D&D 5E Mercer's Gunslinger Martial Archetype: Good, Bad, or Ugly?

[BookBarbarian]

It's a neat concept, but I also feel like I can build a workable gunslinger with Battlemaster and Crossbow Expert. If I can build toward a concept with the core rules I will usually do so. I think it would be easy to refluff the different attack options as different "Guns"

Or maybe if I were DMing a for someone trying to run a Battlemaster of this type, I would work with them (or maybe against them) by providing multiple neat crossbows available in the adventure. A Heavy Crossbow (or gun equivalent) that gives a bonus to Sniping but is poorly suited for close range. A matched pair of Handcrossbows (or gun equivalents) that can fire a number of times without reloading, but are limited in range compared to a standard hand crossbow.

Also, I've always thought it was a bit misnamed. It seems more like a Gunsmither to me.

 

[JSexton]

None of the weapons are Heavy, despite 4 of them weighing 10+ lbs. (a greatsword is heavy at 6 lbs)

This makes sense to me. Heavy isn't just a function of weight, it's about how hard it is to use. A great sword requires a ton of strength to swing quickly, accurately, and without knocking yourself over. It's held at arms length with both hands on the same end, giving you very little leverage. (Yes, yes, okay, many styles put a hand on the blade itself for this reason). A rifle may weigh more, but you have a sling, a butt stock, and are holding it at the 1/3 and 2/3 mark, more or less. And then you only need to move the tip a few inches to shift aim, not swing around your entire body.

Now, if one were to attach a bayonet and want to use Bad News in melee, I'd definitely call it heavy for that purpose.

 

[Chaosmancer]

To my mind, considering it is a fighter subclass it is almost tied with longbows, since the larger damage die is countered with missing an attack for reloading (unless you simply switch pistols and keep going in which case guns are probably more damage)

I think people who are recommending crossbows instead should add quite a few caveats to this. If we talk Pistols dual-wielded the only way crossbows get the same number of attacks is with crossbow expert, and one handed means you are dealing with d6 hand crossbows and some DMs rule that if you dual-wield Crossbows you can't reload them because you don't have a hand free.

Now, Heavy Cossbow vs single pistol looks like an even match, but you absolutely need crossbow expert, or you only get a single attack at a time with the Heavy Crossbow because of the loading property.


So, Battlemaster with Crossbow expert and a heavy crossbow is slightly superior to straight gunslinger with only a pistol. And the Gunslinger has a feat to get in balance


Now, looking at Grit and Manuevers, I think it is a little off-base to say that Grit is the same as manuevers, because I don't think there are any manuevers which exactly match the grit usage, and at 3rd level Grit can be used for Deadeye.

Deadeye gives the gunslinger Advantage on their next attack, which can be used to cancel out disadvantage, make sure a shot hits, or reduce the impact of Sharpshooter. All of which is useful through all levels.

Torso shot is a 10 ft push with no save, which is better than the Battlemaster's push I believe. Arm is a disarm shot, which I don't think Battlemaster can do. Leg/Wings I believe is errated from my version, so it is either prone or reducing a flying creatures height, battlemaster can do prone, but can't knock flying creatures out of the sky, and head gives disadvantage on all attacks the enemy makes, which I also think Battlemaster can't replicate.

Also, remember Grit regenerates with critical hits and from dropping enemies to 0 as well as during a short rest, where as battlemaster dice only come back during a short rest, and at high levels is only 1 die at the start of every fight. Where the gunslinger with improved crit and the right set up could theoritically spend two or three times their normal grit limit in a fight.


So, it has it's place. It has things it can do that other builds might have a hard time matching, and if some party support you can do some stupidly good things (I wonder what a divination wizard who rolled a 20 could do, if the gunslinger burned all their grit into a massive violent shot that was a critical hit )

 

[Saeviomagy]

To my mind, considering it is a fighter subclass it is almost tied with longbows, since the larger damage die is countered with missing an attack for reloading (unless you simply switch pistols and keep going in which case guns are probably more damage)

If you're paying 250gp per 4 attacks you make in a combat, then sure, but you'll be juggling object interactions until 7th level, and most campaigns have some use for money. The UA downtime rules suggest you could almost manage to get an uncommon magic item for each gun you carry...

I think people who are recommending crossbows instead should add quite a few caveats to this. If we talk Pistols dual-wielded the only way crossbows get the same number of attacks is with crossbow expert, and one handed means you are dealing with d6 hand crossbows and some DMs rule that if you dual-wield Crossbows you can't reload them because you don't have a hand free.

You can't dual wield pistols. Two weapon fighting only works with light melee weapons.

Crossbow expert is effectively dual wielding hand crossbows, only you still have a hand free, allowing you to load. Pistols cannot reach the same rate of fire as a hand crossbow with crossbow expert.

Now, Heavy Cossbow vs single pistol looks like an even match, but you absolutely need crossbow expert, or you only get a single attack at a time with the Heavy Crossbow because of the loading property.

But you spent 500-750 gold on your pistols.

Plus - what do you think the odds are of the gunslinger finding multiple magic pistols?

So, Battlemaster with Crossbow expert and a heavy crossbow is slightly superior to straight gunslinger with only a pistol. And the Gunslinger has a feat to get in balance

My contention would be that battlemaster is better than a gunslinger because the gunslinger doesn't exclusively gain the ability to use guns. The battlemaster can get access to them as well. That means the difference between the two is that the gunslinger is limited to firearms, whereas the battlemaster can choose to use them unless he has access to something better, and he most likely will.

On top of that, the battlemaster's class features come much earlier, and are more flexible.

On feats - I think the fact that the gunslinger needs to prioritize an extra stat is probably going to mean that extra feat for the battlemaster is cheaper than it seems. It's also mostly optional: you might find yourself better off with a longbow given the realities of play.

Now, looking at Grit and Manuevers, I think it is a little off-base to say that Grit is the same as manuevers, because I don't think there are any manuevers which exactly match the grit usage, and at 3rd level Grit can be used for Deadeye.

Deadeye gives the gunslinger Advantage on their next attack, which can be used to cancel out disadvantage, make sure a shot hits, or reduce the impact of Sharpshooter. All of which is useful through all levels.

I had in fact missed deadeye. But at that level, the battlemaster has 3 manuevers, which can include precision attack, which will add 1d8 to a roll, and can be used after you make the attack roll, and will stack with advantage. Then he still has 2 other maneuvers that can increase damage after he hits.

Torso shot is a 10 ft push with no save, which is better than the Battlemaster's push I believe. Arm is a disarm shot, which I don't think Battlemaster can do. Leg/Wings I believe is errated from my version, so it is either prone or reducing a flying creatures height, battlemaster can do prone, but can't knock flying creatures out of the sky, and head gives disadvantage on all attacks the enemy makes, which I also think Battlemaster can't replicate.

Well, the battlemaster one is a 15ft push with a save, but also adds the value of the superiority die to the attack's damage. Battlemasters get disarming attack, which is identical to arm shot, but again deals extra damage from the superiority die. A proned flying creature immediately falls so tripping attack covers it, and again gets extra damage. Head shot can be sort of replicated with either goading or menacing attack, again with extra damage, but granting an 'out' (and in the case of menacing attack also restricting the target's movement).

At 7th level, a battlemaster would have to miss out on one of those (probably goading - menacing is too much of a win button against melee creatures).

Also, remember Grit regenerates with critical hits and from dropping enemies to 0 as well as during a short rest, where as battlemaster dice only come back during a short rest, and at high levels is only 1 die at the start of every fight. Where the gunslinger with improved crit and the right set up could theoritically spend two or three times their normal grit limit in a fight.

The main thing is that superiority dice start at 4 per short rest and increase to 6 (or 7 with a feat... same cost as increasing wisdom) with a safety of 1 per combat, without needing you to work on a tertiary stat. A gunslinger is going to need to get wisdom up to decent levels. So the battlemaster is ahead - they've got a lower priority on wisdom, and don't have a pressing need to increase it.

If the gunslinger is regularly doubling or tripling their grit each battle... then they either have a low wisdom (and little starting grit) or the DM is setting them up.

So, it has it's place. It has things it can do that other builds might have a hard time matching, and if some party support you can do some stupidly good things (I wonder what a divination wizard who rolled a 20 could do, if the gunslinger burned all their grit into a massive violent shot that was a critical hit )

I would argue that it doesn't really - it's not significantly different to the battlemaster except in ways that tend to make it slightly worse, and other ways that are potentially headaches for a DM.

 

[thethain]

This makes sense to me. Heavy isn't just a function of weight, it's about how hard it is to use. A great sword requires a ton of strength to swing quickly, accurately, and without knocking yourself over. It's held at arms length with both hands on the same end, giving you very little leverage. (Yes, yes, okay, many styles put a hand on the blade itself for this reason). A rifle may weigh more, but you have a sling, a butt stock, and are holding it at the 1/3 and 2/3 mark, more or less. And then you only need to move the tip a few inches to shift aim, not swing around your entire body.

Now, if one were to attach a bayonet and want to use Bad News in melee, I'd definitely call it heavy for that purpose.

One of them is a hand mortar, that probably has significantly more kick than a heavy crossbow.

 

[Chaosmancer]

If you're paying 250gp per 4 attacks you make in a combat, then sure, but you'll be juggling object interactions until 7th level, and most campaigns have some use for money. The UA downtime rules suggest you could almost manage to get an uncommon magic item for each gun you carry...

I'm a little lost for your point here.

250 gold buys 1 additional pistol, that gives you 8 attack before you need to reload, after 5th level and ignoring action surge, that is 4 rounds of combat. The majority of combats will end by that point, from what I have heard.

Sure, it is expensive, but it is also the focus of the class and while a melee character is looking for 1500 gold for his platemail the gunslinger could go for six of those pistols... so I'm not seeing a major inconvenience here. Sure, you may have some other use for the money, but if you want to be the "gun guy" you probably want to spend your money on guns.

You can't dual wield pistols. Two weapon fighting only works with light melee weapons.

Crossbow expert is effectively dual wielding hand crossbows, only you still have a hand free, allowing you to load. Pistols cannot reach the same rate of fire as a hand crossbow with crossbow expert.

Huh, you are technically correct. And the wording of Crossbow expert could be interpreted as breaking that rather arbitrary limitation. I guess DM fiat on being allowed to dual-wield pistols, which has been a combat trope since forever.

But, I have no idea how you figure you have a hand free if both hands are holding a hand crossbow. Do you character's typically have three arms? Or do you juggle item interactions to make this technicality work?

But you spent 500-750 gold on your pistols.

Plus - what do you think the odds are of the gunslinger finding multiple magic pistols?

Whose bringing up magic? I mean, I don't often consider the availability of magical items that the DM may or may not give me when I plan my build. Yes, magical weapons eventually become important, but that is why you talk to the DM about enchanting your stuff or finding something equivalent.

I mean otherwise, I'd play nothing other than wizards or Sword and Board melee characters, since magical one-handed melee weapons and magical staffs and wands are by far the most numerous items and therefore I am more likely to find them, and multiples even.

My contention would be that battlemaster is better than a gunslinger because the gunslinger doesn't exclusively gain the ability to use guns. The battlemaster can get access to them as well. That means the difference between the two is that the gunslinger is limited to firearms, whereas the battlemaster can choose to use them unless he has access to something better, and he most likely will.

Guns aren't exclusive, but the Gunslinger's proficiency with them is (3rd level ability). They aren't martial or simple weapons, they are firearms. Battlemaster would need to take the weapon master feat to gain proficiency with them, and even then they are only getting proficiency in the guns they declare. One of the implied features (due to this being the subclass used by Talisen for his character Percy) is the ability to craft new guns and improve on the guns you have. So, while it may be possible for the Gunslinger to craft a better gun and then immediately use it, a Battlemaster could only use the weapons he spent a feat to gain access to.

On top of that, the battlemaster's class features come much earlier, and are more flexible.

On feats - I think the fact that the gunslinger needs to prioritize an extra stat is probably going to mean that extra feat for the battlemaster is cheaper than it seems. It's also mostly optional: you might find yourself better off with a longbow given the realities of play.

I had in fact missed deadeye. But at that level, the battlemaster has 3 manuevers, which can include precision attack, which will add 1d8 to a roll, and can be used after you make the attack roll, and will stack with advantage. Then he still has 2 other maneuvers that can increase damage after he hits.

Well, the battlemaster one is a 15ft push with a save, but also adds the value of the superiority die to the attack's damage. Battlemasters get disarming attack, which is identical to arm shot, but again deals extra damage from the superiority die. A proned flying creature immediately falls so tripping attack covers it, and again gets extra damage. Head shot can be sort of replicated with either goading or menacing attack, again with extra damage, but granting an 'out' (and in the case of menacing attack also restricting the target's movement).

At 7th level, a battlemaster would have to miss out on one of those (probably goading - menacing is too much of a win button against melee creatures).

Not going to argue that battlemaster starts a little earlier with maneuvers and those maneuvers are definitely awesome. They definitely are good at doing what they were built to do.

However, Torso shot has a few distinct advantages over Pushing attack. No size limitation and no save being big ones. I'd argue one of the better uses of a pushing ability is to get people out of melee with dangerous enemies. Those tend to have decent or even high strength scores, so the lack of a save is very useful where the battlemaster might have trouble pushing someone vs a strength save. The no size limit means you can knock dragons back a few steps, which battlemasters can't even attempt.

Menacing and Goading could give disadvantage, menacing only if the enemy can be frightened and goading against everyone except for you, but I think the bigger thing here is the damage riders. Right? And yeah, eventually adding an additional 1d12 to your damage is hard to beat. Superiority dice are amazing. Not arguing that point.

The main thing is that superiority dice start at 4 per short rest and increase to 6 (or 7 with a feat... same cost as increasing wisdom) with a safety of 1 per combat, without needing you to work on a tertiary stat. A gunslinger is going to need to get wisdom up to decent levels. So the battlemaster is ahead - they've got a lower priority on wisdom, and don't have a pressing need to increase it.

If the gunslinger is regularly doubling or tripling their grit each battle... then they either have a low wisdom (and little starting grit) or the DM is setting them up.

Or they are playing smart or they are lucky.

Grit comes back in two instances. Roll a crit (lucky) or kill an enemy (playing smart). So, let's say the 3rd level party is fighting Goblins and two bugbears, and the DM was kind enough to let the gunslinger start with a pistol.

Battlemaster has 4 dice at a d8, Gunslinger has 2 grit

Battlemaster is hard limited to 4 manuevers, but with 8 hp a pop, the gunslinger might easily kill a goblin a shot, meaning they can spend grit for deadeye most turns and still feel good about getting that spent grit back . 6 goblins, the Gunslinger could easily end up using Deadeye 8 times compared to the guarenteed 4 of the Battlemaster. And any crits also get Grit back, and constant advantage makes crits more likely. Plus, if they both spend all their points in this fight, only the Gunslinger has a chance to get more back when they are ambushed by the wolves that were released by the enemies further ahead.

It is a gamble, and yeah, works better if you roll and get lucky stats, or are willing to drop constitution to make wisdom and dex your only focuses. But, an 18 Wisdom is not difficult to get even if you take feats instead of ASIs because you grab a wisdom dex class and grab some feats that increase wisdom or just spend a single ASI

I would argue that it doesn't really - it's not significantly different to the battlemaster except in ways that tend to make it slightly worse, and other ways that are potentially headaches for a DM.

Is it slightly worse than the Battlemaster? Sure, probably is, Battlemaster is one of the best subclasses in the game. Super Versatile, great damage potential, lots of options.

But, that doesn't mean Gunslinger doesn't have a few tricks that people might be interested in, maybe they'll want to multi-class Assassin and build a sniper. My point has never been that the Gunslinger is superior, just that it is close enough that you can still have a blast playing it and you aren't going to feel competely overshadowed by the other classes doing their thing. It's a little MAD, it could maybe be tweaked a little bit here and there if people feel it isn't as good as they want it to be, but I don't want to leave people reading this thread with the false impression that this is another 4 elements monk or original Beastmaster.

 

[Wrathamon]

Have you guys listened to the podcast with a gunslinger in play? He doesnt seem that OP compared to the dagger tossing rogue, but seems on par with the ranger and barbarian.