Jeans_Stealer here.

Have you got a player who is just very good at reading the rules, and finding the items with several interpretations? Unfortunately, one of my players is a wargamer and so advantage-finding is essential to victory.

I’ve written, for this player, a combat-dog-companion that can work towards overcoming it’s own bestial trait, as well as the aptitudes it should have and where if it does flee, it runs to, and the sheet had to be clean, and perfect, and have ALL BASES covered, which is next-to-impossible for an RPG.

But he’s done a desperado/assassin/combat guy, and from the look of it, there’s an interpretation for 3 attacks, all shooting, all possibly full auto, per turn that he’s found. He won’t listen to the words “but that’s mental” as our PCs are Special , surely?

The argument with which to say ‘No’ to this must be irrefutable, with rules basis that cannot be argued with, worked around, overcome or seen through or worked around.

Before we discuss subtypes, here’s a description of the action.

half-move action + free attack action (single, semi, full) from the desperado's special skill, THEN Half-attack action (standard) PLUS free attack action (two-weapon-wielder.)

Three attacks, all full-auto capable, half-move.

Discuss. Firstly, what I’ve got…

Subtypes, the first wall - Only allowed one action with the 'attack' subtype per character turn, which, in theory, would make the above-plan fall apart. That move-and-fire free action has the subtype, surely? There’s one. The Standard attack does too, and then… oh wait, the additional attack has it too. Even just two-weapon wielder breaks the one-attack-subtype rule as SEPARATE actions (a half and a free) both have the subtype.

The two-weapon-wielder rule can be interpreted that the free action is attached to the half-attack action, making it one action, making the subtype-rule unbroken... but it’s only interpretation.

Next, Free actions.

“ A character can perform Free Actions in addition to any other actions on his turn.”

The interpretations are endless. In addition could mean same limits don’t apply.

Next. Role skills.

“Each includes the following special rules that are applied to a character with this role: ”

Special . Herein lies the problem. Special could be interpreted differently as well – is special outside the rules of subtypes and limits?

I could just be being a wuss, and not confidently lifting and dropping my GM’s rulehammer. Or, am I being cruel? Is it clearly there in front of me that a desperado with two-weapon-wielder can drop 3 attacks? What’s your interpretation? How can I be irrefutable with the words I’ve got?

I assume this will be FAQed by some errata all the way to hell…

First of all desperado is explicitly limited to standard attacks for the free action.

If you want a precedent, Rogue Trader's MIU weapon interface has a similar functionality and has been FAQed as 'standard attack only' and 'can't use if you already did an attack that turn'.

That being said, I think nerfing the desperado's ability with that wording would make it no longer worth taking(I'm building a Desperado Atm geard toward 3 hand cannon shots per round and if the GM would interret it like this I would build it as something else).

Desperado special ability Move and Shoot: .... after preforming a move action, a Desperado may perform a single Standard Attack with a Pistol weapon he is currently wielding as a free action.

- Only Pistol weapons are allowed

- a move action has to be performed (half action at least gone)

- You may only perform a Standard Attack = one single shot (two single shots if you use two weapons)

- The attack time is just reduced, it does not take a half action as usual, only a free action, but it is an attack action.

That's how I understand it.

You already named the solution to all your problems page 218 Using actions. "Characters can only take one action with the attack subtype..." This means you can fire two weapons full auto as one half action...but you may not attack any more, as you have used the attack subtype...end of story or what could you possible argue against that?

I think people misinterpret the intend behind the special ability...it is not there for players to get extra shots. A desperado shall be able to "run" (full action) maybe in cover or get closer etc. and then still be able to shoot.

My general standard for people finding rules exploits is: "Anything you think you can do RAW, NPCs can, too. Please, convince me my NPCs can do this, too."

I think people misinterpret the intend behind the special ability...it is not there for players to get extra shots. A desperado shall be able to "run" (full action) maybe in cover or get closer etc. and then still be able to shoot.

Personally I feel they wanted to grant extra attacks to make dual wielding worth it, as in older systems it was strictly inferior to using a nasic/heavy weapon and by the looks of it stuff han't changed.

As it stands right now a desperado is better off using a basic weapon with a recoil glove and a pistol (for the times it's role bonus comes into play) and I highly doubt it's the silly image they tried to encourage.

I think people misinterpret the intend behind the special ability...it is not there for players to get extra shots. A desperado shall be able to "run" (full action) maybe in cover or get closer etc. and then still be able to shoot.

Unless the guy who wrote it comes around and states the intent behind the ability I find it rather pointless to say people are 'misinterpreting the intent'because said intent is not clearly known.

Personally I feel they wanted to grant extra attacks to make dual wielding worth it, as in older systems it was strictly inferior to using a nasic/heavy weapon and by the looks of it stuff han't changed.

As it stands right now a desperado is better off using a basic weapon with a recoil glove and a pistol (for the times it's role bonus comes into play) and I highly doubt it's the silly image they tried to encourage.

I am sorry, if you feel offended by my choice of words. I simply wanted to show a different point of view on the ability.

Furthermore I think my interpretation is likely to be right. The ability is called "Move and Shoot" not "Shoot some more"

It also says you have to perform a move action first. If they wanted to grant an extra attack they would have stated that, porbably saying: "If you don't move, you can fire a Pistol once more as a free action." They simply and only reduced the time you need to fire a Pistol for the Desperado...which is or can be quite powerful...

In my interpretation the desperado shall be able to behave like a western shooter, fireing his guns while running from cover to cover.

It might be that the desperado would be better off using a recoil glove and a basic weapon I guess you refer to causing damage and the amouts of shots fired. I do not build characters to max those things out and trust in your thoughts about that. But maybe they wanted to make the desperado more agile, afterall moving your full AGB and being able to fire is a huge advantage...

Okay so you guys are super-helpful already.

The player is limited to a standard attack on the run-and-shoot for desperado. Excellent. Was too busy reading the other stuff, missed that snippet, thank you.

Half-move, single shot, single standard attack (EXPLICITLY stated.) but there seems to be some discrepancy - can he use two-weapon wielder on this free-action as part of run-and-shoot? two standard attacks for the price of one free one?

-->

But he's still got a half-action left, and two-weapon wielder allows for that to be filled with two full-auto bursts from machine pistols, apparently.

So we're back to the 'single attack subtype' - is there anywhere that explicity states this dual-wield with two separate fire-mode pistols counts as a single action, even though it's a half + a free? *looks through details*

...

FOUND IT! Page 132.

Two-Weapon Wielder description:

Both of these attacks count as being part of the same Half Action, and both tests made to attack with the weapons suffer a –20 penalty.

Because 'one attack subtype' has now clearly NOT been violated by the two-weapon wielder talent from the statement above... The plan falls apart. Run-and-shoot cannot be combined with another attack action.

So the choices are:

Run-and-shoot: Move half or full action, get free standard attack (whether this can be combined with two-weapon wielder is up for debate, as the single attack and pistol are in the singular) then a non-attack-subtype action if there's a half left, and a free action as appropriate.

OR

Move for a half-action, no free attack, then half-action two-weapon-wielder, two weapons, up to full-auto.

Three shots is not allowed Thank god for that. Imagine three targets getting shot in the face in the same round, all outside 10m of each other due to independent targeting. I would need some serious challengers to threaten my players... and they'd all be dead in seconds.

Still... Two-weapon wielder with move-and-shoot? What do we think? Move 2x AB and standard attack with one weapon... then due to the talent...?

If a character with the Two-Weapon Wielder (Ballistic) talent is armed with two Pistols (or other ranged weapons that can reasonably be wielded in one hand), he can perform a ranged Attack action (either a Standard Attack, Semi-Auto Burst, or Full-Auto Burst) with one of these weapons. If he does so,

he can then perform another ranged Attack action (either a Standard Attack, Semi-Auto Burst, or Full Auto Burst) with his second weapon.

Move 2x AB, one pistol in standard single shot, other pistol in other hand at full auto.

Thoughts?

In what way do you consider 3 pistol shots worse than a warrior full auto with a basic/heavy at much longer range and then spending a fate point to substitute his 5-6 BS skill bonus fir DoS on the attack?

EDIT:This is just genuine curiosity

The Warrior spent a fate-point to do what he did. Looks great to use a fate point that way.

With only a two-wielder action a turn... they're about even, I'd say. Plus the desperado has to get REAL close, and the warrior may have cover and other mooks to shoot through first.

The Warrior spent a fate-point to do what he did. Looks great to use a fate point that way.

With only a two-wielder action a turn... they're about even, I'd say. Plus the desperado has to get REAL close, and the warrior may have cover and other mooks to shoot through first.

Couple that with the fact that much bigger range means basic/heavy weapons will fight in short range usually if a pistol can reach the target and you will find that full-auto with a basic or heavy outdamages dual wielding most of the time (and requires no specific talents to boot)

Also, as a side note Hop Shooting talent is superior to the desperado's role bonus in most circumstances.

double posy

I sent in a similar question about a week ago:

Me:

"6) The Desperado's [Move and Shoot Bonus]:
a) Will the [Two Weapon Wielder Talent] allow a shot from both pistols or just one when combined with this Bonus?"

Tim Huckelbery:

"6) a) Nope. Just one weapon. You'd want to upgrade to Hip Shooting to fire two weapons."

Further, as was already mentioned, a character can only make one Action with the Attack subtype on her turn. The second attack created by [Two-Weapon Wielder] is indeed included within the same Half Action as the first attack, obeying the Attack subtype rule. [Move and Shoot] can only make one Standard Attack per turn, [Two-Weapon Wielder] or not. This also means that Semi-Auto and Full Auto Bursts are out.

That being said, there are some interesting cases where [Move and Shoot] is more powerful than its sister Talent [Hip Shooting]:

• Run and Shoot: A Desperado with [Hard Target] imparts a -40 BS penalty to her enemies if she Runs to trigger Move and Shoot. And she still gets to attack while being very hard to hit.
• Guard and Shoot: A Desperado can use a [Guarded Action {Action}], Half Move, and attack all in the same turn. Other characters could only do two of these things.
• Disengage and Shoot: A Desperado can take a Half Move action through the [Disengage {Action}], attack, and still have a Half Action left over to do something else. If they successfully invoke the Alternate Acrobatics use, anyway.
• Half Move and Shoot: While not as flashy as the examples above, [Hip Shooting] requires a Full Action. Move and Shoot is usable almost any time since it only takes a Half Action to trigger.

Even though Move and Shoot isn't the strongest Bonus, it's a very utilitarian one. It has its pros and cons compared to Hip Shooting, but the two are different enough to have their own niches.

EDIT: Some typo fixes.

I sent in a similar question about a week ago:

Me:

"6) The Desperado's [Move and Shoot Bonus]:

a) Will the [Two Weapon Wielder Talent] allow a shot from both pistols or just one when combined with this Bonus?"

Tim Huckelbery:

"6) a) Nope. Just one weapon. You'd want to upgrade to Hip Shooting to fire two weapons."

Further, as was already mentioned, a character can only make one Action with the Attack subtype on her turn. The second attack created by [Two-Weapon Wielder] is indeed included within the same Half Action as the first attack, obeying the Attack subtype rule. [Move and Shoot] can only make one Standard Attack per turn, [Two-Weapon Wielder] or not. This also means that Semi-Auto and Full Auto Bursts are out.

That being said, there are some interesting cases where [Move and Shoot] is more powerful than its sister Talent [Hip Shooting]:

• Run and Shoot: A Desperado with [Hard Target] imparts a -40 BS penalty to her enemies if she Runs to trigger Move and Shoot. And she still gets to attack while being very hard to hit.
• Guard and Shoot: A Desperado can use a [Guarded Action {Action}], Half Move, and attack all in the same turn. Other characters could only do two of these things.
• Disengage and Shoot: A Desperado can take a Half Move action through the [Disengage {Action}], attack, and still have a Half Action left over to do something else. If they successfully the Alternate Acrobatics use, anyway.
• Half Move and Shoot: While not as flashy as the examples above, [Hip and Shoot] requires a Full Action. Move and Shoot is usable almost any time since it only takes a Half Action to trigger.

Even though Move and Shoot isn't the strongest Bonus, it's a very utilitarian one. It has its pros and cons compared to Hip Shooting, but the two are different enough to have their own niches.

That cleared up the difference between hip shooting and move and shoot.

However, a move action doesn't pertain to running, sprinting, shooting and disengaging though? Or is that another interpretation thing?

Either way it's all cleared up for me sufficiently.

Thanks to all!

Same thing with D&D 5th edition: several things will give your character a bonus action(s), but you can only use one bonus action per turn - on your turn. Otherwise you could multiclass and make one attack followed by several bonus action attacks.

ugh I still feel nerfed...

However, a move action doesn't pertain to running, sprinting, shooting and disengaging though? Or is that another interpretation thing?

I sent in a similar question about a week ago:

Me: "6) The Desperado's [Move and Shoot Bonus]:a) Will the [Two Weapon Wielder Talent] allow a shot from both pistols or just one when combined with this Bonus?" Tim Huckelbery: "6) a) Nope. Just one weapon. You'd want to upgrade to Hip Shooting to fire two weapons."

Further, as was already mentioned, a character can only make one Action with the Attack subtype on her turn. The second attack created by [Two-Weapon Wielder] is indeed included within the same Half Action as the first attack, obeying the Attack subtype rule. [Move and Shoot] can only make one Standard Attack per turn, [Two-Weapon Wielder] or not. This also means that Semi-Auto and Full Auto Bursts are out. That being said, there are some interesting cases where [Move and Shoot] is more powerful than its sister Talent [Hip Shooting]:

• Run and Shoot: A Desperado with [Hard Target] imparts a -40 BS penalty to her enemies if she Runs to trigger Move and Shoot. And she still gets to attack while being very hard to hit.
• Guard and Shoot: A Desperado can use a [Guarded Action {Action}], Half Move, and attack all in the same turn. Other characters could only do two of these things.
• Disengage and Shoot: A Desperado can take a Half Move action through the [Disengage {Action}], attack, and still have a Half Action left over to do something else. If they successfully invoke the Alternate Acrobatics use, anyway.
• Half Move and Shoot: While not as flashy as the examples above, [Hip Shooting] requires a Full Action. Move and Shoot is usable almost any time since it only takes a Half Action to trigger.

Even though Move and Shoot isn't the strongest Bonus, it's a very utilitarian one. It has its pros and cons compared to Hip Shooting, but the two are different enough to have their own niches. EDIT: Some typo fixes.

Something that's been pointed out to me last night by a buddy: in his words'why on Earth would you dual-wield pistols?' I missed the part where DH2 removed the provision of earlier systems (RT and DW at least) wherryou could only semi-and full-auto while dual-wielding pistols. As it stands right now two pistols is strictly inferior to two basic with pistol grip or recoil gloves. I teally doubt you could get more mileage out of being a Desperado and dual-wielding pistols than out of being something with an actual role bonus and dual-wielding Storm Bolters.

Oh, absolutely dual-wielding Basic weapons will pump out more damage than Pistols, but that's more accredited to the fact that Basic weapons are stronger than Desperados being weak. Basic weapons can also never be fired in melee, even with the Pistol Grip or Recoil Glove. There are plenty of tradeoffs between dual-wielding Pistols or Basic weapons, but I find that the strength in Pistols is their utility rather than raw damage.

Something that's been pointed out to me last night by a buddy: in his words'why on Earth would you dual-wield pistols?' I missed the part where DH2 removed the provision of earlier systems (RT and DW at least) wherryou could only semi-and full-auto while dual-wielding pistols. As it stands right now two pistols is strictly inferior to two basic with pistol grip or recoil gloves. I teally doubt you could get more mileage out of being a Desperado and dual-wielding pistols than out of being something with an actual role bonus and dual-wielding Storm Bolters.

Oh, absolutely dual-wielding Basic weapons will pump out more damage than Pistols, but that's more accredited to the fact that Basic weapons are stronger than Desperados being weak. Basic weapons can also never be fired in melee, even with the Pistol Grip or Recoil Glove. There are plenty of tradeoffs between dual-wielding Pistols or Basic weapons, but I find that the strength in Pistols is their utility rather than raw damage.

Plenty trade-offs, mostly highly situational.You can happilyual wield your two basic weaons and Quick Draw a pistol in melee.There is too litle to gain by building for pistols (aka takimg Desperado)

If desperado's role bonus was allowed to breach the one subtype action per round it would be an worthwile bonus and an incentive to dual wield pistols. As it stands right now? Borderline useless IMO.

Plenty trade-offs, mostly highly situational.You can happilyual wield your two basic weaons and Quick Draw a pistol in melee.There is too litle to gain by building for pistols (aka takimg Desperado)

If desperado's role bonus was allowed to breach the one subtype action per round it would be an worthwile bonus and an incentive to dual wield pistols. As it stands right now? Borderline useless IMO.

My knee-jerk reply to this train of thought is "not everything needs to be mechanically optimal". While I do agree with you that [Move and Shoot] is highly situational and that Pistols are generally weak, it's character concept and roleplaying that makes Desperado worth it.

Consider a [Whip] and a [spear]. Both deal 1d10 R damage with 0 Pen and [Primitive]. The Whip has 3m Range and [Flexible], the Spear has nothing. Mechanically, a Whip is superior since it is both ranged and denies enemies the opportunity to Parry. Not everyone wants to play a whip character though, even if whips have so many advantages.

ADDENDUM: Spears are two-handed, too. A character could dual-wield whips instead of wielding one spear.

My knee-jerk reply to this train of thought is "not everything needs to be mechanically optimal". While I do agree with you that [Move and Shoot] is highly situational and that Pistols are generally weak, it's character concept and roleplaying that makes Desperado worth it.

This is my reaction to the idea of dual-wielded autoguns with recoil gloves, or dual-wielded whips over a spear...

WHO in their right mind wants to be that crappy vampire from Underworld with the two silver whips, getting them trapped in the nearby rocks and then proceeding to have facial surgery via natural weapons? no one.

Who wants a bayonet on their lasrifle, like Colm Corbec, or that insane post-mortem-medal-winning-space-soldier who charges the MG nest? Or a Space-Spartan? Everyone. (I think?) Heck even a hive-ganger with a ROUS-killing-spear is rather characterful.

(how are you going to scream oaths to the Emperor or Khorne when you're trying not to whip out your eyeballs?)

I've had 'optimal' players and my 'dog-handling-sniper-gunman' that started this thread question is a borderline optimal, but he's heavily inspired by modern military, making him 'characterfully optimal'.

BUT I have also gazed further into the scrying ball and using the emperor's Tarot, and tried to 'mechanically' understand the move-and-shoot 'trait' in regards to other actions with the 'movement' subtype, as there isn't strictly (explicitly) a 'move action' as it states on page 66 (but there is an action called 'Move'...) The question has no conclusive answer.

I am actually interested in this interpretation!

I think, (as a GM now) that 'run' takes up too much of a character's attention (trying to leg it like no-one's business in a straight line and not get shot) but disengage? Move? Tactical advance? Those sound like a little-bit of desperado-attention can be devoted to snap-shooting with your bolt pistol as you move, because that's kinda awesome.

BUT on the other side of the coin, the GM-likes-you-to-follow-the-book-stringently-side, at the same time, 'Move' is THE 'Move action' and your 'trait' only works with this.

However... diving back out of combat with a disengage, and then shooting the enemy at POINT BLANK? SWEEEEET So, rule of cool, or book-supported-behaviour?

I am personally warming to the interpretation of the 'Movement' subtype defining a 'Move action', not it actually being the 'Move' Action. Avoiding an Attack of Opportunity due to a class skill to get a point-blank face shot? awesome. Thanks again, guys. Discussions are useful!

Plenty trade-offs, mostly highly situational.You can happilyual wield your two basic weaons and Quick Draw a pistol in melee.There is too litle to gain by building for pistols (aka takimg Desperado)

If desperado's role bonus was allowed to breach the one subtype action per round it would be an worthwile bonus and an incentive to dual wield pistols. As it stands right now? Borderline useless IMO.

My knee-jerk reply to this train of thought is "not everything needs to be mechanically optimal". While I do agree with you that [Move and Shoot] is highly situational and that Pistols are generally weak, it's character concept and roleplaying that makes Desperado worth it.

Consider a [Whip] and a [spear]. Both deal 1d10 R damage with 0 Pen and [Primitive]. The Whip has 3m Range and [Flexible], the Spear has nothing. Mechanically, a Whip is superior since it is both ranged and denies enemies the opportunity to Parry. Not everyone wants to play a whip character though, even if whips have so many advantages.

ADDENDUM: Spears are two-handed, too. A character could dual-wield whips instead of wielding one spear.

You don't have to be a Desperado (in game role) to roleplay the fluff of a desperado (the character concept). You can totally make the same concept come alive as a let's say Assassin dual wielding pistol grip storm bolters (which he refers to as 'heavy bolt pistols'). You could have exact same roleplaying concept with this as with a dual wieldiing bolt pistol desperado, except way better from a mechanical standpoint.

Secondly, just because you want to play a certain concept (if it's not something outrageous ofc, like blind and crippled kung-fu master), you shouldn't be punished/rewarded by a character that's mechanically worse or better than everybody else. That's bad game design IMO.

Take your example: spear warrior is a pretty solid concept in a fantasy game while whip dual wielder is borderline silly. and yet if you want to RP a dual whip wielder, the system rewards you with a significantly more competent character, which, IMO, is wrong.

On a personal level I'm still pissed that one of the most iconic WH40k fighting styles (sword and pistol) has sucked so much in all incarnations of WH40k RPGs

We may be detracting from the thread a bit, so I'm not sure we should continue our discussion here. I will be more than happy to keep this conversation alive in private messaging if you want. While I'm taking the time to tell you this however:

To me, the Desperado is not a strong man, but a fast man. Or woman. Yes, she won't be putting out nearly as much damage as someone who (dual-)wields anything larger than a Pistol, but she'll be a slippery mother who's light on her feet with an itchy trigger finger. An Assassin can't replicate the sheer mobility that the Desperado has even with [Hip Shooting], and even then the Assassin can't take full advantage of Full Auto weapons. Mobility is a strength, just not as overt a strength as Damage is.

Absolutely dual-whippers are silly, no sugarcoating that. But hey, if that's what the player wants, I'd give it to 'im. Though if everyone wanted whips, I'd just take them off the table. I think it's inevitable that some character concepts are "better" than others. A single-shot sniper isn't going to mow down hordes of Orks faster than his autocannon-wielding buddy. Some Heavy weapons even have longer range than sniper rifles anyway. Is that wrong by itself? Not necessarily. The game does try to push players to specialize into particular weapon types. Most notable is how Unarmed combat gets all these Talents designed to make going without weapons viable. Unarmed punches are no Power Fist punches, but the gap between the two is slightly smaller with a little help.

If a particular combination of weapons is weak, "just" homebrew a Talent that supports that playstyle. A player wants to make dual-wielding tower shields a thing? More power to them. This guy wants bonuses for single-wielding? Go right ahead (and this exists in <Dark Heresy> spinoffs). I think that most people who complain are simply not willing to work away from the books. No offence.

Asymptomatic

Telling people to make up their own rules after buying a $50 rulebook because one of the specified Roles in the game is mechanically weak/the mechanics do not reward character concepts is kind of missing the point. It's not my job to to design parts of the game that are explicitly supported by the rules. This is not a case of wanting rules for underwater combat and making them up; it's a case of wanting one of the specific roles in the game (dual wielding pistols) to be on par with just using a basic weapon. It's not an unwillingness to make up rules, it's a frustration that the existing rules force you to do that when they shouldn't.

You always do have something interesting to say and I look forward to your posts.

Personally, I do not find Desperados wanting for power; mobility is highly valued in my book. Pistols are going to be weaker than Basic weapons and I accept that. If the problem is with Pistols' perceived uselessness, which I disagree with, then the solution I found was to just have more Talents and such support Pistols. There are already Talents to define a certain playstyle, such as adding an extra die to Chain weapons or improving Maximal Plasma shots, so why not a Talent to bump up Pistols a little closer to Basic weapons? [Versatile Shooter] from <Only War - Hammer of the Emperor> lets non-Basic weapons benefit from [Accurate]'s extra dice. That's already a step in the right direction. In my opinion, Pistols just need one more push after that.

If the issue is that a Pistol-strengthening Talent doesn't exist already... Well, I don't really have an answer for that. The books only have the Talents that someone out there invented and printed, and it may just be no one thought of helping Pistols or their submissions didn't go through. Half the fun of a game is making custom adventures or custom gear, is it not? At least that's how I view things. Limiting, and I stress the word "limiting", myself to only what's written chokes player creativity.

Talents are a bad way to balance out mechanically had items. In dungeons and dragons, this is what's called a feat tax, which refers to something requiring a feat in order to be useful. The problem with this is that the person who chooses an item that is useful to begin with doesn't have to get any extra feats and this has more freedom of feat choice. The same thing applies here, where you're suggesting that talents (which cost xp) be bought in order to make a character concept useful rather than being able to buy more interesting talents or improve the character concept beyond the baseline of other ones. Trying to fix a lack of reinforcement for a character concept by allowing it to be "fixed" by paying more for it than other concepts is not good game design, and is a thought process that plagues 3.X D&D, Pathfinder, 5E, and even 4E to an extent. The better choice is to improve the starting parts of the character concept, in this case dual-wielding pistols.