Ranged Tactics Toolbox: any good?

[Kurald Galain]

I've heard that this is last month's Paizo release, the Ranged Tactics Toolbox. I haven't heard anyone speak or write about it though... is it any good? I suppose this is mainly about archer characters, but does it have something useful for casters too? Worth buying or should I pass on it?

[Psyren]

There's a few goodies inside from the copy I glanced through (not mine.)

- Cyclonic: a ranged weapon property that lets your shots ignore wind
- Sniping/Imp. Sniping/Gr. Sniping: +5/+10/+15 to remain hidden while using the sniping action.
- Veering: shots bypass partial cover and mitigate cover/soft cover.

Archetypes - I saw the Far Strike Monk and Juggler Bard, I think there are more. Those two are centered around ranged weapons.

Also Clerics get Channel Ray which lets them turn their channel energy into a ray. Healing lasers!

[Snowbluff]

The wind one looks good. Veering would be redundant depending on what you're doing.

[avr]

There's also ranger and barbarian archetypes. The latter, primal hunter, is OK for a ranged barbarian (tho' not nearly as good as the savage technologist), the former, toxophilite, is ... odd. Nice if you wanted to shoot clay pigeons I guess, but few people really want to specialise in shooting objects.

The juggler bard (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo---bard-archetypes/juggler-bard-archetype) would be handy if you wanted to TWF and still be able to cast spells, or if you want to keep a variety of wands or metamagic rods ready.

There's a couple of rogue talents to let rogues throw bombs. Not enough to make it more than an occasional trick, but it's a nice gesture towards improving rogue talents.

There are some new magus arcana. They could have some uses but aren't going to be must haves for anyone. Rate them orange or red in guide format.

[Snowbluff]

The juggler bard (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/archetypes/paizo---bard-archetypes/juggler-bard-archetype) would be handy if you wanted to TWF and still be able to cast spells, or if you want to keep a variety of wands or metamagic rods ready.

What? I'm not sure if losing Versatile Performance is worth it. Still, it's an interesting idea. Maybe if you had a bonus for doing it for feinting or something.

[grarrrg]

toxophilite, is ... odd

The best thing I can say about it is that it doesn't trade away any of the 'normal' Ranger stuff they like to trade away.
So it should combine with most of the other archetypes.


Archetypes - I saw the Far Strike Monk and Juggler Bard, I think there are more. Those two are centered around ranged weapons.

Also Clerics get Channel Ray which lets them turn their channel energy into a ray. Healing lasers!
Why does every Monk archetype EVER trade away Still Mind?

Also, you are required to make *pew pew* noises when Channeling Rays.


What? I'm not sure if losing Versatile Performance is worth it. Still, it's an interesting idea. Maybe if you had a bonus for doing it for feinting or something.

No, see, Juggler is a 2 level extension of the Gunslinger class.
They get to TWF with Guns and gain Evasion.

[Snowbluff]

No, see, Juggler is a 2 level extension of the Gunslinger class.
They get to TWF with Guns and gain Evasion.

HAHAHA! I guess that works. I mean, if you haven't decided to play a Gundolon instead. It doesn't even have to be an OP one, just one with an arm for reloading.

Seriously, losing all of Bards huge skill efficiency is really heartbreaking.

[Prime32]

The skulking sniper's blowgun (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/specific-magic-weapons/skulking-sniper-s-blowgun) grants you what's basically Darkstalker. Better in some ways, since the wording is broad enough to cover niche stuff like touchsight.

Proxy Summoning (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/general-feats/proxy-summoning) and Warning Shot (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/warning-shot-combat) have potential. Concentrated Splash (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/concentrated-splash-combat) has interesting uses for an Underground Chemist (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/rogue/archetypes/paizo---rogue-archetypes/underground-chemist).

[Psyren]

Juggunler seems like it could be a lot of fun. Bang-toss-reload-bang-toss-reload...

[Snowbluff]

Juggunler seems like it could be a lot of fun. Bang-toss-reload-bang-toss-reload...
Well, you don't even have to use it to reload. Juggle some muskets. (http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g366/Kyou_Fujibayashi2/Mami-Tomoe.gif)You don't have to be able to fight with them in one hand, just hold them.

[Psyren]

Well, you don't even have to use it to reload. Juggle some muskets. (http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g366/Kyou_Fujibayashi2/Mami-Tomoe.gif)You don't have to be able to fight with them in one hand, just hold them.

That's Madoka Magicka right? I need to get around to watching that.

[Snowbluff]

That's Madoka Magicka right? I need to get around to watching that.

Yeah. Honestly, that's the least interes- wait. No, there are lamer characters. :smalltongue:

[Deadkitten]

A Juggler also seems to be "wielding" all those objects at the same time so I can see further headaches with that distinction.
"Wielding" a weapon is a mess from what I can remember in pathfinder.

[Psyren]

A Juggler also seems to be "wielding" all those objects at the same time so I can see further headaches with that distinction.
"Wielding" a weapon is a mess from what I can remember in pathfinder.

No more than in 3.5, and at least here if something funky comes up we can get it FAQed. Did you have something particular in mind?

[Deadkitten]

Nothing in particular. "Weilding" was something I never looked into despite it showing up in their rules forum quite frequently.

It was something I tended to just common sense away myself.
I have a feeling something will come up though...

[Deadkitten]

Swashbuckler might be able to dit to TWF effectively. But I don't see that as a problem.

[grarrrg]

Well, you don't even have to use it to reload. Juggle some muskets. (http://i1098.photobucket.com/albums/g366/Kyou_Fujibayashi2/Mami-Tomoe.gif)You don't have to be able to fight with them in one hand, just hold them.

The Juggle ability says "must be able to hold and wield an object in one hand in order to juggle it." While you can hold a Musket with 1 hand, you still need 2 to fire properly, so this doesn't work. :smallfrown:

[Snowbluff]

The Juggle ability says "must be able to hold and wield an object in one hand in order to juggle it." While you can hold a Musket with 1 hand, you still need 2 to fire properly, so this doesn't work. :smallfrown:

D: D: D:

You can wield a crossbow in one had with a penalty, right? Why not with guns?! :smallfrown:

I was thinking of an awesome Mami build while I was at work, too. It was going to be a bard with the good gun spells like Named Bullet and GMW. I was going to compensate for the expense (both in spell slots and GP) of multiple magic muskets by enhancing the ammunition instead.

[torrasque666]

D: D: D:

You can wield a crossbow in one had with a penalty, right? Why not with guns?! :smallfrown:

I was thinking of an awesome Mami build while I was at work, too. It was going to be a bard with the good gun spells like Named Bullet and GMW. I was going to compensate for the expense (both in spell slots and GP) of multiple magic muskets by enhancing the ammunition instead.

Because if you try to one hand a musket you hurt yourself a whole lot more than with a crossbow?

[Snowbluff]

Because if you try to one hand a musket you hurt yourself a whole lot more than with a crossbow?
That's double jeopardy! I'm already taking penalties with misfire!

[Dr.Bakuga]

Tuned Bowstring (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/r-z/tuned-bowstring) is a nice magic item for an Archer Bard.

[Snowbluff]

Tuned Bowstring (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/r-z/tuned-bowstring) is a nice magic item for an Archer Bard.

That's be nice if we weren't abusing Opportunistic Gambler. :smalltongue:

[Dr.Bakuga]

Optimistic Gambler (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/traits/campaign-traits/second-darkness/optimistic-gambler) is a campaign-specific trait that may not be available.

Furthermore, it only extends MORALE bonuses: Inspire Courage provides COMPETENCE bonuses to atk/dmg(and morale bonuses vs fear).


Tuned Bowstrings can provide things like:

Infinite Fast Healing (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/bardic-masterpieces/masterpieces/life-budding-in-salted-earth-sing-string-wind)

Arbitrarily long Awaken (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/bard/bardic-masterpieces/masterpieces/the-bear-s-jig-string-wing)

And of course, arbitrarily long Inspire Rage, Inspire Courage, Dance of the Dead, Dweomercraft...

[Snowbluff]

Actually, you'd probably run out of arrows. "Infinite" being "a non-arbitrary number of rounds based on your carrying capacity, money, and willingness to spend a standard action each round. Not to mention shooting stuff when it's not a appropriate."


Furthermore, it only extends MORALE bonuses: Inspire Courage provides COMPETENCE bonuses to atk/dmg(and morale bonuses vs fear).
Effects that grant morale bonuses. Inspire Courage is an effect that grants a morale bonus. I mean, I only had to click on the link you provided to double check that.

[AvatarVecna]

That's double jeopardy! I'm already taking penalties with misfire!

It's almost like the developers don't want you to triple-wield large firearms!

[Snowbluff]

It's almost like the developers don't want you to triple-wield large firearms!
It's not like I would be getting extra attacks. I would just toss the empty muskets after I fire them and juggle up some loaded ones. I mean- *cough*

Those philistines! It already requires the world's worst bard archetype! :smalltongue:

[Coidzor]

The wind one looks good. Veering would be redundant depending on what you're doing.

It seems like Veering takes care of the half of the problem with firing into melee that Precise Shot doesn't without having to spend a feat on Improved Precise Shot.

[Deadkitten]

Combat Juggling (Ex)

At 2nd level, a juggler can hold and wield (in other words, “juggle”) up to three items or weapons in his hands. The juggler must be able to hold and wield an object in one hand in order to juggle it.

This ability doesn't grant the juggler additional attacks, though it does allow him to use different weapons as part of a full attack. As long as he is juggling fewer than three objects, the juggler is considered to have a free hand (for the purposes of drawing a weapon, using somatic components, using Deflect Arrows, and so on). At 6th level and every 4 levels thereafter, the maximum number of objects the juggler can juggle increases by one, to a maximum of seven objects at 18th level.

If the juggler is affected by any action or condition that would require a concentration check while he is juggling, he must attempt a Sleight of Hand check to continue juggling and avoid losing concentration. The check's DC is the same as a concentration check, treating the spell level as twice the number of objects being juggled.

If the juggler fails his Sleight of Hand check, he drops all juggled objects but one, determined randomly.

This ability replaces versatile performance.

So lets see here.... Juggler Bard 2, Daring Champion Cavalier 18. It seems like with this ability you can still benefit from Precise Strike while "wielding" two weapons in each hand.

So that would give you 8 attacks with haste for weapon damage + ability damage+ 36 PER HIT Provided you are using challenge at the same time. Seems pretty neat.

[9mm]

Juggunler seems like it could be a lot of fun. Bang-toss-reload-bang-toss-reload...

Gun Twriling (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/grit-feats/gun-twirling-grit) is awesome

[Psyren]

Gun Twriling (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/grit-feats/gun-twirling-grit) is awesome

Neat, so Gunslingers can do this after all. Fire main, holster offhand, reload main, draw offhand, fire offhand, holster main, reload offhand, draw main, repeat.

[grarrrg]

Gun Twriling (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/grit-feats/gun-twirling-grit) is awesome

Gun Twirling requires a 4 Feat investment, most of which are otherwise "eh" (the 2 requisites, and Quick Draw). And there's the chance the DM will put a limit on how many Free Actions (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9r85) per round, of which you need THREE Free Actions per each reload (holster>reload>draw).

Juggler Bard/Alchemist+Arm is a 2 level dip that accomplishes the same thing.

So you have to ask yourself which you value more, feats? or levels?

[9mm]

Gun Twirling requires a 4 Feat investment, most of which are otherwise "eh" (the 2 requisites, and Quick Draw). And there's the chance the DM will put a limit on how many Free Actions (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9r85) per round, of which you need THREE Free Actions per each reload (holster>reload>draw).

Juggler Bard/Alchemist+Arm is a 2 level dip that accomplishes the same thing.

So you have to ask yourself which you value more, feats? or levels?

Plus you can just spend 10000 gp (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/e-g/glove-of-storing) for the same trick. So in the end, it comes down to how many free actions the GM allows, as the limit on the number of shots down range is, and always will be, how often you can reload as a free action. How you get there is up to the player.

[grarrrg]

Plus you can just spend 10000 gp (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/e-g/glove-of-storing) for the same trick.

Not quite.
You can only have/use ONE Glove of Storing, and there is no listed action to "switch what your hands are carrying with each other".
So if you 'store' the right gun, you can reload the left, but can only 'unstore' the right gun in the right hand, leaving both hands full, and no way to 'store' the left gun. Thus the right gun remains unloaded.

[Psyren]

Gun Twirling requires a 4 Feat investment, most of which are otherwise "eh" (the 2 requisites, and Quick Draw).

Why wouldn't you have Weapon Focus and Quick Draw as a gunslinger though? And they only need 3 feats, not 4 (since they do have the grit class feature, they don't need Amateur Gunslinger.) That just leaves Dazzling Display, which I agree is eh, but Mysterious Stranger can get some use out of it.


And there's the chance the DM will put a limit on how many Free Actions (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9r85) per round, of which you need THREE Free Actions per each reload (holster>reload>draw).

Free actions were always the DM's purview, even in 3.5. (PHB 139: "However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free.")

That FAQ didn't add anything that wasn't already part of the game, save to empower inexperienced DMs who may not have realized they have a recourse if something feels off or excessive to them or for the level of combat they're running.


So you have to ask yourself which you value more, feats? or levels?

Again, two of those feats you'll likely be picking up anyway, so the cost is a bit more sunk than you think.

[Snowbluff]

Weapon Focus is a craptacular feat for a gunslinger. Accuracy isn't a big issue with them.

Gun Twirling requires a 4 Feat investment, most of which are otherwise "eh" (the 2 requisites, and Quick Draw). And there's the chance the DM will put a limit on how many Free Actions (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9r85) per round, of which you need THREE Free Actions per each reload (holster>reload>draw).

Juggler Bard/Alchemist+Arm is a 2 level dip that accomplishes the same thing.

So you have to ask yourself which you value more, feats? or levels? I don't think dazzling display is any good for a gunslinger. Feinting isn't that great. I guess you could go... Shatter Defenses for more consistent dex denial for your touch attacks. It would work with the prerequisites, too. Oh, and it would work for more attacks, depending.


Plus you can just spend 10000 gp (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/e-g/glove-of-storing) for the same trick. So in the end, it comes down to how many free actions the GM allows, as the limit on the number of shots down range is, and always will be, how often you can reload as a free action. How you get there is up to the player.

Well, some people don't like relying on items. That being said, this sucks unless you are using Iaijutsu (3.5 version) with your sword cane. :smalltongue:

[grarrrg]

Why wouldn't you have Weapon Focus and Quick Draw as a gunslinger though? And they only need 3 feats, not 4... That just leaves Dazzling Display, which I agree is eh, but Mysterious Stranger can get some use out of it...
Again, two of those feats you'll likely be picking up anyway, so the cost is a bit more sunk than you think.

4 feat investment includes Gun Twirling.
Weapon Focus is garbage, and only serves as a feat tax for other actually useful things.
Dazzling Display will be worthless for the majority of builds.
That leaves Quick Draw and Gun Twirling as "actually necessary" to TWF.

[Psyren]

Weapon Focus is garbage, and only serves as a feat tax for other actually useful things.

Sure, but if you're going for those things anyway, there's no reason to continue considering it a cost - that's all I'm saying.

(And for the record, I'm not against the Juggler-2-dip either)

[Coidzor]

Sure, but if you're going for those things anyway, there's no reason to continue considering it a cost - that's all I'm saying.

(And for the record, I'm not against the Juggler-2-dip either)

So you're saying that a feat tax isn't a feat tax if you want what the feat tax is a prerequisite for? Why would you say that a feat tax isn't a feat tax if you want what the feat tax is a prerequisite for? :smallconfused:

[Snowbluff]

Sure, but if you're going for those things anyway, there's no reason to continue considering it a cost - that's all I'm saying. Well most of those chains are expensive as-is, and that's on top of the ranged fighting feat taxes.

I've wondered about weapon focus. Should it really scale? It's a 5% across the board, but that's low. On the other hand it's a relatively small +1 when compared to your other bonuses. [/thoughtleak]


(And for the record, I'm not against the Juggler-2-dip either)

We should petition Paizo for musket juggling.

[grarrrg]

Sure, but if you're going for those things anyway, there's no reason to continue considering it a cost - that's all I'm saying.

Oh, you'll use it, there's no doubt there.
But it really doesn't justify itself, especially on a Gunslinger.


We should petition Paizo for musket juggling.
Hear hear!

[Extra Anchovies]

Well most of those chains are expensive as-is, and that's on top of the ranged fighting feat taxes.

Granted, Weapon Focus already has a spot in the ranged feat tree if you're going for the Snap Shot chain, but I still agree that it shouldn't be a thing (or should be a better feat).


I've wondered about weapon focus. Should it really scale? It's a 5% across the board, but that's low. On the other hand it's a relatively small +1 when compared to your other bonuses. [/thoughtleak]

Maybe +1 to hit per five points of BAB, rounded up?

[Psyren]

It's small, sure, but it also stacks with everything. Luckstones operate under similar principles.

For the record I'd be fine with it scaling slightly. I think all feats should, though a lot of little things all scaling can have a butterfly effect on the math if we're not careful.


So you're saying that a feat tax isn't a feat tax if you want what the feat tax is a prerequisite for? Why would you say that a feat tax isn't a feat tax if you want what the feat tax is a prerequisite for? :smallconfused:

Because it's a sunk cost. A tax you pay whether or not you do X should not be considered a barrier to doing X - that's a fallacy.

[grarrrg]

Because it's a sunk cost. A tax you pay whether or not you do X should not be considered a barrier to doing X - that's a fallacy.

Sunk Cost assumes that you have already paid the cost. In order for Weapon Focus to qualify as a Sunk Cost you would need to take it based on it's own merits. Taking it to qualify for another feat, and ONLY because it lets you qualify for that other feat leaves it firmly in Feat Tax territory. Most people would NOT be inclined to take Weapon Focus on a Gunslinger, as it is _really_ not that great.
There are _2_ 'typical' Gunslinger feats that require Weapon Focus; Gun Twirling and Snap Shot (sort of 3 if you count the technically 3.5 Gunslinger-feat).
Even if you took Gun Twirling and Snap Shot, and just for funsies decided to do Intimidate and get some use out of Dazzling Display, Weapon Focus would still just be a Feat Tax. The pain is lessened because it lets you get 3 feats you actually wanted, but it is still just a feat tax.


There's also the fact that Retraining is a thing, so if you did happen to 'accidentally' take Weapon Focus, you could just retrain it to something else
Thus Sunk Cost doesn't really apply, because you still decide to actively keep Weapon Focus, and a Sunk Cost is something you can never get back.

[Psyren]

"Taking it to get X" is indeed a tax.

Already having it for X, deciding you subsequently want Gun Twirling, and then saying that requirement makes Gun Twirling too costly, is sunk cost fallacy.

[9mm]

We should petition Paizo for musket juggling.

Why stop at muskets? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNyxXkCmCLI)

[grarrrg]

Already having it for X, deciding you subsequently want Gun Twirling, and then saying that requirement makes Gun Twirling too costly, is sunk cost fallacy.

Considering we are not discussing a specific pre-existing build, then Sunk Cost cannot apply, as there is nothing 'taken' yet.
And a properly planned Gunslinger build will most likely either not have Weapon Focus, or have it as a Feat-Tax for something they actually want.

And finally, there's the Opportunity Cost of spending one of your limited feats on Weapon Focus. And remember, Retraining can get rid of a feat if you find you changed your build partway through.



I've wondered about weapon focus. Should it really scale? It's a 5% across the board, but that's low. On the other hand it's a relatively small +1 when compared to your other bonuses. [/thoughtleak]Maybe +1 to hit per five points of BAB, rounded up?

I say roll Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus and Critical Focus all into the same feat.
Flat +1 Bonus, with 'if you have a Fighter level of 8+ it becomes a +2'.
+1/5 character level to Crit-Confirm Rolls
Possibly have it apply to a Fighter Weapon Group instead of a single weapon.

So a level 10 Character will have +1 to all attacks, with an additional +2 to Crit-Confirms (net +3 vs. w/o the feat).
A level 20 Character with enough Fighter levels will have +2 all attacks and +4 Crit-Confirm (net +6).

[Snowbluff]

Why stop at muskets? (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNyxXkCmCLI)
First off, Homura is just using her extradimensional equipment. No juggling involved there.

Secondly, that fight was BS to the point it wasn't internally consistent. It's just an example of how the writing goes downhill when Mami is on screen. I know it's hard to write using one hand, but come on! Shooting the ribbon doesn't work at the start, but suddenly does at the end? They gave us a fight to fill screen time with nothing at stake, and had to horribly nerf one of the characters to do it. Great.

I know Mami is supposed to be stronger, but Homura is smarter, more experienced, and has had to put up with Mami's crap for 100 loops at least. Mami is a problem in general. I'm surprised anything she can do would surprise Homura.

So Mami has a whole bunch of powers that have never been established, but Homura uses none of the other ones that she has developed, like the wing thing?

Considering we are not discussing a specific pre-existing build, then Sunk Cost cannot apply, as there is nothing 'taken' yet.
And a properly planned Gunslinger build will most likely either not have Weapon Focus, or have it as a Feat-Tax for something they actually want. Do you even get enough feats to have 2 weapon focus lines on the same build?



I say roll Weapon Focus, Greater Weapon Focus and Critical Focus all into the same feat.
Flat +1 Bonus, with 'if you have a Fighter level of 8+ it becomes a +2'.
+1/5 character level to Crit-Confirm Rolls
Possibly have it apply to a Fighter Weapon Group instead of a single weapon.

So a level 10 Character will have +1 to all attacks, with an additional +2 to Crit-Confirms (net +3 vs. w/o the feat).
A level 20 Character with enough Fighter levels will have +2 all attacks and +4 Crit-Confirm (net +6).
Well, we can write this one off. Fighter levels? No thanks. And by no thanks I mean "I ate the pages in your CRB that referred to fighter." The same goes for a BAB solution. What about the 3/4 classes? :smalltongue:

I like the idea of rolling the weapon something chain into 1 feat and applying it to all weapons. However, an ideal solution would work for all characters, including ones who use magical and supernatural attack forms, like the Soundstriker bard.

[torrasque666]

I like the idea of rolling the weapon something chain into 1 feat and applying it to all weapons. However, an ideal solution would work for all characters, including ones who use magical and supernatural attack forms, like the Soundstriker bard.

So in order for martials to have nice things, it has to apply to everyone else as well? Meaning that it still sucks to be a martial?

[Snowbluff]

So in order for martials to have nice things, it has to apply to everyone else as well? Meaning that it still sucks to be a martial?

Meaning yes. If you're a fighter, you should not be better than a bard, inquisitor, or druid, or monk (for various levels of understanding and play).

Meaning no, because you made an error if you think an attack bonus would have any bearing on the difference between the mundane and the others.

[torrasque666]

I mean more your.... "ideal" solution. It is in no way ideal if all it does is give EVERYONE a boost.

[Snowbluff]

I mean more your.... "ideal" solution. It is in no way ideal if all it does is give EVERYONE a boost.

Because we should arbitrarily single a class out to receive a halfway decent feat to improve an attack bonus.

It's not a buff to mundanes or casters. It's bringing the feat in line with others, as well as making it an option for all classes to provide everyone with the option if they want it. Making it open ended would mean we won't need Soundstriker thread #401 on "hey this doesn't work with it, either." Fighter is probably the last class that needs a bonus to hit, anyway. MAD classes like monk need all the help they can get, and if this feat can help make up a for a harsh stat spread, then it's for the best.

[torrasque666]

Or, rather than simply moving the posts, you can in fact make it so that the class that is supposedly the best at swinging a sword is actually the damn best at swinging the sword. Fighter needs more love. Sometimes the only way to accomplish that is by giving it fighter-only feats and saying "tough luck" to everyone else who wants it. I'm not talking about simply a bonus to hit. I'm taking point against your stance that a single class can't get nice things that others can't.

[Extra Anchovies]

Or, rather than simply moving the posts, you can in fact make it so that the class that is supposedly the best at swinging a sword is actually the damn best at swinging the sword. Fighter needs more love. Sometimes the only way to accomplish that is by giving it fighter-only feats and saying "tough luck" to everyone else who wants it. I'm not talking about simply a bonus to hit. I'm taking point against your stance that a single class can't get nice things that others can't.

The fighter should also get class features on the odd levels. Not things as major as feats, but something.

[Snowbluff]

I'm taking point against your stance that a single class can't get nice things that others can't.
It's a feat. Everyone has the ability to take feats. Ergo, feats should be more open ended if possible. If you want to give the fighter something nice, than talk to Anchovies. His idea was good, even if he agrees with you. Don't even make it a crummy attack bonus. I'll laugh at you if you do.

[grarrrg]

Well, we can write this one off. Fighter levels? No thanks. And by no thanks I mean "I ate the pages in your CRB that referred to fighter." The same goes for a BAB solution. What about the 3/4 classes? :smalltongue:

Just what exactly were you reading?
The only "fighter" part was the implementation of Greater Weapon Focus. The requirements would be the same as regular Weapon Focus (or possibly nothing at all if we go with a 'weapon group' or 'everything' approach). And it was already based on character level and not Bab.

Also, the 'design goal' is 'minimal disruption'. I'm looking to tweak existing, not to write brand new things from scratch.


The fighter should also get class features on the odd levels. Not things as major as feats, but something.

Really shouldn't have to point out that this is a Pathfinder thread, seeing as how the title of the thread is the title of a Pathfinder book.

[Snowbluff]

Just what exactly were you reading?
The only "fighter" part was the implementation of Greater Weapon Focus. The requirements would be the same as regular Weapon Focus (or possibly nothing at all if we go with a 'weapon group' or 'everything' approach). And it was already based on character level and not Bab.

Also, the 'design goal' is 'minimal disruption'. I'm looking to tweak existing, not to write brand new things from scratch.
Anchovies mentioned BAB scaling, so I put my comment about it there. Sorry if you didn't understand. You chained and enslaved the scaling part of the attack bonus to a specific class for no reason. It does defeat the point of making weapon focus a good feat if most classes aren't benefiting any more that they were regularly.

It was my thought. Shouldn't I be the one setting the design goal? And if you were being minimally disruptive, why not just erase the part that requires a specific weapon altogether? It's not a huge change.



Really shouldn't have to point out that this is a Pathfinder thread, seeing as how the title of the thread is the title of a Pathfinder book. Numbers aren't really classes features, either. It's like saying BAB or having a good will save is a class feature. D:

[grarrrg]

You chained and enslaved the scaling part of the attack bonus to a specific class for no reason.
There are TWO scaling parts,

Flat +1 Bonus, with 'if you have a Fighter level of 8+ it becomes a +2'.
+1/5 character level to Crit-Confirm Rolls
Only the "greater weapon focus" is 'chained' to a class, the 'crit-confirm' applies regardless.

Even removing the "greater" part still leaves it better than the two other feats.


why not just erase the part that requires a specific weapon altogether? It's not a huge change.
Also mentioned:

Possibly have it apply to a Fighter Weapon Group instead of a single weapon.

You don't need to be a Fighter to reference/use "Fighter" weapon groups.
That way it still retained -some- of the original purpose, while not pigeonholing you quite so badly (not that that part was ever much of a restriction anyway, as most people tend to pick one weapon and stick with it).

But if you want a flat "+1 to hit on anything that uses attack roll" go nuts.

[Snowbluff]

There are TWO scaling parts,

Only the "greater weapon focus" is 'chained' to a class, the 'crit-confirm' applies regardless.

Even removing the "greater" part still leaves it better than the two other feats.
Yeah, Critical Focus is a worse feat, and you made it worse by lowering the bonus at a lot of levels. Not to mention a lot of classes don't benefit from criticals as much either from not having wide threat ranges like archers and druids, or not having a damage source that crits well, like rogues (SA) or inquisitors (Bane). So it's just weapon focus except there's a piece of text you can forget about attached at the end. :smallfrown:


You don't need to be a Fighter to reference/use "Fighter" weapon groups.
That way it still retained -some- of the original purpose, while not pigeonholing you quite so badly (not that that part was ever much of a restriction anyway, as most people tend to pick one weapon and stick with it).
Nothing I said implied I didn't read it. The change from adding "group" and changing the line isn't a big one is what I was saying. :smalltongue:

[grarrrg]

Yeah, Critical Focus is a worse feat, and you made it worse by lowering the bonus at a lot of levels.

Weapon Focus (and "new focus") can be taken at level 1 for a straight +1-all. Critical Focus requires Bab+9 for +4 crits-only
So from levels 1-to-8 "new focus" is straight up better, because the other option doesn't exist yet.

"New" takes a big hit at level 9, but level 10-to-14 is probably better for "new" overall. +1 all/extra+2-crits vs. +4 crits-only, you're gaining +1 on all attacks, and only losing 1 on Crit Confirms.

And from level 15 on, "new" is just straight up better with +1 all/extra+3-crits.


So it's just weapon focus except there's a piece of text you can forget about attached at the end. :smallfrown:

Version 2
Weapon Focus works on anything requiring an attack roll. This includes your Ranged Touch Attacks and such.

Keeping with my idea of 'minimal fudging', how much of an accuracy bonus should Weapon Focus be worth at level 20?
I'd assume +1 @ level 1 to start
But what kind of scaling? Character level seems to be the easiest to base it off of.

I'd like to keep the "roll Weapon Focus, Greater W-Focus and Critical Focus into 1 feat" thing.
But how should the Critical component scale? Maybe something 'simple' like "bonus counts double for Crit confirms"?

[Snowbluff]

Weapon Focus (and "new focus") can be taken at level 1 for a straight +1-all. Critical Focus requires Bab+9 for +4 crits-only
So from levels 1-to-8 "new focus" is straight up better, because the other option doesn't exist yet.

"New" takes a big hit at level 9, but level 10-to-14 is probably better for "new" overall. +1 all/extra+2-crits vs. +4 crits-only, you're gaining +1 on all attacks, and only losing 1 on Crit Confirms.

And from level 15 on, "new" is just straight up better with +1 all/extra+3-crits.
That's a good point baout the prerequisite. It's such a crummy feat that I keep forgetting it's not available until a much higher level. Honestly, I never understood having high BAB requirements. I think it would be better if feat chains like that were available at lower levels. It'd give more variety at those levels, and classes like the fighter would be able to have more of the chains done by the time they could get 1.



Version 2
Weapon Focus works on anything requiring an attack roll. This includes your Ranged Touch Attacks and such.

Keeping with my idea of 'minimal fudging', how much of an accuracy bonus should Weapon Focus be worth at level 20?
I'd assume +1 @ level 1 to start
But what kind of scaling? Character level seems to be the easiest to base it off of.

I'd like to keep the "roll Weapon Focus, Greater W-Focus and Critical Focus into 1 feat" thing.
But how should the Critical component scale? Maybe something 'simple' like "bonus counts double for Crit confirms"?

Doubling the bonus is probably the best option. It's not that it's the most graceful way of doing it, but it's less wordy and simple. So I think that would work.

As for how much it should be worth, I'm not entirely sure. 1 @1 sounds alright, but people never take this feat unless they really need it. Maybe it should start at 2, and move up to 3? Or maybe it starts at 2, but adds a bit of a damage bonus?

[Ssalarn]

Or, rather than simply moving the posts, you can in fact make it so that the class that is supposedly the best at swinging a sword is actually the damn best at swinging the sword. Fighter needs more love. Sometimes the only way to accomplish that is by giving it fighter-only feats and saying "tough luck" to everyone else who wants it. I'm not talking about simply a bonus to hit. I'm taking point against your stance that a single class can't get nice things that others can't.

My suggestion would be, if you want to improve the Fighter via feats,you should link them to a relevant class feature (http://paizo.com/products/btpy99gr?The-Genius-Guide-to-Bravery-Feats) that justifies their exclusivity, and then bump them up to the level of extraordinary or supernatural abilities. You should also focus on shoring up the Fighter's biggest weak points: Will, utility, and versatility. The Fighter already wins the martial DPR olympics more often than not thanks to all of his bonuses to attack and damage and gobs of feats, it's basically everything else that he has issues with.

I like Bravery as a defining feature for the Fighter, as it's the only thing he really gets that actually has any flavor to it, and it provides a decently scaling platform to attach bonuses to; for example, a reputation feat that gives the Fighter +2 to Diplomacy and Intimidate for every point of Bravery he has, and "short-cut" combat maneuver feats that give you a bonus to a selection of similar combat maneuvers that scales with Bravery and grants some other ability or option. That'd let you get in on combat maneuvers at a low cost, or grab the standard chain(s) as well if you want to hyper-specialize for some reason.

[Psyren]

Considering we are not discussing a specific pre-existing build, then Sunk Cost cannot apply, as there is nothing 'taken' yet.
And a properly planned Gunslinger build will most likely either not have Weapon Focus, or have it as a Feat-Tax for something they actually want.

But the same can be said for a two-level Juggler dip. If we're not discussing a particular build, we don't know that we can fit that in yet either. So it's a wash.



And finally, there's the Opportunity Cost of spending one of your limited feats on Weapon Focus. And remember, Retraining can get rid of a feat if you find you changed your build partway through.

You cannot however retrain a prereq for a feat that you are keeping. You can shuffle around the levels at which you take various feats (e.g. a 3/4 BAB class at level 3 or later can retroactively choose Weapon Focus as their 1st-level feat, despite not originally qualifying at 1st level), but you cannot dump Weapon Focus and still keep Point Blank Master or Gun Twirling.

[grarrrg]

But the same can be said for a two-level Juggler dip. If we're not discussing a particular build, we don't know that we can fit that in yet either. So it's a wash.

My point is any half-decently optimized Gunslinger will not have "just" Weapon Focus. They'll either take it for something useful (feat tax), or not have it at all.
Poorly optimized Gunslinger, than Sunk Cost 'might' be a thing if it wasn't for...


You cannot however retrain a prereq for a feat that you are keeping.

I'm aware, and again my point is that they won't want to have "just" weapon focus. With the gobs and gobs of useful Ranged feats, taking "just" weapon focus is a waste. Maybe they took Weapon focus early with the intent to go for Snap Shot, then at level 6 decided "eh, maybe not". For Sunk Cost to apply they would have to be stuck with Weapon Focus, but since retraining is a thing they can just ditch it (and yes Retraining has a cost, but gold is cheap compared to a feat).

[Psyren]

My point is any half-decently optimized Gunslinger will not have "just" Weapon Focus. They'll either take it for something useful (feat tax), or not have it at all.
Poorly optimized Gunslinger, than Sunk Cost 'might' be a thing if it wasn't for...

You're still missing my point - if you have it for "something useful" - then you have it. You're one feat closer to picking up Gun Twirling then - as far as you're concerned, it now has 2 prereqs rather than three.

If that doesn't clear it up, then there is really no point in us continuing this discussion.



Maybe they took Weapon focus early with the intent to go for Snap Shot, then at level 6 decided "eh, maybe not". For Sunk Cost to apply they would have to be stuck with Weapon Focus, but since retraining is a thing they can just ditch it (and yes Retraining has a cost, but gold is cheap compared to a feat).

You can ditch literally any tax by saying "eh, maybe not" to the thing that you needed the tax to get. How is this relevant?

[grarrrg]

You're still missing my point - if you have it for "something useful" - then you have it. You're one feat closer to picking up Gun Twirling then - as far as you're concerned, it now has 2 prereqs rather than three.

And just how does that help? I have 2 pre-reqs to go, and 1 Feat Tax in the bag. "woo". It's still a feat tax.
At the end of the day you still need to have 4 feats for Gun Twirling to 'do' anything.

[avr]

There's two definitions of a feat tax I've seen used. There could be others.

The one which grarrrg seems to be using is 'a feat which I would not otherwise take, but which is required as a prerequisite to something I do want.'

The other is more 'a feat which is required to stay competitive'. This usually comes up in connection with 4e. I'm not sure whether that's Psyren's definition, but the argument looks a lot like one over definitions.

[Psyren]

And just how does that help? I have 2 pre-reqs to go, and 1 Feat Tax in the bag. "woo". It's still a feat tax.


It helps because if you have "1 feat tax in the bag" for something else, to use your phrase, that's one less cost you have to tally when deciding if GT is worth it.

For example, if I'm a gunslinger going for Point Blank Master, and I am evaluating the question "should I take Gun Twirling?" - I literally only have Dazzling Display to wonder about. Evaluating WF at that point is illogical, because if I already took it for PBM then it's a sunk cost for GT. Make sense?

[Snowbluff]

The other is more 'a feat which is required to stay competitive'. This usually comes up in connection with 4e. I'm not sure whether that's Psyren's definition, but the argument looks a lot like one over definitions.

Curse you, Expertise Feats!

Well, at least expertise feats were better than weapon focus. Holy Crusader Expertise or whatever let you use your holy symbol attacks without provoking AoO, which is great if you're a hybrid caster.

... Actually, we should look into a variety of bonuses for different classes, Grarrg. So they get a +1/2/3 and a bonus that would make their lives easier, like Swift Action Wildshape or Feinting.