When selecting the Slayer archetype Sniper, the class feature Accuracy (Ex) is not properly reducting range increment penalties.
At 1st level, a sniper halves all range increment penalties when making ranged attacks with a bow, crossbow, or firearm.
This ability replaces track.
Range: Any attack at more than this distance is penalized for range. Beyond this range, the attack takes a cumulative –2 penalty for each full range increment (or fraction thereof) of distance to the target. For example, a dagger (with a range of 10 feet) thrown at a target that is 25 feet away would incur a –4 penalty. A thrown weapon has a maximum range of five range increments. A projectile weapon can shoot to 10 range increments.
While worded differently, Accuracy functions in a similar manner to the feat Far Shot.
Far Shot (Combat)
You are more accurate at longer ranges.
Prerequisites: Point-Blank Shot.
Benefit: You only suffer a –1 penalty per full range increment between you and your target when using a ranged weapon.
Normal: You suffer a –2 penalty per full range increment between you and your target.
Attached are screenshots with version 6.05.04, one with just Accuracy (Ex) (which is of course non-functional), and one with Far Shot applied.
ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONALITY NOTE
While there is no official declaration from Paizo on exactly how these two interact, due to the way the two are worded, it is often believed (and it seems in most cases played) that Accuracy and Far Shot stack with each other. This is more of a minor point, but since fixing Accuracy would likely include considering the interaction between the two regardless of the fixing method, I'm noting it here.
Far Shot is worded as affecting each individual increment, reducing each increment's penalty to -1 rather than -2.
Accuracy is worded as affecting the overall total penalty, taking whatever the total penalty value is and cutting it by 50%
Stacking these two together would result in a 50% * 50%, or 25% total mod to range increment penalties. At the maximum possible range (10x range increment results in a -18 attack penalty), you'd be calculating:
100% = -18 attack penalty
50% = -9 attack penalty
25% = -4.5 attack penalty (round down to -4)
Another way to look at it is:
Range Penalty Normal: -2 per increment
Range Penalty (Far Shot): -(2 - 1) per increment= -1 per increment
Range Penalty (Accuracy): (-2 per increment) * 50% = -1 per increment
Range Penalty (Far Shot AND Accuracy): (-(2 - 1) per increment) * 50% = -0.5 per increment
Pathfinder Core + ACG (w/ ACG prereqs)
Great detailed reporting. However, to prevent excessive flooding of edit notices into my jira notice box, can I request you make use of the handy PREVIEW function. Below the comment screen there is both a PREVIEW button and a help for formatting in jira.
Now, you've hit upon the dirty secret of the JEP formula system. Automatically rounds down. I can't do a thing about this today. I'm heavily pushing the Code Team, and especially to implement the FORMULA PARSER REPLACEMENT project. With that in place, these formula issues and such will become a lot more manageable by the data team. Without it, I'm dead in the water stuck with nasty hacks or no improvement.
I'm going to flag this as requiring code work.
I apologize, I didn't realize every edit spammed you. I do use the preview function, however I tend to come back to add or change details at a later time to try and make things clearer and easier to work with. Or I'm just worried I worded things poorly in the first place. I'll try to refrain from that from now on.
I've run into this issue a few times myself when trying to make custom content, so I'm not too surprised seeing it rearing its head again. I appreciate the information, however! Hopefully it'll be looked at in the near future. Luckily this particular feat/ability stacking issue is not an extremely common occurrence.
Array or will this be straight formula?
How would you implement this, once we get the rest of the system up and running.