Cookies Disclaimer

I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to authenticate logins, deliver better content and provide statistical analysis. You can adjust your browser settings to prevent our site from using cookies, but doing so will prevent some aspects of the site from functioning properly.

Pathfinder Online will be ending operations on November 28, 2021. For more details please visit our FAQ.

All posts created by Bob

Bob
I've filed a bug to look into this when we're polishing "incomplete" features.
Bob
Harad Navar
Bob
It's easy to create a believable rule that high-powered magical/divine attacks require ammo and low-powered ones don't without problematically defying our natural expectations of how things work, since after all they work "like magic," which is to say they inherently work in defiance of our natural expectations.

Star Slinger is a special problem…
Depending on the amount of ammo a quiver can carry, it might stretch belivability to have a quiver of daggers. Maybe a dagger bandolier?

Star Slinger, channel force, and channel smite could be seen as using the weapon as a non-destroyed focus to channel Stamina into non-physical damage. However, repeatedly using stamina to power feats like Star Slinger is self limiting when you have to wait for Stamina to recover to use a feat again. It will be interesting to see how the cool-down for using ammo will affect the pace of combat. In particular, in your thinking so far, how would an ammo holder with a limited amount of ammo compare to repeated use of a Stamina powered feat?

I was thinking that it might be possible to convert some feats where the use of ammo is questionable into ones that use Power rather than Stamina. (Unless there is some coding that makes all drains on Power a combat cool-down.)

Harad

There are certainly ways to handle thrown weapons, but they tend to either get very complicated or require lots of suspended disbelief. For now, we've just focused on weapons that avoid those issues, or at least on feats that avoid using those weapons in problematic ways.

We haven't gone into the details on reloading and such enough to really talk about how that should feel. Best to hold off until we're closer to it and can focus on it properly.

It's probably technically possible to use power on attacks, but there are advantages to keeping things clean and reserving power for expendables. Still, something to keep in our back pocket if we really needed something like that for balance purposes.
Bob
Duffy Swiftshadow
Do we have any idea how much a quiver is able to hold?

A possible concern is that due to how PvP deaths work you can't realistically carry spare ammo in your inventory as you will inevitably lose it on some death, thus any ammo based character needs secure accessible stockpiles if the amount a quiver can hold isn't 'high' enough. Which significantly weakens dedicated ranged characters compared to melee under a bunch of different conditions. Was the intention to make primarily ranged characters weaker outside of carefully planned (mainly defensive) PvP? Or was the assumption that characters wouldn't stick to a particular combat style?

On the one hand ammo could do interesting things like curb everyone running a cleric focus, or at least reduce how much we do now. On the other hand it seems to cause all sorts of concerns with just playing a ranged character logistically that just doesn't exist for a melee character. I'm not hating on the idea of ammo but I am concerned we're missing some things to make it fun and playable. My thought is that with the coming settlement/holding access changes and the required ammo any attack on territory you don't control requires some sort of staging area, which today means Smallholdings or Base Camps. However that has some restrictions that makes it awkward to use like that. I feel like ultimately their needs to be some class of deployable structure to fill this gap that can have 'alliance' level permissions.

We're planning to take a closer look at exactly how quivers and such work when we get to that part, specifically because we have concerns about making sure ammo doesn't get in the way of having fun as a ranged character. It's still supposed to be a really good idea for ranged characters to have some melee and non-ammo backup available, particularly if out soloing, but we want to make sure that focusing primarily on ranged attacks is a valid and fun playstyle.
Bob
Stilachio Thrax
Harad Navar
It would appear that the Star Slinger feat would be included in the need for ammo. Would Channel Force and Channel Smite also be included?

If applied to a range weapon/focus, I would say yes. Not to a melee version of the attacks, though.

Technically, ammo can be required on any feat for an ammo-using weapon that we want to make a little overpowered, whether it's melee or ranged. As examples, there are some melee cantrips that require ammo. We particularly like it for ranged attacks because overpowering them as a result of the ammo requirement balances out the need to underpower them due to the advantages of attacking at range.

Of course, some of the ammo requirement choices are also made for the sake of believability. We're almost always going to require an arrow for ranged bow attacks because it just makes sense. On the other hand, some kind of spiritual arrow for clerics could be believable and could bypass the need for ammo. As long as the attack is appropriately underpowered there aren't any resulting balance problems. This also works well for area-of-effect attacks, where we usually have to underpower them to balance out the fact that they damage multiple targets. With an ammo requirement, we can give them back some of their power and let them hurt each individual a bit more.

For most cantrips and orisons, it's pretty easy to believe that sometimes they use ammo and sometimes they don't. It's easy to create a believable rule that high-powered magical/divine attacks require ammo and low-powered ones don't without problematically defying our natural expectations of how things work, since after all they work "like magic," which is to say they inherently work in defiance of our natural expectations.

Star Slinger is a special problem, because starknives aren't ammo-using weapons and don't have an ammo container associated with them. As such, it would be difficult to require ammo usage without special-casing them somehow. My general take would be to say that since that feat is clerical in nature, either the thrown item is more a spiritual representation of the knife, or that Desna simply wills the starknife back into the thrower's hand after the attack completes. Channel Force and Channel Smite would be similar, since most of the weapons they can be used with don't use ammo, except for the focus version, and that one does use ammo.
Bob
Edam
Out of curiosity, I know tokens are currently all based on CON - but are some T3 potions WIS based, the way some T2 potions use WIS instead of CON ? ( I have never bothered with T3 potions to test it as I have 19 CON and can use the tokens.)

Yes, items like Bloodblocks and Sunrods that use WIS are available in T1 (Apprentice's), T2 (Journeyman's) and T3 (Master's). They're all listed in my spreadsheets under Miscellaneous Alchemy, as they're not exactly potions or grenades.
Bob
Edam
The wizard Mastery feats ( "Cold Mastery"/"Fire Mastery" etc) provide bonus wand/staff attacks you can slot which, whilst somewhat under powered for their level, specifically state in the in-game mouse over they use no ammo.

Will similar "ammo free" attacks be available for bows and focuses ?

Also …
  • will melee (non ranged) attacks on wands, staffs and focuses also use ammo?
  • will heals and buffs consume ammo or will ammo just just be for attacks and debuffs?
  • what about thrown weapons such as the star knife ? Will the star knife need ammo ?
  • my impression is we will be able to use lower tier ammo on our t3 weapons and just slot the T3 ammo when we want the extra power … is that correct ?
  • If so, what about the other way around. Can we slot T3 ammo in a T1 weapon and will that T1 weapon get any benefit from the higher tier ammo ?

Looking a bit more carefully, it appears that aren't orisons (focus attacks) that don't use ammo, but I think that's because clerics are generally expected to carry another weapon. May need to rethink that for clerics with a bow. For more standard archers, I think the assumption is that they'll also have a secondary melee weapon.

Use of ammo doesn't seem to be affected by whether the attack is melee or ranged, or whether or not it's beneficial.

Not really sure what the plan was for thrown weapons. Doesn't look like the ammunition system would be a good fit for those.

You can use lower-tier ammo with higher-tier weapons, but you'll definitely notice the difference.

You may be able to slot higher-tier ammo with lower-tier weapons, but if you do, you'll get no advantage from the higher tier.
Bob
Decius
Is the intention that one could fund ammunition using a small fraction of the proceeds from loot? Because I need about 10 attacks or so to dispatch a single level-appropriate monster, and they drop a lot less than 2s on average, even counting salvage at raw material prices.

The intention is that with a reasonably judicious use of ammo, including using some lower-grade ammo for easier enemies and maybe occasionally doing a little stabbing (or at least some non-ammo cantrips/orisons), you'd get more loot value (assuming you sell everything, including recipes) than you'd need to purchase in ammo before heading out. We're also planning to drop some simple +0 ammo along the way, though not enough to stay out indefinitely using found ammo for every shot.

Decius
Would it make sense to treat each item as a quiver, yielding 20 shots each? (Just multiplying the yield and carry capacity by 20 throws off the AH market unless prices lower than 1c can exist.)

Bundling items is a possibility if we have too many single items that have trouble selling at 1c each. Our actual hope is that prices will eventually rise enough that anything selling for 1c will be quickly purchased, if only to resell at a profit.


Bob
The Eternal Balance
Using lower level ammo (cheap, affordable, easily obtained) is going to nerf higher level weapon/focus/wizard attacks?!?!?

That's the way the most recent proposed design was written up, though it's important to note that's after a significant boost to the current damage for ammo attacks that aren't using ammo. The alternative is to make the base ammo attacks relatively weak (maybe around where they're at now, but possibly a bit lower) and let the ammo add significantly more of a boost at the high end. There needs to be room for higher-tiered ammo to provide a significant advantage over lower-tiered ammo.
Bob
We're talking about making some changes along those lines, but unfortunately it's not just a spreadsheet change. It's not a huge change either, but we have to figure out when we'll be able to fit it in with all the other code changes scheduled.
Bob
We still need to finalize the design for the ammo system, something we won't really dig into until we're much closer to working on it, but I can give somewhat vague answers to some of the questions posted.

If a feat is set up to use ammunition, then 1 piece of ammunition will be used every time the feat is used. There are more details to how ammunition and containers work, but I need to look into that a lot more before I start talking about the details.

In general, all physical attacks with weapons like bows will use ammunition, and the majority of wand, staff and focus attacks (cantrips and orisons) will do so as well.

Using lower-tiered ammo will in some not-fully-determined way make your weapon act much more like the lower-tiered version of that weapon.

Plusses on ammunition will do something to improve the attack, with the current thought being that they'd increase your base damage.

Implementing keywords like Silver is a little more involved and affects lots of non-ammo things as well. Not sure when we'll be able to get to that.

I don't know exactly where the balance will wind up in terms of ammo-using attacks vs. non-ammo attacks. Some of the value of using ammo stems from being able to attack at a distance, so that advantage is part of what you're paying for through the cost of ammo. Overall, we'll want to balance things so that ammo is worth using regularly. We've also talked about having mobs drop some low-grade ammo so that you're not constantly running back to town for more, though you may need to do so if the mobs you're fighting require high-end ammunition. That said, using ammunition just to run quickly across the map will probably be a somewhat expensive choice, though not necessarily prohibitive.