too, then next in Gunslinger for the accuracy. Either way you go Exemplar Dedication for the Unfailing Bow for slightly more damage and more on a crit.
Maybe because your routine doesn't account for moving (it is only 30'), buffing (as for the Thaumaturge you're suggesting), or otherwise setting up one's attack (like for a Rogue w/ Demoralize/Dread Striker). Three bolts on their own do little damage and at short range w/o those extra actions. So there will typically not be a reload in the first round, making the third round difficult. Heck, if the Thaumaturge/Smiting Champion/etc. has to move within 30' range, they might not even get off a buffed burst, which is kinda weak for a ranged combatant.
I don't think a martial can depend on just using a crescent cross unless willing to settle for/build for single shots too. This resembles a caster switching to Cantrips, and might be fine w/ some builds anyway.
How is it not solved? I just used the new content to make it so you are able to reload the capacity 3 gun in 1 round. Commander Tactic Reload and the new spell Helpful Reload, how is this not a solution to the problem, it just requires you to use 1 action to reload. Unless I am missing something that makes it, 1 Actions Reload, 2 Action Crescent Spray and boom, you can repeat this every turn!
However the item is Tech and the Crescent Cross is not a tech weapon. So you really are stretching this solution. The two weapons and items are not compatible.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Won't work... random stranger wouldn't spend their actions on your shenanigans.Oh! Oh! I got it! You have a party member stand next to you and spend 3 interact actions reloading your crescent (2 if you're feeling particularly generous and spend one reloading yourself). Fulfils the requirement of working in PFS2e with any comp. This conundrum is solved lads.
I'll set the bar at 'could I achieve this in PFS2e with any party comp' as my line in the sand with allowances for (solved with Free Archetype for home games).
They were being sarcastic
If you want to do this setup solo, good luck. I was giving a way to actually do this combo even if not solo as Pathfinder/Starfinder is a co-op game and not everyone plays solo in PFS/SFS. Some builds require multiple PCs to make it either effective or better, like Kineticist can do an amazing build solo but it works better with more PCs involved.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to do this setup solo, good luck. I was giving a way to actually do this combo even if not solo as Pathfinder/Starfinder is a co-op game and not everyone plays solo in PFS/SFS. Some builds require multiple PCs to make it either effective or better, like Kineticist can do an amazing build solo but it works better with more PCs involved.
I think the point being made is, when you have to get someone else's character involved to keep you shooting each turn to be effective...it's not a viable plan.
It's one thing to occasionally plan on combo'ing something together. Not just supporting your character every turn.
The point I think is not damage, I think the point is the 3 attacks at 0 MAP. Sure you deal 2d12+8, and yeah that's massive on a crit but the problem in the Crescent Cross is only a d6, so without any damage modifiers it's only 2d6 damage on a crit. Technically you get this at level 4 so possibly it's 4d12+8 vs 4d6, there are ways you could optimize it, Gunslinger is 4d6+2d4 on a crit which is slightly more but is it OP no. #ven if you did Exemplar, it be 4d6+2d4+2d4, if you go Unfailing bow on a crit. Which is 4d6+4d4, 40 damage at max vs 58 and this is not even considering any damage boosts.
Thing is, it's 30ft with Gunslinger accuracy, two attacks might be able ot keep up but that's a lot of work. You could switch to Thaumaturge for some more damage but actions. Dealing +2 damage per weapon dice is good plus the weakness can stack, That's at level 4, +8 damage per shot instead of 1d4, which is doubled to a crit from Gunslinger to 2d4 but you can trigger weakness multiple times based on how Crescent Spray is worded. So you can just get +8 on all three shots, which only increases as you level.
But I agree in the end, 2-handed weapon is the correct path over trying to use this, I will admit to this.
I would say yes, the fact that this feat front-loads three Strikes at 0 MAP means you get a turn that's incredibly above-curve, even if it does deplete your weapon's ammunition and uses a d6 damage die. The fact that the crescent cross is a combination weapon means that even after you run out of ammunition, you can switch to melee mode and keep on using the weapon still. If you're wielding a crescent cross in the other hand, you get to have another turn like this, and the cost of the second weapon can itself be mitigated with blazons of shared power. Two turns of significant burst damage I think is a lot more than what most feats offer, and the fact that you're making three ranged Strikes each time also means this comboes massively with on-hit mechanics like the Rogue's sneak attack damage. I'd want to test this properly to fully confirm, but Crescent Spray does look extremely powerful.
It's really strong first two turns potentially, but much reduced output after that.
If they change the wording of the feat to preclude multiple instance of precision damage (like Sneak Attack) it would make it pretty weak for anyone except like a Thaumaturge.
And if you're not adding precision damage (or another damage bonus) it's a weak ranged (d6) and a very weak melee weapon (d4).
Honestly, without adding multiple instances of precision damage it's probably too weak to be usable even with crescent cross training.
And as long as combat last more than 2 rounds (which is likely) when you average the damage out over the rounds of combat it's probably in line with other strong damage dealers.
However, I will agree it's very front loaded.
As a GM, if it proved to be disruptive in play I might ask a player to use only 1 (not two crescent crosses) and to either reload or switch to a different weapon after the first round. But I think it won't be necessary.
And again, it's only really on classes that have some big damage bonus they can apply on attacks. I think specifically its really the Rogue or Thaumaturge you'd have to watch out for.
Having two strong turns single-handedly guaranteed by a feat is already way above the expectations for most feats, and two turns will often be half an encounter or more. Beyond the balance considerations, my worry here is that this feat might lead to extremely repetitive behaviors across encounters, since your best bet will often be to just use Crescent Spray on your first two turns, with still a third action left to do any other single action you'd need to do. If this were a melee action, it'd be less of a given, but because this is something you can do from range, it also makes the action extremely reliable.
The simple solution is limit precision damage to once per Crescent Spray. Now the Thaumaturge is the only class (I think) that has the potential to make it any good.
And then just ask any Thaumaturge player not to do it, if you're worried about it.
That's the thing, though, even without precision damage I still think the action is quite strong. I'm also not talking about house-ruling fixes here, just the feat itself, though if I were to house-rule something I'd probably just limit the feat to two Strikes, which would avoid dealing too many Strikes on one turn and would preserve the element of better MAP (with action compression still around switching modes and barrels).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
At that point you've just basically remade the Double Shot feat, admittedly with action compression to avoid the interact cost of changing barrels.
And at that point you might as well use any other easier to use and better ranged weapon.
I can't find myself agreeing with this, for two reasons:
The very fact that taking a Strike out of Crescent Spray would still make it a lot better than Double Shot, a feat of the same level, I think is pretty solid confirmation that Crescent Cross Training is overpowered.
I don't agree at all that the base weapon is weak, let alone unusable, but if we're really operating on the premise that the weapon is bad, would the sounder principle not be to make the bad weapon good, and then not need an overpowered feat to lift it out of the gutter? The Gunslinger gets a ton of flak for having to operate with a weak weapon group, so why praise this instance?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You also do not need to load all 3 barrels, you could always only reload 2 barrels. You are still doing 2 Actions for 2 Strikes at 0 MAP against the same target, sure it isn't the whole 3 Strikes for 2 Actions but is 2 Attacks at 0 MAP as good as making 2 strikes at 0/-5?
Its just a lot of qualitative hand waiving to say 3x0MAP strikes is insanely OP without understanding how it actually unfolds in combat. Trying to contextualize it against other feats that do the same is apples to oranges when your remember those other weapons are reload 0, have static modifiers like propulsive or thrown, have larger weapon damage dice, might gain their static damage with less virtual feat or action taxes, might have theirbown means of MAP fixing, and can much more flexibly fit into reactive turn rotations if the enemy isn't perfectly where you want them or doing what you thought.
I do think we're committing that very same qualitative handwaving now, though. We all seem to be collectively forgetting that the crescent cross is a combination weapon that doesn't just cease to work when it runs out of ammunition; you can switch to melee mode and keep attacking just fine with a parry weapon. To qualify subsequent turns as "off-turns" therefore strikes me as incredibly blinkered, because those are turns where you'll be able to choose from any other feats you have access to in order to start making use of the melee part of those weapons. Those turns are only "off-turns" compared to the insanely strong burst of power you'd get from your first two turns (which, it bears repeating, is often more than half the turns you'll get in a combat encounter), and it is bizarre that we're imagining that a character would have absolutely no feats to use during those turns at all. If we want to honestly start talking about contextualizing, let's start with that bit of actual context.
I'm gonna start with this bit:
You can't have it both ways. If the weapon has a burst damage round you can't then baseline the weapon on that burst damage and ignore then long term effect of non burst turns against the overall combat sustained damage metric. Ignoring the 2 turn cycle clearly built into the weapon in a comparison is a bad faith position.
My rule of thumb when accusations like these start flying around unprompted on these forums is to find out where the person making the accusation is committing the same fault they're trying to pin on someone else. In this particular case, the point made has already been addressed several posts prior, like so:
Having two strong turns single-handedly guaranteed by a feat is already way above the expectations for most feats, and two turns will often be half an encounter or more.
So, to be clear: I'm not discounting the fact that the ranged portion of the crescent cross becomes less effective once you've emptied it of its shots, I'm simply pointing out that by the time you've run out of shots, the feat has already worked significantly above the curve. Because encounters tend to last 3 to 4 rounds, having two rounds' worth of very strong turns, i.e. half the encounter or more, is more than what one feat can normally provide on its own. Furthermore, your remaining rounds can be spent still using those weapons in melee with a full complement of runes, as opposed to many other ranged weapons forcing you to revert to a weaker backup weapon. Ignoring all of this evidence that has already been presented to you is what truly is arguing in bad faith here.
While I'm not sharing my DPR calcs, the ones I've run are not making your burst turns actually better than the meta of the game and on many builds is just flat worse.
I think we know the real reason for you not sharing your calculations, which is that sharing them would disprove your point. To wit: a Rogue using this for sneak attack damage would average 33.6 damage in one turn at 5th level against an at-level enemy with a high AC for their level, and this is not counting the AC reduction from being off-guard. By contrast, even if you somehow managed to add twice your spell rank to the damage of a top-rank thunderstrike at that level, it would only average about 24 damage (this by the way is one of the best spells at that level for single-target damage). At higher levels, this difference widens further with more damage dice and damage property runes, and this is before we start including other force multipliers like injury poisons or special ammunition. I'd say that's a pretty stark difference.
Its an aweful combination weapon. One side uses dex to hit and a 1d6 damage dice with no deadly, fatal, or static modifier. Then the other side uses strength on a 1d4 damage dice with no deadly, fatal, or agile. Your attack stat is split and you have the two smallest damage dice sizes available to choose from. Your attack stat forces a 16/18 starting STR/DEX which kills your ability to have out of combat skill and utility while still leaving you behind on attack bonus on the smallest non finesse melee damage dice. Most 1d4 martial weapons have finesse, agile, and like 2-3 other traits like deadly, trip, etc. I have no idea why you think its good or balanced. Its objectively very weak on both sides of the weapon and the ranged side is only made relevant by this one feat. No PC would choose to use this weapon if given a free choice in the system unless the purposefly want to handicap themselves for flavour/theme.
The issue that's becoming very obvious here is that you're looking at the two halves of this weapon in isolation while conspicuously refusing to acknowledge how they're both the same weapon. A d6 damage die is perfectly fine on a ranged weapon, and the parry trait is an added bonus. While the melee component isn't particularly strong, it has the benefit of being on the same weapon, meaning you get to switch for it and use all of the same runes for much better melee performance. The whole point of combination weapons is that they let you use two weapons with the same runes; if each weapon were on-par with non-combination weapons of their respective types, they'd be the only weapons people would pick outside of ABP (and if you're running ABP, you could just carry a bunch of crescent crosses and spam Crescent Spray to maximal effect every turn).
Also, while I'm seeking a way to have a crescent spray every turn because optimization is fun for some of us
I think this is the crux of the issue: you're trying to make this feat out to be something it's not, and that in fact no feat is to begin with. This isn't a game where one feat will solve all of your fights in perpetuity, this is a game where one feat will be useful on one turn, another fight might be useful on the next, and so on, or alternatively where you'll be leveraging multiple feats towards a particular combo. One feat single-handedly granting an effect that is both extremely strong and extremely reliable for one turn, let alone two with the aid of a single magic item, is already way above the curve. If you're regularly running 6-7 round encounters (which I question; level 8 monsters for instance average about 130 HP and would lose a massive chunk to you alone in the first two rounds), then for sure this feat will be comparatively less powerful by virtue of boosting a smaller amount of your turns, but in 3-4 round encounters its influence is massive.
This is no shortbow sadly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's also no strap problems like with shields, this is a weapon you can keep loaded on your hip / retrieval belt.
Even with Reload compressing actions, I still see dropping the empties as likely being the practical way to go.
Considering you can snap your fingers and poof a loaded C Cross into your hand for a free action, that action advantage is nuts.
False premise #1 -> Encounters tend to last 3 to 4 rounds. This is not an a priori fact like many people in the community try to treat it. The value will be based on combat severity, environmental effects, party composition, player preparedness, player skill level/execution, and to a certain degree luck based.
The numbers I provided for this feat would cause similar team-wide damage to end a PL+3 enemy within 2 rounds, so I'd say that the data supports a 3-4 round average. It is worth noting as well that you have furnished zero evidence in favor of the 6-to-8-round encounter you're promoting.
So lets propose a basis so that we don't keep talking past each other.
Basis #1: Parties are at full health and have renewable resources maximized before an encounter.
We're already not off to a great start; this is not a requirement of encounters, and is not terribly relevant to the feat being discussed unless we're counting ammunition loaded as part of this basis.
Basis #2: Due to Basis #1 an encounter of < medium threat is irrelevant to a discussion.
This does not follow, and fundamentally misunderstands the numbers I provided: the point of the comparison I made was not the at-level enemy being used, but the other sources of burst damage, which this feat eclipses.
Assuming a 4 person party, a PC that is taking a 'striker' only type role (ranged or melee) will be responsible for at least 37.5% to 50% of the fielded creature's HP pool to compensate for any PCs that might fill utility, buff, debuff, or healing roles in combat.
... says who? This premise is laughable; we're not playing World of Warcraft here where everyone's locked into strict DPS, tank, and healer roles, we're playing a game where everyone can contribute damage, utility, and so on. Even that "striker only" Rogue would have a third action to Demoralize an enemy and boost their Strikes even further, along with the effectiveness of their whole team.
PCs must spend a minimum of 1 stride to get into position at the start of combat.
... to get into melee, perhaps, but unless you're making the bizarre choice to place units over a hundred feet away from each other every encounter (in which case melee characters would need to spend more than one action Striding), the crescent cross user will be able to make ranged Strikes just fine.
PCs will need to switch targets (once per enemy) and suffer the action taxes that come along with with that.
Remind me of those action taxes again? I didn't know Hunt Prey was a universal action.
PCs that require a specific status will need to pay the associated action tax to set-up the status (e.g., flatfooted) per combat, per enemy, or per round as necessary.
In the case of many conditions, perhaps, but off-guard has the wonderful benefit of being automatically applied from flanking, to say nothing of how it is also incidentally applied from a great deal many other desirable effects, like the Trip action rendering an enemy prone. This is also not counting feats like Unbalancing Blow or Dread Striker that allow you to apply off-guard as a rider to other effects. You are making the false assumption here that each party member is only applying status effects for themselves, when the reality is that most conditions are designed to benefit you and your allies once applied.
The bog standard fighter with a 1D12 weapon is doing the baseline 37.5% damage every full round to one enemy of equivalent HP.
If this were about setting common ground, then you would have shown your work, but it appears I have to do it for you instead: a 5th-level Fighter has a 75% chance to hit an at-level enemy with high AC, including a 25% chance to crit, which on a second Strike in the turn becomes a 50% chance to hit with a 5% chance to crit. Two Strikes with a d12 weapon translate to (2 x 6.5 + 4) * 1.55 = 26.35 average damage. You'll notice that this is distinctly less than Crescent Spray still, and given how this would be about 34% of an at-level enemy's HP, you'd be right... except as you should have probably acknowledged before launching into this, fights in PF2e aren't just about swinging greatswords until someone dies. We need to start including conditions.
Take, for instance, the frightened condition: if the Rogue Demoralizes that enemy and makes them frightened 1, that damage already jumps up to 28.9, closer to that 37% you mentioned, and if that enemy is also off-guard (say, from being flanked), then that damage goes up to 34, of 44% of that enemy's HP. Meanwhile, Crescent Spray under those conditions would deal an average of 1.1*3*4*3.5 = 46.2 damage: on its own, this is about 60% of an at-level monster's HP, so those two alone would already be very likely to kill an enemy on the first round. Even with just Fighter-level damage, it would only take the damage contribution of one additional party member to finish off that monster, to say nothing of what the fourth party member can do: not only is 3-4 rounds an accurate estimate of that moderate-to-severe encounter, a Crescent Spray Rogue could probably shorten this dramatically, especially if they get lucky with their crits.
Weird dispersion to throw when you aren't providing any basis for your claims.
I have provided numbers you could have verified independently and listed the conditions under which I performed my calculations. I am perfectly in a position to cast aspersions here, because I know for a fact you haven't done the math, and I have done the work to show it. Take all the time you need to attend family stuff, as this isn't exactly a burning issue, but if we're going to sit down and do this discussion, then it is poor form to refuse to acknowledge the evidence I've provided as you've done, falsely claim I have nothing to support my claims, and then make claims yourself that have no basis in fact.
They aren't the same weapon.
They quite literally are. Yes, they use different stats that many martials will easily build in parallel, and both halves share the same runes, along with a bit of utility via the parry trait in either form. Discounting these benefits does not make it sound like you're really interested in having a grounded discussion here, and discounting this utility because it's supposedly all about maximizing DPR at all times comes across as horrendously disconnected from PF2e actual play and what it's about.
Can you switch barrels as a free action, allowing you to Strike 3 times on the same target and thus emptying your crossbow in one round?
No?
Then it's not overpowered...
Seriously, there's currently NOTHING that allows users to switch Capacity weapons' barrels as free actions as many times they would like...
I could see someone wielding a Crescent Cross or a Pepperbox in one hand and rotating/switching the barrels with the other hand in one quick motion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can you switch barrels as a free action, allowing you to Strike 3 times on the same target and thus emptying your crossbow in one round?
No?
Then it's not overpowered...
That is precisely what Crescent Spray lets you do:
You Strike up to three times with the ranged version of your crescent cross. If it is currently in its melee configuration, you can swap it to its ranged configuration as a free action before attempting these Strikes. You must have a bolt already chambered for each Strike and can Interact to swap to a different capacity chamber as a free action between each Strike. Each attack counts toward your multiple attack penalty, but you do not increase your penalty until you have made all your attacks.
Emphasis added. You get up to three free actions in addition to the three Strikes you make at the same MAP compression, so this is a huge amount of both action and accuracy compression.
1) Why do I feel like there's a target limit missing there? I mean, a "spray" feels like a "cone". Is it really ruling that in 2 actions, I can shoot 3 times on the same target?
2) Would this work with the Gauntlet Bow?
Feats and abilities from this archetype that normally work with a gauntlet bow also work with your crescent cross, treating the melee form of the crescent cross as a gauntlet where appropriate. You gain the Crescent Spray action.
Good to know... Now I see why it's kinda OP...