Alternate Gunslinger rules

[AvatarVecna]

DM has suggested some alternate rules for the Gunslinger: guns automatically get Dex to damage, but they never target Touch AC. Would you take that deal?

[grarrrg]

DM has suggested some alternate rules for the Gunslinger: guns automatically get Dex to damage, but they never target Touch AC. Would you take that deal?

Well, Gunslinger becomes even MORE front-loaded. 1 level and you have all you could ever really need from the class.

Overall it's a fair enough trade.
It will reduce 3/4 Bab (and 1/2 Bab) classes from wanting to play with guns, and Deadly Aim is no longer a slam dunk auto-use.
But stat to damage with Ranged weapons is always nice, ESPECIALLY if it's the same stat used to-hit.

[AvatarVecna]

Well, Gunslinger becomes even MORE front-loaded. 1 level and you have all you could ever really need from the class.

Overall it's a fair enough trade.
It will reduce 3/4 Bab (and 1/2 Bab) classes from wanting to play with guns, and Deadly Aim is no longer a slam dunk auto-use.
But stat to damage with Ranged weapons is always nice, ESPECIALLY if it's the same stat used to-hit.

To be fair, I'm still not sure if it's guns, or gunslingers that get this bonus. One is certainly better than the other...

[grarrrg]

To be fair, I'm still not sure if it's guns, or gunslingers that get this bonus. One is certainly better than the other...

It wouldn't make much sense if it was "Gunslinger only". Then everyone else would get to target Touch AC with guns, just not you?

Course, if it applied to Guns, then it would be a nerf to the Gunslinger itself, unless they got double DEX-to-damage, or something to replace that ability.

Unless it was a Gunslinger-only-optional thing "You either get Touch AC or DEX Damage, not both", that would help, maybe.

[Extra Anchovies]

What, Gun Training at level 1 in exchange for needing massively higher to-hit? Big nerf. I wouldn't take it.

[grarrrg]

What, Gun Training at level 1 in exchange for needing massively higher to-hit? Big nerf. I wouldn't take it.

"massively higher"?
So I should feel bad for those poor archers that can't ever never hit anything?
And those fighter types that keep swinging and missing?

Oh, wait, most other non-caster characters seem to get along just fine without targeting touch-AC. Huh. How bout that.

[Mithril Leaf]

"massively higher"?
So I should feel bad for those poor archers that can't ever never hit anything?
And those fighter types that keep swinging and missing?

Oh, wait, most other non-caster characters seem to get along just fine without targeting touch-AC. Huh. How bout that.

It means you can't just coast by on BAB hitting with all your iteratives.

[Extra Anchovies]

"massively higher"?
So I should feel bad for those poor archers that can't ever never hit anything?
And those fighter types that keep swinging and missing?

Oh, wait, most other non-caster characters seem to get along just fine without targeting touch-AC. Huh. How bout that.

Where do I say that targeting normal AC makes it impossible for gunslingers to hit? Nowhere. So please try to refrain from extrapolating my argument in a stupid direction and then ridiculing me based on your own assumptions.

What I did say is that the difference between touch AC and regular AC is generally very large: using the standard combatant array (Pathfinder Unchained, p. 198), AC and touch AC differ by 8 at level 5, by 11 at level 10, by 13 at level 15, and by 16 at level 20. That's "massive" if you ask me, because needing a result 16 points higher reduces hit chance by 80 percentile points (and even from level 5 it's a 40-percentile-point reduction).

So the gunslinger gets a boost from levels 1-4 (Gun Training at 1 instead of 5), in exchange for needing much higher to-hit over their entire career if they want to keep their average damage the same. Which is why I wouldn't take that deal.

[grarrrg]

Where do I say that targeting normal AC makes it impossible for gunslingers to hit? Nowhere. So please try to refrain from extrapolating my argument in a stupid direction and then ridiculing me based on your own assumptions.

Then explain yourself properly the first time.
The ONLY thing you said was:


What, Gun Training at level 1 in exchange for needing massively higher to-hit? Big nerf. I wouldn't take it.

"massive" isn't a strictly defined term. It means "really big". The implication being "good luck hitting anything ever".
To which I pointed out that other classes that don't target touch-AC don't tend to have much of a problem with it.
Yes it's a big difference from touch-AC, but the change just bumps you down to "normal".


So the gunslinger gets a boost from levels 1-4 (Gun Training at 1 instead of 5), in exchange for needing much higher to-hit over their entire career if they want to keep their average damage the same. Which is why I wouldn't take that deal.
(quick note: Gun Training is DEX-to-damage AND a reduction of Misfire chance, and we don't yet know what, if anything, they would get in exchange at level 5+)

Yes, on a fully optimized Gunslinger this would be a poor trade. Who wants to give up their TWF-Double-Barreled-Free-Reload-Free-Up-Close-And-Deadly-Boomsticks-Of-Doom?
Then there are people who play *gasp* unoptimized characters. Like people who use a Musket but NOT Musket Master. On some of these it would be a fair trade, as they aren't making many iteratives anyway.

It would also enable a variety of options that would otherwise be sub-par, and give them a chance to shine.
The aforementioned "1 level of Gunslinger" dip that gets you everything you need. No fusing with 5 levels of Gunslinger, no Trench Fighter 3 "shortcut", just straight up good to go at level 1. Mysterious Stranger 1/Paladin 19? Heck yes! Siegegunner 1/Spellslinger 5/Eldritch Knight 10? Right on!

Some archetypes get delayed, or even no DEX-to-Damage:
Mysterious Stranger doesn't get it until level 9
Buccaneer (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/core-races/human/buccaneer-gunslinger-human) doesn't get it until level 13
Experimental Gunsmith (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/core-races/gnome/experimental-gunsmith-gunslinger-gnome) doesn't get it ever!
But the above change might actually let some of these be USEFUL instead of a strict downgrade (well, the Mysterious Stranger had uses before, but now it'd be even more of a 1-level-wonder).

[AvatarVecna]

I agree with both sides; it's a definite downgrade for a build that was already decently optimized, but it's hardly making you worse than normal. My big problem with it (and the reason I posted it here to ask people's opinions) was that the DM was trying to rebalance it without completely nerfing my damage, because he's heard of how ridiculous a Gunslingers DPR is, but he didn't realize that they're only ridiculous because of targeting Touch AC; Dex to damage and targeting regular AC is a downgrade for most straight Gunslinger builds, and he seemed to have the impression that he was doing me a favor.

Needless to say, I've moved on to other character concepts. Thank you both for your contributions to the discussion.

[Grod_The_Giant]

So your accuracy goes down to that of a standard archer? Oh no, the shame! Seriously, you're a full BAB class; you'll be fine.

[Extra Anchovies]

"massive" isn't a strictly defined term. It means "really big". The implication being "good luck hitting anything ever".

Congratulations, you're jumping to conclusions again. I never said "good luck hitting anything ever", so don't assume that I did.


To which I pointed out that other classes that don't target touch-AC don't tend to have much of a problem with it.
Yes it's a big difference from touch-AC, but the change just bumps you down to "normal".

Still a reduction in damage output in exchange for getting half of one of your class features four levels earlier.


Yes, on a fully optimized Gunslinger this would be a poor trade.

It's a poor trade for any gunslinger in a game that will get to level 5, and is a direct downgrade for any gunslinger in a game that starts at level 5 or higher.


Then there are people who play *gasp* unoptimized characters. Like people who use a Musket but NOT Musket Master. On some of these it would be a fair trade, as they aren't making many iteratives anyway.

(Nitpick: "unoptimized" is making truly random build choices, while "poorly optimized" is taking suboptimal ones)

What you're saying here about character optimization may be condescending, but it isn't relevant to my point. Switching from touch to regular AC reduces a Gunslinger's damage output no matter how many attacks they were getting and no matter how much damage each hit deals. Does it reduce enough that the Gunslinger is useless? No. But it reduces it, and doesn't give anything of any substance in return, so it's a nerf. It also makes the Gunslinger a 1-level dip class, which is poor design.

[Psyren]

DM has suggested some alternate rules for the Gunslinger: guns automatically get Dex to damage, but they never target Touch AC. Would you take that deal?

For a Gunslinger, absolutely not - they already get Dex to damage, they just have to wait a little (and at the levels they don't have it, weapon damage + deadly aim can still kill things.) But for other gun-using classes it could be worthwhile as they would only need a quick dip.