Personaly i don't like guns in fantasty games
I mean who wants to walk round with a load of black powder which explodes when exposed to naked flame
when there are wizards walking around with fireball and various other spells which could ruin your day i mean why risk it also if it gets damp it wont work if the mix is wrong it dose'nt work so no i dont think that in a world of magic black powder would be very popular
The argument could be made, why bother with swords when magic and archery will kill you before you could get close enough to use them. So are you going to remove swords also?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm well aware of that, the important part is that that's too much detail. There is a fine line for the amount of detail that goes into the game, you are blowing past it like it's the starting line at a marathon.No one puts that much thought into their weapons Ciretose, you might as well require people using katanas to carry lots of oils on them, or to have tons of extra parts lying around for then the fiddly things inevitably chip.I didn't even get into care needed by firearms...
The fact is that usable gunpowder isn't a simple thing to make. Your analogy isn't equivalent unless you need to load an explosive into your sword every time you use it.
The reason we didn't use gunpowder weapons much was not because we didn't have them, but because they were impractical beyond scaring the horses until fairly late in the game.
That isn’t the important part.
A class is a specialist. Each level is improvement in that area of specialization through study and/or experience to the point they are able to do so at superhuman levels of skill.
If you are a fighter, you learn how to use weapons more effectively (BaB) and different techniques (feats and features). Magic users learn new spells.
The reason people used clubs was because it was easy to find a stick and hit someone. As time progressed they sharpened it. As time progressed they made it metal.
Etc…
Similarly people threw things at each other. Then they figured out how to make bows that could fire sticks faster than they could throw them. It required skill to be able to pull and aim a relatively high tension bow quickly and effectively. This is the skill gained by those who are in classes specializing in bows.
Crossbows were invented to remove some of the skill required while increasing the force needed. Any moron can use a crossbow, but they take forever to reload. So you would mass produce them and have people working in tandem to load and fire. For the purposes of the game, the ability to quickly reload a crossbow is the skill gained by classes who specialize in crossbows.
Neither of the above has an entire class devoted to them.
Now we move on to guns. Until the invention of corning in 1429, they were basically boom and smoke machines. The person using the weapon were unskilled peasants, but the person mixing the powder was highly skilled and trained.
Pointing the gun isn’t the class. Using the gun is the class. Mixing the powder by hand in the proper amounts is the class in the same way making bombs is the Alchemist, or putting together spell components is the Wizard.
Early firearms co-existed with knights, but in unskilled hands they sucked. They misfired, took forever to reload, and were more expensive and less effective than crossbows.
They used them to scare horses, basically. And for highly dangerous and ineffective cannons.
Now if you want to make a class that can use those crappy weapons supernaturally well, in the same way a fighter uses other weapons supernaturally well, you have to understand the problems with the weapon are not in the poor utilization of a good weapon, but in the fact that it is a crappy weapon unless made into a good weapon by skilled hands.
In other words, being able to make the gun good is the class. Being able to make gunpowder than doesn’t blow up in your face and load it quickly into the gun, again without having it blow up in your face, is the supernatural ability that should have been gained by the class.
You can have guns in the game just fine if they are the guns that existed at the time. It won’t break anything. You can even have a gunslinger functionally have a revolver, as long as they are the only ones who know how to use it as a revolver and to everyone else it is a crappy gun.
You could build an entire class around someone taking this crappy piece of metal and making it sing. It would not break anything else, because it wouldn’t be something any other class could do.
Instead they tried to add guns as if they were the same as bows or crossbows. They added layers and layers of mechanics and paperwork for ammunition calculations…
It could have been so simple. It should have been so simple. A class that can use a weapon effectively that no one else can use effectively. A weapon that in the right hands is far more powerful than any sword or bow.
Instead…
The point is, very simply, Guns aren't like swords. Guns aren't like bows. Guns are different.
We had been doing so well with the agreeing...I need to go to work so I'll save this war for another day...or at least until I get home.
Well I was kinda agreeing with you. :P
I mean, let's face it. None of the weapons are actually realistic. I mean, they're just enough that it almost seems somewhat plausible, but then you realize that none of it actually is.
I mean, look at adamantine. Hard as it is and it cuts through steel like butter. But no material does that, nor does that actually make sense. If you take a steel sword, or even some sort of titanium super-blade, folded over and over, with an edge sharpened with a laser, you still wouldn't effortlessly slice through wood. There would still be some resistance there.
Likewise, as noted, bowstrings don't snap, bows don't suddenly become useless because of moisture in the air, and we're still tossing around 6+ arrows in 6 seconds, in 6 different directions, at 6 different – generally moving - targets, possibly while moving either on our own power or while flying on some chimeric beast.
There comes a point where realism takes a back seat to the fantasy aspect. Kind of like how all your equipment doesn't melt into slag when you get hit with a fireball, or when you're swallowed whole. Or how acid is considered an Energy type. It just works out better in actual play that way.
So I still agree with you that the rules are bad. I just think that when it comes to realism and simulationism versus playability, guns should have the same amount as everything else: very little.
Because, honestly, we're not doing realistic things with other weapons.
A level 7 gunslinger can trip Treerazer just by hitting him. No save or anything. That's the broken bit.
No likely as Treerazer is flying. At best you could cause him to make Fly skill check at DC 20 where he has +38 Fly skill. If he fail which he can't he would drop 20 feet.
I have to agree that Targeting legs is broken thought. You do full damage and the target is tripped all with targeting the touch AC. I think you should at least target the CMD of the target and if successful you do damage and knock the target prone. But even as is Treerazer would be affected since he can fly and even if you do catch him on the ground he can at will greater Teleport or use Telekinesis in clever way.
Voska66, the tripping bit is an example. The problem is the no-save nature of the ability. You can make him drop his axe, be confused (with no save!), etc.
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
Voska66, the tripping bit is an example. The problem is the no-save nature of the ability. You can make him drop his axe, be confused (with no save!), etc.
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
If I ever get the chance to play a gunslinger, I'm going to have rolls associated with the targeting limbs ability.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hate implies a strong feeling about them. Personally, I am fairly indifferent toward them, but they will never be allowed in my campaigns.
Why?
Because I don't really like the direction Paizo is going with firearms. Hirtorically, crossbows and firearms replaced longbows not because they were better, but because they were easier to use. 1 longbowman could outshoot 3 or more crossbowman, but it took years to train a longbowman.
I see firearms similar to crossbows. Easy to use, but slow to fire. As such, I have my own house rules for firearms, and they are incompatible with Paizo's vision for firearms. Since the gunslinger is based on Paizo's vision for firearms, it really doesn't fit into my campaigns.
Hate implies a strong feeling about them. Personally, I am fairly indifferent toward them, but they will never be allowed in my campaigns.
Why?
Because I don't really like the direction Paizo is going with firearms. Hirtorically, crossbows and firearms replaced longbows not because they were better, but because they were easier to use. 1 longbowman could outshoot 3 or more crossbowman, but it took years to train a longbowman.
I see firearms similar to crossbows. Easy to use, but slow to fire. As such, I have my own house rules for firearms, and they are incompatible with Paizo's vision for firearms. Since the gunslinger is based on Paizo's vision for firearms, it really doesn't fit into my campaigns.
The advanced ones are easier to use, but the GM has to decide they are in mass production and not just being discovered.
right now, i could so use a Morgan and Coke, some Nachos, a white chocolate raspberry chesecake, and a large garlic chicken pizza. all so i can see that special on gunpowder when it comes back.
That's Captain Coke to you, show some respect!
The advanced ones are easier to use, but the GM has to decide they are in mass production and not just being discovered.Hate implies a strong feeling about them. Personally, I am fairly indifferent toward them, but they will never be allowed in my campaigns.
Why?
Because I don't really like the direction Paizo is going with firearms. Hirtorically, crossbows and firearms replaced longbows not because they were better, but because they were easier to use. 1 longbowman could outshoot 3 or more crossbowman, but it took years to train a longbowman.
I see firearms similar to crossbows. Easy to use, but slow to fire. As such, I have my own house rules for firearms, and they are incompatible with Paizo's vision for firearms. Since the gunslinger is based on Paizo's vision for firearms, it really doesn't fit into my campaigns.
I am going for...
A. All firearms are simple weapons to useB. All firearms do significantly more damage(Muskets are 3d6 base, and get dex added to their damage)
C. All firearms have long reload times. Even with special training(IE a feat) and alchemical cartridges, the reload time never gets to less that 1 full round.
D. All firearms are 100% reliable for the first shot, the chance of a misfire starts at 0, and increases the more you shoot it without cleaning it out.
This makes firearms good mainstay weapons in large standing armies(A large group of level 1 warriors firing 3 to 5 shots a minute) or as alpha strike weapons(Swashbuckler draws a pistol, shoots, then switches to a sword).
Honestly, the only thing about gunslinger that I see as broken is their ability to make all attacks within the 1st range increment against touch AC, especially when they can augment that with the Dead Shot deed which allows the full attack action using just one bullet and confirms the whole hit as a crit with just one confirmation roll. IE what might normally be 3 hits with one x4 crit now becomes one hit with x12 dmg. But even at that it is restricted to a limited range.
That said, a friend of mine is running a game where gunslingers are permitted with just two slight modifications: 1st) firearms do not normally target touch AC; 2nd) the Deadeye deed can allow for touch attacks with a firearm at the cost of one Grit per range increment, but the cost cannot be reduced to less than one Grit with the Signature Deed feat (though you could still take that feat to get extra range out of that one Grit)
And while the near-automatic tripping ability of the Targeting deed is useful, the way I see it is it is a temporary effect that is more comparable than anything to the Bard's ability to use Frightening Tune to automatically Shaken (-2 atk, saves, skills, and ability checks) ALL enemies within a given radius (30 ft I think), and that one doesn't require any sort of roll on the players part OR allow for a saving throw. Yes it's useful, but as a single full-round attack action it's more circumstantial.
Of course, as always, feel free to take what you like and discard the rest. If you just don't like Gunslingers, don't deal with them.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, the only thing about gunslinger that I see as broken is their ability to make all attacks within the 1st range increment against touch AC, especially when they can augment that with the Dead Shot deed which allows the full attack action using just one bullet and confirms the whole hit as a crit with just one confirmation roll. IE what might normally be 3 hits with one x4 crit now becomes one hit with x12 dmg. But even at that it is restricted to a limited range.
Even that isn't so bad. Maximum 5 attacks at level 20, and adding damage bonuses only once to this bullet, especially because it consumes grit, is better used when you have a broken weapon to avoid the obligatory misfire.
That said, a friend of mine is running a game where gunslingers are permitted with just two slight modifications: 1st) firearms do not normally target touch AC;
Why even use guns then ? Take a crossbow (a weapon reaching 10 on the suckometer, remember), you deal more damage, spend less gold, and you weapon doesn't break each round for the same effect.
Since it's apparently been lost already, I'll ask again:
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
|
| 77 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
GUNS DON'T BELONG IN MAH SENTIENT JELLO.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
I hate how accurately that paragraph describes one of the parties I currently GM for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then get familiar with the mythology of other places and throw it at your players. Japanese, Egyptian, Indian, Native American, not South American though, unless you want to creep everyone out, all of these can be pretty fun....even if they are really weird sometimes.
Add stuff like when a fight moves and power attacks or vital strikes make up a super move for him.
Since it's apparently been lost already, I'll ask again:
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
I have seriously considered converting the Gunslinger into a Crossbow-slinger. A way to bring the poor crossbows up to longbow status. So for me at least, there is interest.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
I love this post so much.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I love this post so much.i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
Agreed
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So much love for that post.
So much love for that post.
Odd huh? Especially since it should be considered business as usual.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
I won't even lie...this post touched my heart in ways no one will ever understand.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
Best. Post. Ever.
I'd beg to Signature it if we had the option.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i don't get why people see D&D or it's derivatives as medieval european.
you have medieval knights wearing rennaiscane era armor, wielding roman era falcatas, worshipping greek gods, traveling with native american shamans wearing the hides of saharan beasts, who transform into prehistoric dinosaurs who are accompanied by modern japanese schoolgirls wielding Tokugawa Era Daisho and Wearing black pajamas, and old men wearing robes and pointed hats who chant mathematical equations to control reality, on a journey to kill brain eating space aliens, giant sentient firebreathing spellcasting reptiles and sentient jello.
Seriously... you get a cookie for this post.
... So you hate fun, got it. :-P
This is the general impression I get from people who don't like the gunslinger. Or HATE it, as they may say.
I like the gunslinger. I like it the same way I like classes that don't get any love.
Just give 'im a chance, will ya? He can be somebody, just give 'im a chance to show ya.
Besides, it's very fun as a GM to insert random tropes to fit the characters your players are playing, and the gunslinger broadens that scope just a bit more.
GS: I walk into the tavern.
Me: The music and merriment come to a screeching halt as you enter, and everyone turns your way. The bartender, looking a bit nervous, wipes off a glass and says, "What'll it be?"
Goofy, but fun to do. Plus, the more you learn about them, the easier this gets.
I'm just not crazy about the idea of a class with full BAB, whose weapon's attack roll is against Touch AC, limited only by ammunition and reload speeds(which are almost hand-wavable when the right feats are selected). It's just my preference and taste, but guns feel like they should be in a separate game from swords and longbows. I know all about how ancient China had black powder weapons even before classical medieval times, I'm just talking about preference.
I played in a game where everyone in the world was using guns, and I was the only one attempting to use a sword. It was just like the old saying goes; "Never bring a knife to a gunfight... Even if that knife is magically enchanted and channeling arcane spells." I wound up flat on the ground with negative HP after the first round of every encounter, meanwhile the damned NPC hirelings were dishing out more damage and tactical advantage simply due to the fact they were carrying guns. I didn't play in the campaign very long...
As a counterpoint, I must say I do like what PF have done with guns, and I have no problems accepting the in-game rules for guns, but mixing them up with "traditional"(YMMV) fantasy elements just makes my brain go wonky. I'm having a hard time envisioning my favorite medieval fantasy settings with the heroes lugging around rifles and machine guns instead of swords and shields. To each their own. But if I ever do decide to run a game with guns, I will definitely be using PF's rules and Gunslingers.
|
Please don't lump everyone who dislikes or even goes as far as to hate the Gunslinger into one big camp of people who are vying for keeping guns out of our games because they don't fit thematically.
Early firearms are part of both the Golarion games I play and run as well as in my homebrew; I just dislike the Gunslinger itself and its mechanics.
Please don't lump everyone who dislikes or even goes as far as to hate the Gunslinger into one big camp of people who are vying for keeping guns out of our games because they don't fit thematically.
Early firearms are part of both the Golarion games I play and run as well as in my homebrew; I just dislike the Gunslinger itself and its mechanics.
I don't hate Gunslingers, but they don't fit thematically in most of the campaigns I run. I have never actually banned the class(yet), but in my Red Hand of Doom game I simply made guns rare; they exist pretty much for the one player in the group that wants to use them.
|
|
Since it's apparently been lost already, I'll ask again:
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
Cheapy,
The Super Genius Games product Ultimate Options - Grit and Gunslingers provides rules for using Grit (or the relates Guile and Panache) for other weapons which can be used by anyone.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... So you hate fun, got it. :-PThis is the general impression I get from people who don't like the gunslinger. Or HATE it, as they may say.
I like the gunslinger. I like it the same way I like classes that don't get any love.
Just give 'im a chance, will ya? He can be somebody, just give 'im a chance to show ya.
Besides, it's very fun as a GM to insert random tropes to fit the characters your players are playing, and the gunslinger broadens that scope just a bit more.
GS: I walk into the tavern.
Me: The music and merriment come to a screeching halt as you enter, and everyone turns your way. The bartender, looking a bit nervous, wipes off a glass and says, "What'll it be?"Goofy, but fun to do. Plus, the more you learn about them, the easier this gets.
I don’t know how many ways I can say this.
I have no issues with the trope. I hate the execution.
I love the idea of a gunslinger in the setting.
I don’t like the gunslinger they gave us, in the same way I don’t like the ninja or the samurai they gave us, but I love those concepts.
A gunslinger is a person who is a master of guns.
The gunslinger class is an overly complicated full BaB class with more moving parts than the very simple concept requires.
A gunslinger doesn’t need full BaB with anything but guns.
They made two major mistakes in the design that ruined it for me.
First, they made the design decision to make firearms items that any class can use well rather than making them what they were. Generally crappy weapons that could only be used with the help of highly trained powder makers and weaponsmiths.
If they had made guns powerful, but nearly impossible to use repeatedly by non-gunslingers, a lot of problems would have been fine.
You could have had a loaded pistol be like a wand for non-gunslinger classes. It is preloaded with a single powerful blast, but you don’t know how to make effective gunpowder or properly and safely load it, so after you pull the trigger you are going to need some help. Repeated use of a gun would require at least a level of gunslinger to know how to make gunpowder and maintain the gun. As you level you would learn how to and quickly reload it as well as how to make more powerful powder (increased damage) and ammunition (armor piercing ammo and gunpowder combos, scatter shot ammo and gunpowder combos, exploding dice, etc...)
You could have given gunslingers the ability to have damage bonuses along the sneak attack or bomb progression some types of ammo as a class feature, for example. Or you could have made the touch attack feature a gunslinger class feature gained from knowing how to mix the powder and ammo properly, rather than a feature of guns.
And that is the second problem. If everyone can use firearms effectively, you have to have a reason why gunslingers are “special” aside from the fact that they are the class that can use guns. So you have to add extra mechanics that require table bookkeeping…grit is an overly complicated mess that forces players to kill steal to get grit back. That has no place in the concept, it was added to fit the mechanical needs, because since everyone can be a gunslinger, they needed something to make gunslingers “special”
The gunslinger concept is very, very, simple. Badass with a gun. You take a ¾ bab class with a “flurry of blows” like progression with guns only who gains increased damage/scatter/damage types/etc…as they level and learn new ways to make powder and ammunition…that is a simple, awesome class that doesn’t require all of the machinations that introducing a weapon into the game able to act against touch attacks does.
I want a gunslinger class. I love the Dark Tower series and Clint Eastwood westerns. I would love that class at my table. Hell, I’ve allowed that class at my table with some basic houserules.
But what I got is what I expect from a 3pp, not from the core publisher. An overly complicated mess that changes core concepts in the game (adding touch attack weapons as a base weapon…) and doesn’t even create the concept it describes.
Look at what I described above for my conceptual gunslinger and what the Gunslinger class currently is.
Which is closer to what you think of when you think of a gunslinger?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I played in a game where everyone in the world was using guns, and I was the only one attempting to use a sword. It was just like the old saying goes; "Never bring a knife to a gunfight... Even if that knife is magically enchanted and channeling arcane spells." I wound up flat on the ground with negative HP after the first round of every encounter, meanwhile the damned NPC hirelings were dishing out more damage and tactical advantage simply due to the fact they were carrying guns. I didn't play in the campaign very long...
This is entirely a mechanical issue. It should not be confused with the concept at all. If the NPCs and everyone else were using guns and you got slaughtered all the time, then it sounds like the guns were clearly superior to the options you took. However, it is entirely possible to run games where guns work, and are mechanically sound. It – of course - just depends on what mechanics you are using.
I am a supporter of guns in fantasy. There's just something about the idea of a bard who uses guns, smoke, and illusion spells together. Or a wily wizard pulls out a boomstick when he runs low on spells. Or a swashbuckling fighter with a flintlock in one hand and a sword in the other.
To me, I think part of it being fantasy is it also being fantastic. I like the idea of adventurers riding hot-air balloons and surfing the clouds over mountainous peaks to floating cities or fortresses, and rip-riding through a swamp on a motorboat fashioned out of an engine that runs on magical fire and water to produce steam. Before taking a journey across the ocean on a ship, and suiting up with bottles of air for an under sea adventure!
FANTASY! Whooooo! ^-^
The problem is I think the mechanics suck. :P
This is entirely a mechanical issue. It should not be confused with the concept at all. If the NPCs and everyone else were using guns and you got slaughtered all the time, then it sounds like the guns were clearly superior to the options you took. However, it is entirely possible to run games where guns work, and are mechanically sound. It – of course - just depends on what mechanics you are using.
I'll agree with you there. The encounters were based on everyone having guns, so much of it was in close quarters, with damn near everyone having various levels of Gunslinger. I was a Magus, and whenever I tried to move up to melee to channel a spell through my sword, I got the crap shot out of me by the enemies carrying guns. But, I think everybody was ignoring that guns only attack Touch AC within 1 increment, because they were shooting all over the place and only rolling against Touch. Many times, well over 10, 20, 30+ feet of distance.
It was a very detailed gun-centric campaign(range increments aside). Although, the level of gun-nut you have to be to enjoy it was not mentioned to me beforehand, or I would have declined the invite. I'm just not into guns, unless it's something futuristic/sci-fi like Star Wars. Otherwise, I'll just play Call of Duty.
|
Then get familiar with the mythology of other places and throw it at your players. Japanese, Egyptian, Indian, Native American, not South American though, unless you want to creep everyone out, all of these can be pretty fun....even if they are really weird sometimes.
Add stuff like when a fight moves and power attacks or vital strikes make up a super move for him.
Hey, whats so creepy about south american mythology?
Since it's apparently been lost already, I'll ask again:
Is there interest for a gunslinger without guns? The question is particularly for those who want Certain Aspects of Medieval Europe With Magic as their fantasy. Crossbow, wands, slings, etc.
Cheapy,
The Super Genius Games product Ultimate Options - Grit and Gunslingers provides rules for using Grit (or the relates Guile and Panache) for other weapons which can be used by anyone.
Yep, read it. I am thinking of something a bit more concrete though.
Hey, whats so creepy about south american mythology?Then get familiar with the mythology of other places and throw it at your players. Japanese, Egyptian, Indian, Native American, not South American though, unless you want to creep everyone out, all of these can be pretty fun....even if they are really weird sometimes.
Add stuff like when a fight moves and power attacks or vital strikes make up a super move for him.
Cannibals!
|
|
Hey, whats so creepy about south american mythology?I can't speak for Bluestar, but to me, South America (well, South of the U.S. at least, Aztecs / Mayans specifically) mythology is creepier because I still see South America as less over run by civilization than say Europe or even Egypt.
Look at a pair of pyramids for example:
The Egyptian pyramid is probably picked clean by looters and may very well be a tourist trap. At worst, you've found a pyramid that's been covered with sand for a long time and have to deal with a mummy and a curse, all pretty typical stuff. Boring even.
A pyramid in Mexico could be the tourist trap same as in Egypt. Or it could be one in a lost part of a jungle (much scarier than the desert) some where in the Yucatan Peninsula where people were sacrificed to gods that most people know very little about (as opposed to the more well known Egyptian gods) or have to deal with the spirits of slaughtered sacrifices, or even the Natives who perished when their temple was looted. Or even the conquistadors who died looting the pyramid.
Interesting, I was just curious if this was a common conception when it came to south american mythology and fantasy as I have been working on the subject for a while now. Sorry for derailing the tread a bit thou.
Its funny to read about how the use of guns are so inaccurately portrayed and thus banned in a game full of dragons, fey and gnomes. I like the Gunslinger as it simply adds a new option for opening up new character types and stories in the game I really love. I could care less how accurate they are.
Its funny to read about how the use of guns are so inaccurately portrayed and thus banned in a game full of dragons, fey and gnomes. I like the Gunslinger as it simply adds a new option for opening up new character types and stories in the game I really love. I could care less how accurate they are.
It's all about preference and opinion. No one can really tell someone else their preference is wrong, but around here they sure as heck try. I could care less about the historical aspect of guns, they don't fit in most(not all) of my games. I'll toss a player a bone and allow them in "rare" state on occasion.
|
|
My biggest problem with the Gunslinger is the gold output on one. Pathfinder at its core is probably an Emerging Guns campaign. That means that ammo is going to be base cost. So we are talking about 10 gp a shot for just the blackpower! And that is assuming you are letting them reuse their shots....with doesn't make a lot of sense. No low level campaign is going to be able to sustain that. A typical fight even up to say 5th lvl would only see the Gunslinger shooting 1 or 2 times.
After that you starting getting into more attacks per round, thus more gold shot per encounter. Even at 10th lvl you don't always find 100-150 gp per person per encounter to make up for the 10-15 shots you used that battle. As a GM, I wouldn't let that happen because then the other players are getting way more gold then similar campaigns. I mean think about it, 10 encounters later, the Gunslinger is just reloading while the Fighter is buying some minor magic item.
Finally, you have to deal with improving your guns. Even an Emerging campaign isn't going to be sprinked with a lot of magical firearms. That means you are forced to find enchanters to improve your existing guns. That is just more money that other players are putting into new gear because they have been able to improve their weapons though just loot. I tend to mitigate this a little by letting them trade in magic items for enchantment, but you really can't do it on a +1 for +1 basis, so in the end you are still behind the rest of the party.
I don't see how the Gunslinger is a viable class as long as you use the per shot cost factor in on them.