|
You lace your ships with Resist Fire 30 (at rather a high expense, economy ahoy), I use disnitegrate. Goodbye, ship.
The whole idea of naval transport in high-magic fantasy hangs on a somewhat flimsy idea that no high-level casters took up a "will sink ships for $$$" lifestyle.
And if you're trying to say that there was no piracy before guns, well, that's not true.
|
You lace your ships with Resist Fire 30 (at rather a high expense, economy ahoy), I use disnitegrate. Goodbye, ship.
The whole idea of naval transport in high-magic fantasy hangs on a somewhat flimsy idea that no high-level casters took up a "will sink ships for $$$" lifestyle.
And if you're trying to say that there was no piracy before guns, well, that's not true.
High level Wizards are rare and getting within 220 feet of a ship puts you in the line of cannon fire, too.
Dispel Magic still works.
As for piracy not existing before the Age of Sail. Of course it did. If you want to play the Battle of Salamis with eye-patches? Fill your boots.
I don't think you'll see that image on the front cover of any book trying to sell something about "pirates" though. It's a MAJOR disconnect with the entire FEEL of the genre -- and you know it, too.
Those darn Victual Brothers, for instance.
(Though it has to be said that based on the illustrations in this product, Paizo is going for an Age of Sail vibe.)
|
|
You lace your ships with Resist Fire 30 (at rather a high expense, economy ahoy), I use disnitegrate. Goodbye, ship.
The whole idea of naval transport in high-magic fantasy hangs on a somewhat flimsy idea that no high-level casters took up a "will sink ships for $$$" lifestyle.
And if you're trying to say that there was no piracy before guns, well, that's not true.
High level Wizards are rare and getting within 220 feet of a ship puts you in the line of cannon fire, too.
Dispel Magic still works.
As for piracy not existing before the Age of Sail. Of course it did. If you want to play the Battle of Salamis with eye-patches? Fill your boots.
I don't think you'll see that image on the front cover of any book trying to sell something about "pirates" though. It's a MAJOR disconnect with the entire FEEL of the genre -- and you know it, too.
Please, implying what I know and what I don't know doesn't really work, even if done via bolded italicized.
For me, the word "pirates" conjures images of eyeptach-wooden leg-parrot-yarrrr-rum-sabre-more rum-cat'o'9'tails-kraken-walk the plank-booty-parley lads and lasses, and even if there are any pistols and cannons there somewhere, I can perfectly live without them.
If you can't, well, no probs, but that's the "Get XXX out of my YYY" (or in this case: get in) purism. If you don't tolerate the other's visions of some tangent in fantasy, don't expect them to tolerate yours.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Please, implying what I know and what I don't know doesn't really work, even if done via bolded italicized.
For me, the word "pirates" conjures images of eyeptach-wooden leg-parrot-yarrrr-rum-sabre-more rum-cat'o'9'tails-kraken-walk the plank-booty-parley lads and lasses, and even if there are any pistols and cannons there somewhere, I can perfectly live without them.
Evidently, it did.
Because I didn't see any homage to galleys crewed with slaves or free-rowers in your vision of the pirates. You think of them in the Age of Sail same as does everyone else.
The Age of Sail requires cannon -- or else galleys and their rams rule the waves.
More to the point, my Jack Sparrow requires a pistol in one hand and a cutlas in the other. Maybe yours is different.
The least that could have been done was to recognize that in Pirates of the Inner Sea with a Gunslinger archetype. Is that a weakness in the book? Damned right it is.
I was always curious, where do the Shackles Pirates get their rum? Are there sugar plantations in Sargava and/or the Shackles?
My only problem with the cover art is that the "pirate" doesn't appear to be engaged in any sort of piracy. Despite the flag, it doesn't make me think of piracy.
*shrug*
As a sidenote, the earliest recorded usage of the skull and cross bones flag was in the late 1600s IIRC and that would explain associating prates with that flag and guns. I think it is hard to separate the imagery of that flag from those of pirates with pistols. But, piracy in general, I don't have much trouble separating the two.
|
|
My only problem with the cover art is that the "pirate" doesn't appear to be engaged in any sort of piracy. Despite the flag, it doesn't make me think of piracy.
It certainly makes me think of Jack Sparrow vs. The Kraken , which is the vibe that is being channeled in that illustration.
'Ello beasty.
Dispel Magic still works.
As for piracy not existing before the Age of Sail. Of course it did. If you want to play the Battle of Salamis with eye-patches? Fill your boots.
I don't think you'll see that image on the front cover of any book trying to sell something about "pirates" though. It's a MAJOR disconnect with the entire FEEL of the genre -- and you know it, too.
The Conan RPG has a full-fledged supplement on Pirates that had zero to do with the Age of Sail tropes. It was an awesome book. And you could still cover the thematic bases of a Pirates of the Carribean movie with it, just as you could in a Golarion that doesn't go whole-hog on the Age of Sail influences.
In most pirate movies, muskets & cannon are more for visuals and justificaiton for explosions than anything else. Most of the iconic battles devolve into swordfights & boarding actions and gunpowder's effectiveness is reserved for blowing up a ship.
In the novel, Red Sails Under Red Skies, classic pirate action is had without cannons and gunpowder.
It can be done, and it can works just as well. I understand why some folks want it, however, but wasn't that the justification for why the rules were included in Ultimate Combat? Paizo's stated pretty strongly that the RPG line is not a Golarion line. So rather than cram the Age of Sail stuff down our throats in Golarion product, they've given you the tools to amp it up via Ultimate Combat.
Seems pretty reasonable to me.
The Age of Sail requires cannon -- or else galleys and their rams rule the waves.
More to the point, my Jack Sparrow requires a pistol in one hand and a cutlas in the other. Maybe yours is different.
The least that could have been done was to recognize that in Pirates of the Inner Sea with a Gunslinger archetype. Is that a weakness in the book? Damned right it is.
While Golarion is obviously NOT Earth, there are other areas where firearms impact the setting (potentially negatively). It was years ago when Golarion info was beginning to be rolled out, but I recall a post by James Jacobs where he talked about the setting having Vikings and still having nations engaged in sea trade on a level that wasn't seen on Earth until much later -- 'cause Vikings and Pirates were both cool. (I'm paraphrasing from memory but I think that was the gist of it.)
In any case, the impact of firearms would have an even bigger impact on sea battles that it did in ground warfare. So for those who want Viking raiders & galley slaves (& many GMs like having galley slaves for their PCs to free), Paizo might be trying to keep a wide range of vessels viable so that frigates and galleons don't dominate.
'Cause when I want to get my Viking on, a Viking on a galleon doesn't entirely fit, either.
In most pirate movies, muskets & cannon are more for visuals and justificaiton for explosions than anything else. Most of the iconic battles devolve into swordfights & boarding actions and gunpowder's effectiveness is reserved for blowing up a ship.
Not just in movies, but in real life too.
The firearms of the period were not easy to reload in battle. So once you took your shot, your pistol would be kind of useless.
Count me in with Steel Wind in the lack of a pirate gunslinger archetype being a disappointment. A pirate supplement is the single most logical place I can think of to put something like that into. Not seeing it makes me think that the gunslinger might end up like the old 3.5 splatbook classes, with no support once published.
Actually, unless I'm mistaken, the new pirate AP should have info throughout for including guns if one wishes to (which I think would be support for gunslingers in that it gives means for including them in long term play, but could be wrong on how you would define support) and they will be explicitly included as part of the storyline and plot in the final module.
But, if by support you mean feats and such, I would expect them to be included in future supplements just as they were included in the UC.
Perhaps they (the Paizo staff) will put their toes in the water with an individual (non-Golarion) PFRPG module heavily weighted toward a gun-toting society. Not that I am dropping a hint or anything...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, one might just go ahead and question the whole idea of sea-faring vessels in a...
You know, one might just go a head and question.. ANY mundane methods of transportation of stuff.
I mean seriously..
"Oh No! bandits are in the woods!"
"Why are the bandits in the woods? We stopped using caravans ever since tom learned teleport."
Tom then casts divination spells, finds the bandits and fires an orbital laser cannon into the woods thus exterminating the bandit "Menace"..
Or Perhaps the Bandits learned magic, and are able to hijack the teleportation highways and disrupt Tom from firing the Orbital Laser Cannon spell.
With all of this magic, WHY ARE THERE NO FLATSCREEN TVs! Why are there fighters and rogues? Why haven't they learned how to make spaceships and fly around in the endless night? Do trolls reproduce through budding?
The major problem here is that its the classic trope of pirates with guns. Yes, reloading was a problem even back during the age of sails, AND that is why people who had guns would carry multiple guns on them.
But then every single picture is the classic "Age of Sail" version of pirates. Just like nearly every gunslinger picture is them wielding 2 pistols. Apparently it is a joke in paizo to get these cool awesome pictures of characters, and then NOT put anything in really mechanically to play that character or the big trope of the picture/genera thingy..
IT would be like putting in a bunch of pictures of knights fighting dragons and wizards, blocking breath attacks or magic balls of energy with their shield.. Then not putting anything that would allow a person to play said knight.
Or perhaps with the current stuff that is out.. Lets say making a large number of pictures reminiscent to assassins creed. You know, the pakour type of stuff. Then, not putting in the hidden blade, the ability to actually do pakour, and giving an archetype like this to.. I dunno.. Fighter?
|
|
Ultimately, a GM can introduce anything he/she wants into the adventure path and there are plenty of rules covering firearms and naval combat already in the various Pathfinder books. Just like additions of other worldly travel, aliens, or time travel to current times - it is ultimately up to players and the GM to determine what they want in their game. It's all good. You could have magic cannons/muskets too - no gunpowder - just magic boom sticks. :)
The thing is, its usually easier for players to ask for something that exists than it is for them to ask for something that doesn't yet exist. Cause if it doesn't exist, then it must be created. The GM typically
A) is too busy making the campaign
or
B) Doesn't trust players enough to make something balanced.
You know, one might just go a head and question.. ANY mundane methods of transportation of stuff.
I mean seriously..
"Oh No! bandits are in the woods!"
"Why are the bandits in the woods? We stopped using caravans ever since tom learned teleport."Glad to see I'm not the only one who thinks the argument of "Your side is wrong because MAGIC!!!" is a total cop-out.
Yep. I do though love arguments at start of with "Back during the those days.." as much as I love "A wizard walks into a bar.." arguments though.
Truthfully technology should be much more advance if you have magic. Some of my favorite magic items back in AD&D were basically vending machines such as the "Cola" golem(It was a cola vending machine), who would always give a refreshing beverage to the maker, but had lots of problems for anyone else. Such as eating their silver pieces or giving them potions of death.
Back in 3.5 days, I actually had a "laser rifle" I made out of a Ray of Light wand and a heavy crossbow.
But I'm willing to overlook the technological achievements that should have been made the moment magic starting coming into the equation as.. Wizards are freeking lazy. Hence the reason for mundane travel, piracy, banditry and the extreme lack of even +1 swords in the "good guys" possessions. (Ever notice how the bad guys always have better equipment than you can buy?)
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
In most pirate movies, muskets & cannon are more for visuals and justificaiton for explosions than anything else. Most of the iconic battles devolve into swordfights & boarding actions and gunpowder's effectiveness is reserved for blowing up a ship.Not just in movies, but in real life too.
The firearms of the period were not easy to reload in battle. So once you took your shot, your pistol would be kind of useless.
"We can still use 'em as CLUBS!"
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Re: Technology as magic
I think that's part of the reason that fantasy settings have to blow up occasionally.* The world may not think of magical locomotives, but the players do.
The Realms had their portals. (I recall one in Unapprochable East to Kara Tur) And Eberron had their trains, airships etc. We've not seen (IIRC) any such developments in Golarion. The easiest explaination is a something prevents most long term routes. Which then beggars the question of what or how? The star, er elf-gates seem to be stable, and distant worlds seems to have a decent commerce going (along with Akiton airships) So why haven't those things become more common on Golarion?
Re: Guns. I agree when I think Pirates I think two things a) The golden age of piracy and b)Somalia. The later isn't a good game, the former almost always includes cannon. So why don't we see more?
I can think of three reasons.
1) Price. Gunpowder and shot are artifically expensive in Golarion. The cannon costs 6000 GP, one shot is 130 GP (100 for the powder, 30 for the ball) That's a lot of feather anchor tokens which will stop a ship cold for a whole day. It's also a Necklace of fireballs V.
2) Sabotage. There are some nice powder/anti-powder spells in UC. They're all close range, but with a rod of enlarge, you can get 50' + 5' How close do ships get again? Or even one 7th level wizard with some good spells and dimension door memorized twice. Catapults are safer and won't explode on their own (misfire). This doesn't count a mage pulling a Khelben and blowing up barrels in warehouses, making people unwilling to ship the stuff.
3) Supply issues. Cannons require Black Powder, Catapults require rocks. You've been at sea 6 months. Which are you more likely to find?
*
The funny thing about black powder..
When a wizard buys 2/3 of the parts of it for his spell component pouch, its cheap and easy to find.. But the moment you add in burnt wood, it suddenly shoots up to millions of monies.
So basically buy a wizard spell component pouch, and burn unused food and other things (make it into charcoal.) Infinite gunpowder.
"We can still use 'em as CLUBS!"In most pirate movies, muskets & cannon are more for visuals and justificaiton for explosions than anything else. Most of the iconic battles devolve into swordfights & boarding actions and gunpowder's effectiveness is reserved for blowing up a ship.Not just in movies, but in real life too.
The firearms of the period were not easy to reload in battle. So once you took your shot, your pistol would be kind of useless.
And they did. Check out the heavy wooden handles on pistols of the era.
The funny thing about black powder..
When a wizard buys 2/3 of the parts of it for his spell component pouch, its cheap and easy to find.. But the moment you add in burnt wood, it suddenly shoots up to millions of monies.
So basically buy a wizard spell component pouch, and burn unused food and other things (make it into charcoal.) Infinite gunpowder.
The real problem comes from Paizo trying (and failing) to find a balance between the anti-gun and pro-firearms factions of their player-base.
More reasonable prices can be achieved if the "Commonplace Guns" option (Ultimate Combat p. 135) is used. (Consider the cost for ammunition to include a level of "hazard pay" for the alchemist)
Also check this out:
Heroes like Burroughs’s John Carter or Howard’s Solomon Kane carried pistols alongside their swords, and it’s hard to imagine a pirate ship without cannons blazing.
... also from page 135. (The emphasis is mine)
The funny thing about black powder..
When a wizard buys 2/3 of the parts of it for his spell component pouch, its cheap and easy to find.. But the moment you add in burnt wood, it suddenly shoots up to millions of monies.
So basically buy a wizard spell component pouch, and burn unused food and other things (make it into charcoal.) Infinite gunpowder.
The real problem comes from Paizo trying (and failing) to find a balance between the anti-gun and pro-firearms factions of their player-base.
More reasonable prices can be achieved if the "Commonplace Guns" option (Ultimate Combat p. 135) is used. (Consider the cost for ammunition to include a level of "hazard pay" for the alchemist)
Also check this out:
Heroes like Burroughs’s John Carter or Howard’s Solomon Kane carried pistols alongside their swords, and it’s hard to imagine a pirate ship without cannons blazing.... also from page 135. (The emphasis is mine)
All of this comes from Ultimate Combat though, which is a world neutral book. It is intended to be easily applicable to any player's game that has interest in the topic, so that they can integrate the rules at their respective comfort level.
However, it has nothing to do with the baseline assumption for firearms in Golarion that Paizo established years ago. Just because the RPG line introduces new rules and concepts, that does not mean that the campaign setting should be retconned to appeal to fans of said rules. That's poor world-building.
Also check this out:
Heroes like Burroughs’s John Carter or Howard’s Solomon Kane carried pistols alongside their swords, and it’s hard to imagine a pirate ship without cannons blazing.... also from page 135. (The emphasis is mine)All of this comes from Ultimate Combat though, which is a world neutral book. It is intended to be easily applicable to any player's game that has interest in the topic, so that they can integrate the rules at their respective comfort level.
However, it has nothing to do with the baseline assumption for firearms in Golarion that Paizo established years ago. Just because the RPG line introduces new rules and concepts, that does not mean that the campaign setting should be retconned to appeal to fans of said rules. That's poor world-building.
True. However, an AP focusing on the "Pirate Fantasy" subgenre, will tend to provike these kinds of disagreements.
And it is difficult to imagine a a pirate ship without cannons blazing.
as I said
Piracy is one of the worlds oldest ocupations
it is easy to imagine a pirate ship without guns a blazing.
by the way, just so yuo know the difference between a ship's guns and cannons is that the ship's guns don't have wheels or atleast thats how I can explain it.
Pirate ships all they need are balistae and a blood thirsty crew.
pirates raid coastal cities/villages and merchant vessels.
Pirates of the carribean had guns but early pirates likely just were coastal raiders and went a pillaging where t hey saw fit...
you dont need a ship with black sails that crewed by the damned and commanded by a man so evil that hell itself spit him back out. ye savvy
edit: I just realized that I hit the quote button on the wrong thread again...
Actually that is incorrect. Piracy is not one of the oldest occupations. Why?
Because Boats didn't exist. Piracy was after boats were made, before that, the act of stealing from someone was known as Banditry.
Its as easy to imagine a pirate ship without cannons as it is to imagine knights without horses (Or other mountable creatures) and platemail that don't fight dragons with swords.
Seriously, can you imagine a knight walking around with a stick in a leather bikini?
However, it has nothing to do with the baseline assumption for firearms in Golarion that Paizo established years ago. Just because the RPG line introduces new rules and concepts, that does not mean that the campaign setting should be retconned to appeal to fans of said rules. That's poor world-building.
The baseline assumption for firearms in golarion is that they are rare. Rare does not mean Non-Existant.
Since the automatic claim is that UC does not count for anything, Remember this product does mention that there are at least a few ships with firearms, one of which is the leader of the shackle pirates.
It is by far the seemingly common claim that because its rare, it shouldn't be an archetype. But then that would mean Chelix Diva's and Oenopion Researcher shouldn't exist as an archetype. Just saying.
I recently got the skulls and shackles Item deck. Several firearms in it.. several.
Is the Inner Sea Pirate PrC a replacement for the Shackles Pirate PrC or will that be updated in the upcoming Shackles setting book? I have a player for Skulls & Shackles that was going to make use of the Shackles PrC, but if the Inner Sea one is meant to replace it, then I'll let her know.
Inner sea is just something so everyone can get a little more piratey. Shackels is limited to pretty much just rogue (or a few others with the right archetypes.)
|
|
Is the Inner Sea Pirate PrC a replacement for the Shackles Pirate PrC or will that be updated in the upcoming Shackles setting book? I have a player for Skulls & Shackles that was going to make use of the Shackles PrC, but if the Inner Sea one is meant to replace it, then I'll let her know.
The Pirate PRC that appears in the Pirates of the Inner Sea is an update of the prestige class that appears in the original Campaign Guide to Pathfinder RPG. (It's not a very effective PrC, to be honest).
The best available option, imo, is the Rogue Pirate archetype in Ultimate Combat, unless you really want to dip the PrC for the extra ship speed and just take the feat for sailing near the Eye, (although the Storm Sailor pirate trick does stack with the feat). Still 4 levels in the PrC class to get both? Nah...
Seriously, can you imagine a knight walking around with a stick in a leather bikini?
[derail]Yes![/derail]
Is the Inner Sea Pirate PrC a replacement for the Shackles Pirate PrC or will that be updated in the upcoming Shackles setting book? I have a player for Skulls & Shackles that was going to make use of the Shackles PrC, but if the Inner Sea one is meant to replace it, then I'll let her know.The Pirate PRC that appears in the Pirates of the Inner Sea is an update of the prestige class that appears in the original Campaign Guide to Pathfinder RPG. (It's not a very effective PrC, to be honest).
The best available option, imo, is the Rogue Pirate archetype in Ultimate Combat, unless you really want to dip the PrC for the extra ship speed and just take the feat for sailing near the Eye, (although the Storm Sailor pirate trick does stack with the feat). Still 4 levels in the PrC class to get both? Nah...
Its not an update. They are two completely separate PrCs.
One is a PrC for a particular faction of pirates, The Shackle Pirates.
The other is more of a Generic pirate PrC. Kinda like how Red Mantis Assassin isn't an Update for Assassin.
|
|
Its not an update. They are two completely separate PrCs.One is a PrC for a particular faction of pirates, The Shackle Pirates.
The other is more of a Generic pirate PrC. Kinda like how Red Mantis Assassin isn't an Update for Assassin.
These kind of semantics are not helpful.
The Shackles Pirate PrC that was present in the original Golarion 3.5 Campaign Guide is not present in the revised version for PFRPG. It is now updated for PFRPG and presented in Pirates of the Inner Sea without a "Shackles" description in the class title.
Looking at the abilities of the original Shackles PrC and comparing them to the tricks of the new Pirate Prestige Class, it is plain and obvious that the Pirate Prestige Class is an update to the Shackles Pirate from the OGL Campaign Guide. Indeed, many of the abilities are word-for-word with the new Pirate tricks.
The reason the new Prestige Class is not called a "Shackles Pirate" is because the book is called Pirates of the Inner Sea, and not Pirates of the Shackles. That's the reason for the change in class title - and it's the only reason.
The OP posed a straight-forward question; he deserves a straight-forward answer.
I am not sure what effect it will have on the AP, but there are 4 guns, a cannon (along with a Ballista, and a catapult), and 2 ways to carry powder in the Item Cards, so maybe we will see more guns then we think.
Its not plain and obvious anymore than Vivsection alchemist being an "updated" rogue, because they both have sneak attack.
Shackles Pirate - Swamp based abilities, Ability to mentally control ship, ability to make fog crafts and the ability to stop other ships.
Inner sea pirate - A "mini" rogue, has the ability to pick up a handful of tricks, the only one of which that is word for word the same is Deep Breath. Quick appraise is similar between the two, but Shackles takes a round, Inner Sea takes a move action, or a standard to find the best item.
Storm Sailor vs Navigate Malestorm.
Both do lower the category one. After that each have different functions.
I gave a straight forward answer. Inner sea is not an updated shackles. Its a pirate PrC yes, but really that's it. It has not been updated, but instead a completely new one was created.
|
|
The Inner Sea Pirate is a new prestige class designed to replace the Shackles Pirate prestige class from the old Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting.
So it is both an "update" and a new PrC. Going forward, you won't see anyone with the Shackles Pirate PrC, but you'll most likely encounter some characters with the Inner Sea Pirate PrC.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Its as easy to imagine a pirate ship without cannons as it is to imagine knights without horses (Or other mountable creatures) and platemail that don't fight dragons with swords.
Seriously, can you imagine a knight walking around with a stick in a leather bikini?
Not true! It's much easier to imagine pirates who don't use guns!
I just have to think about this!
(At least I don't remember any gun-guns. Little crossbows and dart guns and catapults and stuff, but no pistols or cannons.)
Actually that is incorrect. Piracy is not one of the oldest occupations. Why?
Because Boats didn't exist. Piracy was after boats were made, before that, the act of stealing from someone was known as Banditry.
Its as easy to imagine a pirate ship without cannons as it is to imagine knights without horses (Or other mountable creatures) and platemail that don't fight dragons with swords.
We've had piracy for as long as we have recorded history. If that isn't "one of the oldest occupations", I'm not sure what would count. We've certainly had pirates long before the rise of the heavily armored knight.
Julius Caesar fought pirates.
For in early times the Hellenes and the barbarians of the coast and islands, as communication by sea became more common, were tempted to turn pirates, under the conduct of their most powerful men; the motives being to serve their own greed and to support the needy. They would fall upon a town unprotected by walls, and consisting of a mere collection of villages, and would plunder it; indeed, this came to be the main source of their livelihood, no disgrace being yet attached to such an achievement, but even some glory. An illustration of this is furnished by the honor with which some of the inhabitants of the continent still regard a successful marauder, and by the question we find the old poets everywhere representing the people as asking of voyagers—"Are they pirates?"—as if those who are asked the question would have no idea of disclaiming the imputation, or their interrogators of reproaching them for it.
Vikings were pirates too. They made annual raids on whatever they could.
Before them the saxons and others made raids along rivers and coasts with ships as far as they could sail. In the middle sea region piracy was there even before roman times, strongly bounded to slavery.
Vikings were pirates too. They made annual raids on whatever they could.
Before them the saxons and others made raids along rivers and coasts with ships as far as they could sail. In the middle sea region piracy was there even before roman times, strongly bounded to slavery.
And long before all of that, you had the Sea Peoples, piratical barbarian invaders who helped bring about the Mediterranean Dark Age from roughly 1200-1050 BC, a "great league of nations risen against us, Tjeker and Peleset and Denyen and Shardana..."
That said (and not intending to throw more fuel on the fire), if we got at least a little support for gunslingers eventaully I'd be happy. And with Captain Kerdak Bonefist, that pirate king who has a shipload of cannons... Maybe the Duchy of Alkenstar cut a deal with him, giving him 'superweapon' in exchange for him cutting certain ships some slack and/or selling to them at cut-rate prices?
The thing is, you have wizards, oracles, clerics, druids, sorcerers that trhow fireballs, manipulate the sea and weather, conjure krakens and do all sorts of other crazy stuff. Who needs cannons?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is, you have wizards, oracles, clerics, druids, sorcerers that trhow fireballs, manipulate the sea and weather, conjure krakens and do all sorts of other crazy stuff. Who needs cannons?
The poor fighter/rogue trying to fight the above.