| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Shirren-Eye Rifle was pretty similar to Assassin Rifle before the errata, but now it's been dropped a die size and Deadly d12 swapped for Fatal d10. Assassin Rifle had Fatal d12 swapped for Deadly d10, while keeping the damage die. If I wanted to deal d10 damage, I'd just use Assassin Rifle, especially since Deadly adds more dice.
Is Shirren-Eye Rifle meant to be Fatal d12, a crit-fishing sniper rifle that does lower base damage but more on a crit at certain levels? Or is it just a worse weapon?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I can see that the weapons are pretty equivalent on their stats and traits in general. I'm not entirely sure why that is a horrible thing though.
It's also kinda debatable whether Fatal or Deadly does more damage at higher levels. So I am not going to immediately accept the blanket statement that having Deadly d12 instead of Fatal d12 makes a weapon objectively and unarguably worse. You will need to make some sort of compelling argument for that one.
|
It's also kinda debatable whether Fatal or Deadly does more damage at higher levels.
How is this debatable? Assuming the fatal die is at least as high as the base die and the fatal die is at least as high as the deadly die then fatal is at least as good.
Is there some weapon where the fatal die is lower than the base die?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I can see that the weapons are pretty equivalent on their stats and traits in general. I'm not entirely sure why that is a horrible thing though.
It's also kinda debatable whether Fatal or Deadly does more damage at higher levels. So I am not going to immediately accept the blanket statement that having Deadly d12 instead of Fatal d12 makes a weapon objectively and unarguably worse. You will need to make some sort of compelling argument for that one.
Your confusion likely stems from the fact that you looked at the pre-erratta versions. The post erratta versions
'The shirren eye rifle (page 266) deals 1d8 piercing damage and has the analog, fatal d10, kickback, unwieldy, and volley (30 ft) traits.'
'The assassin's rifle (page 266) has the analog, backstabber, breakdown, deadly d10, kickback, unwieldy, and volley (30 ft) traits.'
(Unmentionded: The Assassin's Rifle is presumably keeping its 1d10 damage die. If it does not, the erratta does not mention it.)
Even on a crit at low levels the Shirren Eye Rifle does less damage than the Assassin's Rifle, and the equation gets worse for it the further up the levels we go.
The Shirren Eye Rifle is now a direct downgrade to the mythical lost technology of an Arquebus.
How is this debatable? Assuming the Fatal die is at least as high as the deadly die surely the fatal is always at least as good?
It's also kinda debatable whether Fatal or Deadly does more damage at higher levels.
No. If the Fatal die is the same as the Deadly die, Deadly eventually adds two and even three dice instead of the one that Fatal caps at. Normally, Fatal makes up for that by boosting the weapon's base damage dice two steps, but in this case, it's only one step and it's only boosting the base dice to d10, which is what the other weapon normally has.
The Shirren Eye Rifle can't glitch. and what are the relative costs of the two?
Assassin Rifle is also analog, and only 20 credits more.
The Shirren Eye Rifle can't glitch. and what are the relative costs of the two?
Assassin is also Analog. It's 100 credits vs 80 credits for Shirren.
So basically if you're missing 20 whole credits at character creation. But if you're going budget anyways for the first level, might as well just go Seeker, as the money (and lack of unwieldy) will likely make more of a difference (60 credits) than potential deadly d8 at level 1.
Any time after level 1 though, Shirren-Eye should be replaced immediately.
I don't think having small upgrades like this is bad per se, but it does kinda stand out in a space desperate for variety (snipers).
|
|
No. If the Fatal die is the same as the Deadly die, Deadly eventually adds two and even three dice instead of the one that Fatal caps at. Normally, Fatal makes up for that by boosting the weapon's base damage dice two steps, but in this case, it's only one step and it's only boosting the base dice to d10, which is what the other weapon normally has.How is this debatable? Assuming the Fatal die is at least as high as the deadly die surely the fatal is always at least as good?
It's also kinda debatable whether Fatal or Deadly does more damage at higher levels.
You're absolutely right. Thank you. Oh, and, Doh!!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Balance aside, it's kind of weird that pre-errata the assassin's rifle was the fatal weapon and the shirren rifle was deadly and they inverted them.
The balance really doesn't make sense either. It's not just one of those issues of a trait being over or undervalued either. d8/fatal d10 is always worse than d10/deadly d10, you do less damage when you don't crit and the same damage when you do... until deadly starts adding extra dice at high levels then it's always a downgrade.
But then the assassin's rifle also has backstabber and breakdown on top of that. Backstabber isn't very much damage and breakdown is hard to put a value on, but that's still two extra traits for the weapon that's already unequivocally better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The Shirren Eye Rifle is now a direct downgrade to the mythical lost technology of an Arquebus.
?!
OK, let me walk through this. We have:
Shirren Eye Rifle:
Category Martial
Price 80 credits
Damage 1d8 P
Bulk 1
Hands 2
Range 120 ft.
Reload 1
Upgrades: 1
Traits: analog, fatal d10, kickback, unwieldy, volley (30ft)
Arquebus:
Category Martial
Price 8 gp(=80sp)
Damage 1d8 P
Bulk 2
Hands 2
Range 150 ft.
Reload 1
Upgrades: (can have some)
Traits: fatal d12, kickback, concussive
*Same with respect to: required proficiency (martial), price, base damage, # of hands, reload rate, having the kickback trait, and (effectively) being analog.
*Hard to compare with respect to: upgrade slots (1, versus the kinds of upgrades you can put on an Arquebus).
*The Shirren Eye Rifle's advantages: 1 bulk (vs 2 bulk).
*The Arquebus's advantages: 150' range (vs 120'), fatal d12 (vs fatal d10), concussive (vs not), no unwieldy drawback, no volley drawback.
So, bulk aside, the Arquebus isn't just better than the Shirren Eye Rifle. It's much, much better: it has a higher fatal die, has the concussive property, and doesn't have either of the punishing unwieldy or volley drawbacks.
Wow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think one reason the SF2 sniper rifles got trimmed back on fatal/deadly damage, which PF2 guns don't share, is that they have the Pick category extra damage crit effect. So for anyone with crit spec the Shirren Eye actually does 1 extra damage per die on average (+2 per die crit spec, minus 1 per die lower fatal die).
Of course the Arquebus's gun crit spec is plenty powerful, it's just not damage focused.
I think one reason the SF2 sniper rifles got trimmed back on fatal/deadly damage, which PF2 guns don't share, is that they have the Pick category extra damage crit effect. So for anyone with crit spec the Shirren Eye actually does 1 extra damage per die on average (+2 per die crit spec, minus 1 per die lower fatal die).
Of course the Arquebus's gun crit spec is plenty powerful, it's just not damage focused.
No. I don't believe that is the reason at all. Critical Specialisations are meant to be about equally powerful, but even if you were to argue against that, the Firearms spec is arguably more powerful than a bit of extra damage.
That aside, we don't need to reach there. It's plainly obvious why the most prominent Snipers got nerfed: Sniper Operative received a substantial buff to its Enhanced Exploit. Which, to be clear, was needed in my opinion.
Regrettably, I do also think it was a really bad way to go about it. This kicks in at 9th level, the Sniper Operative very much needed it at a lower level, but, also, the nerf to the Sniper weapon group now makes them a gimmick weapon primarily usable by one subclass, and only above 9th level. They were already pretty weak due to Unwieldy, this just made it a lot worse.
No one but a Sniper Operative should touch them, and even then probably only from 9th level onward.
I think even a normal operative could make some decent use of a sniper rifle although probably not as their primary gun. The range+aim+kickback and maybe backstabber gives you a pretty good amount of alpha strikes well beyond the range of most things ability to respond so you are getting a fair amount of shots before you could potentially be forced to swap to something else.
They are also tech weapons so can get weapon mod upgrades which helps.
It really depends on the adventure if you are doing dungeon crawls/inside ship type fights probably don't bring a long gun. If you are exploring alien worlds in outdoor settings if your GM is willing to let you make full use of starting engagments at sniper range they are are still pretty dang good even for non sniper operatives.
I think even a normal operative could make some decent use of a sniper rifle although probably not as their primary gun. The range+aim+kickback and maybe backstabber gives you a pretty good amount of alpha strikes well beyond the range of most things ability to respond so you are getting a fair amount of shots before you could potentially be forced to swap to something else.
They are also tech weapons so can get weapon mod upgrades which helps.
It really depends on the adventure if you are doing dungeon crawls/inside ship type fights probably don't bring a long gun. If you are exploring alien worlds in outdoor settings if your GM is willing to let you make full use of starting engagments at sniper range they are are still pretty dang good even for non sniper operatives.
No offense, they are, in a very literal way, worse than an Arquebus. And the Arquebus isn't even a standout weapon. Their range increment is 120. It's not a lot. Yes, on a theoretical giant flat plane with no full cover they would be momentarily not horrid for about the first turn until you get your actual weapon out.
And I think that's a genuinely very disappointing state for a weapon. You'd be better off making them a consumable at that point.