heres a couple of weapons the slingbow(longbow in shape but shoots out clay bullets.)
gattling crossbow(like gattling gun but fires crossbow bolts instead,no gunpowder needed)
The pellet bow has some historical base and I use a variant in my game....but the gatling crossbow? Where's that from? I don't see how medieval technology could develop a string strong enough to withstand such rapid reloading or develop a mechanism fast enough to bring about a sufficient rate of fire.
The repeating crossbow from real history is the chu-ko-nu
Chu Ko Nu Picture and historical description
Pellet bow from my game is a shortbow variant:
Range 30', damage 1d6 with lead bullets (size M), bludgeoning damage, Martial ranged weapon, Critical x2
Pellet crossbow (harder hitting with lead pellets, 150 # draw weight), range 40', damage 1d8 with lead bullets, bludgeoning damage, simple ranged weapon, Critical x2
Stones fired from pellet bows are -2 to hit penalty due to irregular size and also do one category less damage.
I rule that atlatl's add +10' to javelin range.
I'm sure this stuff is covered in some sourcebook that I don't own....
I know that it's a fantasy game, but in my opinion, you have to draw the line somewhere. If you want to play with gatling guns and rapid fire crew served weapons, then play something other than D&D.....the D20 modern/d20 past books come to mind.
Maybe Van Helsing as well....it's a cool weapon for the movie screen. Putting it into practice for a D&D campaign would be a matter of DM taste. It's not for me.
I don't much care for gizmo type weapons - if they worked, they would've had them - even light crossbows sort of don't work for me - "real crossbows" used grinders (or some other tool) or required the user to stand on the bow and pull the string back. Which would REALLY slow the rate of fire - they also did whopping damage - as a pratical matter the damage in the game balances the quicker draw allowed by the game crossbow, but I digress.
The basic weapons (for me) are fine - in fact there are probably too many - and many are (to my taste) really cheesy even in the PHB.
That said there is room for new weapons - for example in Southeast Asia warriors mounted on elephants used long sword/polearms tailored to that style of fighting - stuff like that I see a place for.
I also see a place for more special weapons properties - but then I have submitted queries to dragon on several that were no's so I am a little biased.
I know that it's a fantasy game, but in my opinion, you have to draw the line somewhere.
Really? Why? I've always struggled with this attitude. I have to admit that Ebberon is really growing on me, and I think it owes much of its success to breaking the bonds of rather restrictive historical/Eurocentric campaigns. With elemental driven mass transit, the press, individuals who live hundreds of years, and infinite planes, it strains credulity more to assume that some mad engineer hasn't come up with, say, the repeating crossbow. Heck, I think some underpowered race would have come up with gunpowder and simple firearms a long time ago. There was once a RIDICULOUS debate going on in the offices when someone insisted that the D&D universe wouldn't have the tech necessary to create nails. How do you reign that in? You don't. Guns are loud, prone to malfunction, difficult to buy ammo for, etc. I think elves, or whoever else seems un-gunnish, would have countered things like this in warfare with simple cantrips that prematurely ignite gun powder.
I know that it's a fantasy game, but in my opinion, you have to draw the line somewhere.Really? Why? I've always struggled with this attitude. I have to admit that Ebberon is really growing on me, and I think it owes much of its success to breaking the bonds of rather restrictive historical/Eurocentric campaigns. With elemental driven mass transit, the press, individuals who live hundreds of years, and infinite planes, it strains credulity more to assume that some mad engineer hasn't come up with, say, the repeating crossbow. Heck, I think some underpowered race would have come up with gunpowder and simple firearms a long time ago. There was once a RIDICULOUS debate going on in the offices when someone insisted that the D&D universe wouldn't have the tech necessary to create nails. How do you reign that in? You don't. Guns are loud, prone to malfunction, difficult to buy ammo for, etc. I think elves, or whoever else seems un-gunnish, would have countered things like this in warfare with simple cantrips that prematurely ignite gun powder.
I've never had issue drawing the conceptual line with this, because as an SCA Middle Age reenactor who is Asian, expanding the concept of the Middle Ages beyond the Western Eurocentric view is easy...but taking D&D out of a percieved Middle Age level of technological advancement would skew the modeling of the world to the point of leaving D&D and entering the game-system realm of d20 modern or some other technologicaly advanced game syatem.
Fantasy world or not, logic and certain scientific reasoning still govern certain premises and results; if a magical, repeating crossbow were 'real' in your game world, wouldn't the person, institution or nation then embark on a world-conquering offensive with this new "weapon of mass destruction" that would tip the scales of war, wizards or not?
Can you say, "My winged warrior with an Anti-Magic field around him flies around assassinating the enemy spellcasters and leaders with his gatling crossbow and +1 bolts - just in case they have Protection from Normal Missiles."
The logical progression of the invention of such a device? Immediate world war.
Then again, such a development sounds like a great plot for an Epic Level campaign...
Another point would be that if magic can replace technological advancement (i.e. - magical repeating bow replaces firearms), you are now entering a slippery slope where the players will want to develop 'modern' arms and technology, using magic as the catch-all solution to do so; that is allowing your players to open a Pandora's Box on the DM...
Player: "What do you mean I can't research a spell that lets me accelerate this pebble at my target at 1000 feet per second? The area of effect is only a single stone of less than one pound!
DM: [/i]"Oy....."/i]
(or...)
Player: "I would like to use my Create Wondrous Item feat to construct a magical wagon that has a move base of 240' and doesn't require horses - we'll cover three times as much countryside, since we won't have to stop for rest and we'll save a bundle in feed, not to mention we'll be able to run away from anything we can't fight..."
DM: [/i]"Oy....."[/i]
IMHO, having a 'fantasy Middle-Age character' even desire to create such magical recreations of modern technological items is metagaming - and severely discouraged.
For myself...I like to keep my technology Middle-Age consistent, with magic covering the elements of fantasy.
M
I think both sides of the hill leading to the peak "most awsomest gaming experience" are pretty slippery. I grok your point. Lately, however, I've been enjoying rutting through some pretty stinky second edition stuff (ie Planescape and Spelljammer) and I have to admit, though I would have done it a lot differently, that stuff is pretty fun. Erik and I argued for a while about Spelljammer in particular. I think the idea of other planets in D&D are tres retarded. Why? With planar travel, the Far Realm, and other junk even "outside" of that, other planets seem SUPER redundant. That's the measure for me, if it's "new" let it in, but if it overlaps with something existant, we can do without. I prefer a Baron VonMunchhausen style flat earth cosmology, myself. But I digress.
Using real world metrics in Fantasy (of any kind) is a mad endeavor. We quickly discovered that when trying to design a more realistic super-hero world for Mutants and Masterminds. How many times would NY city need to be levelled before people retreated below ground, living in terror of super heroes? Ninjas, cowboys, dinosaur riders, bombs . . . s'all good. Makes the campaign world easier for the players to relate to. "You mean we can raise the dead, but we can't send a letter through a postal system?" But I guess that's a gaming style issue.
I have a bone to pick with the concept of exclusion in general.
Oh, and with simple spells like Warp Wood, seems unlikely that any single old school-ish weapon, like Mr. Gattling Crossbow, could really turn the tide in Epic warfare.
Put your trust in the halberd.
|
I think the real question in all this comes to the whole idea of a fantasy versus sci-fi and the current trend afoot to blend the two.
Now personally, I generally favor the whole 'never the twain shall meet' approach, which is why I don't like Eberron. The only exception I've ever had to that is Spelljammer, because my original gaming group had a blast playing in that setting, so I'm sentimental. But I would much rather see a setting as 'pure' magic or 'pure' high-tech.
In the end, I suppose, it all comes down to individual tastes.
Oh, and with simple spells like Warp Wood, seems unlikely that any single old school-ish weapon, like Mr. Gattling Crossbow, could really turn the tide in Epic warfare.
Actually, that would be something to really go for, in the Epic Warfare school of thought:
- Mass Warp Wood...Mass Heat Metal...
Those spells would turn the tide of a battle faster than any Fireball or Chain Lightning...for less magical expertise required than say, summoning a Tanar'ri.
*shudders*
M
~~ Lately, however, I've been enjoying rutting through some pretty stinky second edition stuff (ie Planescape and Spelljammer) and I have to admit, though I would have done it a lot differently, that stuff is pretty fun. Erik and I argued for a while about Spelljammer in particular. I think the idea of other planets in D&D are tres retarded. Why? With planar travel, the Far Realm, and other junk even "outside" of that, other planets seem SUPER redundant. That's the measure for me, if it's "new" let it in, but if it overlaps with something existant, we can do without. I prefer a Baron VonMunchhausen style flat earth cosmology, myself. But I digress.
I'm OK with inclusion of planetary travel a la Spelljammer - magic is providing a plot vehicle for the game world, not giving characters an inherent advantage over the rest of the world. The application of magic vs. technology is the key and is the DMs call to curtail.
Using real world metrics in Fantasy (of any kind) is a mad endeavor. ~~ sic ~~ Makes the campaign world easier for the players to relate to. "You mean we can raise the dead, but we can't send a letter through a postal system?" But I guess that's a gaming style issue.
That's where you have to draw the line of Middle Ages vs. Modern Ages conveniences...
In theory, a character party could become rich and empower the masses to rise up against the Nobility by starting a "Pony Express" to educate the people and spread knowledge and news hundreds of times faster than before, essentially speeding up the advancement of civilization by introducing modern concepts - even those that don't apply magic (hello, printing press?)... But, regardless of the player's motives, be it profit, victory in the adventure or what - all of it is metagaming, since they are applying player knowledge that their characters wouldn't be privy to...
*says the role-playing purist*
M
I've never had issue drawing the conceptual line with this, because as an SCA Middle Age reenactor who is Asian, expanding the concept of the Middle Ages beyond the Western Eurocentric view is easy...
*WARNING - slight thread-jacking ahead*
Unless you happen to be the Board of Directors, who wants to exclude all non-Western persona representation. Maybe someone needs to explain it to them that people actually traveled during the Middle Ages, and golly gee whillikers, met people who weren't European! Darn that history!Grr!
*End thread-jacking*
Back to the point of the thread, I think some low-level spells could be applied to a battlefield with great prejudice, like the aforementioned warp wood and heat metal. Just imagine what combust would do to gunpowder. A nifty little spell called control weather to call a rainstorm would wet the gunpowder, making it fairly useless, not to mention soaking any wood-based weaponry. (For a siege tower, it actually might be advantageous. A siege tower with a semi-permanent rainstorm over it, hmmm....) A ballistae that fires bolts that have tanglefoot goo in the arrow-head, or release globes of darkness upon impact, or transmute rock to mud. :-D
I think with enough creativity, any potential technological wonder can be countered with a magical or non-magical solution. History has shown this over and over and over again (the non-magical solutions, anyway).
That's where you have to draw the line of Middle Ages vs. Modern Ages conveniences...
In theory, a character party could become rich and empower the masses to rise up against the Nobility by starting a "Pony Express" to educate the people and spread knowledge and news hundreds of times faster than before, essentially speeding up the advancement of civilization by introducing modern concepts - even those that don't apply magic (hello, printing press?)... But, regardless of the player's motives, be it profit, victory in the adventure or what - all of it is metagaming, since they are applying player knowledge that their characters wouldn't be privy to...
*says the role-playing purist*
M
I have to disagree, Marc.
While I'm a fan of reminding players that their characters are not 20-something modern humanists with a solid background in modern science, I don't subscribe to the thought that a fantasy-based world has to limit itself to a medieval mindset.
This isn't a Dark Ages game after all, and each race can (and should) have different mindsets regarding civil rights, technology and availability. Would it be metagaming to pursue in peasant's rights in 600 AD? History is rife with rebellions or uprisings dedicated to improving a group's position; it's this constant striving that has resulted in the modern sensibility.
Ultimately, though, it depends on the game setting itself. Eberron (whether you like it or not) states that it views the magic-vs-technology/convenience-vs-realism argument one way; Forgotten Realms does it entirely differently. One of the things I love about D&D is that it can change radically between campaign settings, and that's why I would love to play in an Eberron game.
Which is sexier: Spanish pirates with cannons, pistols, and cutlasses, or Goblin pirates with ballista, fireballs, and +3 short swords?
I don't think that having a difference of opinion on this makes one more or less of a roleplaying purist - a historical purist, perhaps, but that has nothing to do with the roleplaying itself...
*WARNING - slight thread-jacking ahead*
Unless you happen to be the Board of Directors, who wants to exclude all non-Western persona representation. Maybe someone needs to explain it to them that people actually traveled during the Middle Ages, and golly gee whillikers, met people who weren't European! Darn that history!Grr!
*End thread-jacking*
Wait... you mean that it's not just Celts and Vikings and Frenchmen and Burgundians and Italians? That Russians were influnced by Asiatic traditions? Fie, fie upon you! :)
it's not just Celts and Vikings and Frenchmen and Burgundians and Italians?
I quite highly recommend Strange Creations: Aberrant Ideas of Human Origins from Ancient Astronauts to Aquatic Apes by Donna Kossy. There we also learn of the Reptoid, Dinoid and Pre-Cetacean (furry were-dolphins) influence on Europe.
Amusingly, we do seem to have gone off topic, but the current line of discussion is interesting enough.
I sometimes like to consider how the current world would have turned out if magic and monsters had been introduced, and then apply those kind of effects to D&D. The repeating crossbow technology might have been designed out of necessity due to humans having to fight against ogres and wizards. It might have been transported there from the world's equivalent of Asia by a wizard or dragon who teleported. It might have been invented by a mind flayer or inspired by the clockwork of Mechanus.
OK. Back on point.
I like what highly unstable sticks of dynamite could do for a campaign. You'd have to be crazy to carry it, but oh the hilarity of Kobolds blowing themselves up.
What I meant by that you have to draw the line somewhere is that if you allow every technological concept into your D&D game, you're not really playing D&D any more. If you're into a freewheeling d20 campaign where anything goes, then by all means bring on the gatling gun crossbows...I'm sure it would be fun to play in--it's just not for me.
you're not really playing D&D any more.
What? Sez who? The game is Dungeons and Dragons, not Sir Plague Victim Muddyboot's Fuedal Historic War Sim. Have you seen Spelljammer, Ravenloft, Planescape or Ebberon? Again, pretty much any technology could be EASILY reproduced through magic, alchemy or technology. In fact, a certain affinity for technology is the only cool thing gnomes have going for them, IMO. Tech is merely a plot contrivance. Where do you draw the line? No gunpowder, no nails, no women's suffrage? One of the most beloved 1st Ed modules, Barrier Peaks, had the players explore a wrecked spaceship.
It's the duty of the DM to season the stew, and find a balance that keeps his players entertained. If dude wants to be an engineer ninja cowboy, let him. If it freaks out the general campaign worlds population, well, the peasants are likely to kill him anyway. as teh DM, you are teh invisible hand that moves the game. Tech varies wildly from setting to setting. If every building in a city is lit by magic, wow does that make magic a lot more mundane. Just make them gaslights, and it will be OK. Just a lot less "twee". And its still, 100%, unadulterated D&D. All that requires are some dungeons someplace, and some dragons. What's influenced the more modern D&D settings, I reckon, are videogame RPGs like Final Fantasy. Can't blame the industry for trying to evolve and stay competitive. In market shares, games like that CRUSH old school D&D. Feh! I won't sit back and let someone label me a D20 Modern enthusiast.
|
Don't worry F2K, I got your back! I also dislike the "teching up" of D&D. That is the main reason why I will never support anything Ebberron, including D&D Online. I don't like someone bastardizing something I love and trying to force-feed the end result to me while telling me how good it is and how it keeps up with modern marketing strategies. I dislike anime' in general so I do not play any of the Final Fantasy games on principal also. I live in North America, not Japan. I like gritty, gothic dungeons and travel by horseback, not intelligent robot characters and train travel. So people might like it but some people don't. I don't. There are already games out there that cover that Genre.
as always IMO
FH
I can see technologies like cannons, basic guns and so forth being developed in a mediaeval world, and it might be interesting to have them pitched against wizards and ogres. It only fits in well if you either don't mind ignoring realism for the sake of fun, or if gun technology isn't widespread for some good reason (the creation process is a closely guarded secret, gunpowder is hard to make, it's too expensive to be cost-effective for most armies, it's unreliable, etc). Widespread, reliable guns would replace the crossbow, which would obsolete heavy armour, and I think that's not a direction all fantasy players want to go in.
In fact, a certain affinity for technology is the only cool thing gnomes have going for them, IMO.
Well, that and about a dozen of them can fit in your pocket without an encumbrance penalty. :)
Tech is merely a plot contrivance. Where do you draw the line? No gunpowder, no nails, no women's suffrage? ... It's the duty of the DM to season the stew, and find a balance that keeps his players entertained.
I'd have to agree with Kyle on that point.
While a steampunkish game like Iron Kingdoms doesn't appeal to me personally, I know that it is gaining in popularity with some younger players. For the most part, it's D&D in another wrapping; another interpretation worth exploring.
(Personally, I'd rather port D&D characters into a modern-ish setting, because I like the simplicity of working with character templates, rather than the more generic options that the d20 Modern builds offer.)
My tastes run more towards an old style Swords and Sorcercy feel, ala Iron Heroes, where magic is sinister and champions go on quests and win the day with the strength of their arms.
But objectively, that interpretation of D&D is no more valid, or should I say just as valid, as the fantastic magical world of Forgotten Realms or even the fantasy noir of Eberron.
I think what's really being debated, however, is the issue of continuity. We all hate it when a favorite character leaves/dies in an episodic TV show ... and some of us are hesitant to introduce high-tech/magic into a game that's already established as a certain setting.
I'd say, allow the new tool if it makes sense to the DM's sensibilities of the world. At the same time, while a PC should be entitled to new toys every once in a while, they have to respect the setting as well.
I've had players attempt to hijack a game in that fashion. (Perhaps that's a bit strong a term, but in effect that's what happens). Again, if the PC wanted to play a particular brand of D&D, with whatever toys that seting allows, that's the game they should find/create. But if you are already in a game, respect the setting the DM is trying to create.
To be fair, we should start a thread on the general D&D board re:Tech levels in D&D.
to Fake Healer: I don't think anyone is forcing anything on you. Baseline D&D readily supports a gritty low fantasy. And it's not about "anime-ing it up". D&D rightfully adapts with the times, and the tastes of varied fantasy enthusiasts. Back in the 1970s, the most dominant influence on the game was high fantasy, ie LoTR and others. But I've heard even Gygax's core crew had someone who refused to play anything but a gunslinger. There are a lot more awesome ideas in the market these days.
You may be interested to know that D&D has had a MAJOR influence on asian animation. Record of Lodoss war is a total homage to the game. It's pretty silly to dismiss an entire 50 yo genre. There's a lot going on in anime these days that you are remiss as a D&D fan not to check out. Sure, IMO Ranma One-and-a-half is about the worst thing ever, but to lump that in with, say, Samurai Champloo or Full Metal Alchemist is ill-informed. You're really missing out.
In fact, a certain affinity for technology is the only cool thing gnomes have going for them, IMO.
IMO the whole tinkerer want to be tech thing is what makes gnomes pathetic. As small people that rely on illusion there is more than enough to build good campaigns off of.
Fantasy tech - is fine for (as other have said) anime - but I think it screws up D&D. I think keeping to a medieval/dark ages theme - gives more than enough room for anybody with half an imagination to create ENDLESS scenarios, magic, planes, other races, elemental beings, dragons, lost civilizations, undead - you don't need to add a lot of ill conceived crap to make that work. Adding junk clutters the game without making itbetter, and creates confusion as to the context.
If some people want to thats their perogative of course but for me such addiions get in the way from what is appealing about the game.
D&D led me to learn more about history, folklore, even religion - I like the game I play to have a connection to those things - I like to learn when I game. I like games inspired by legends and mythology, sometimes I even learn something - steampunk, cyberpunk, space opera, are all cool in their own context - and I am sure that there will be a literary genius that comes along and creates a world that successfully blends science, magic, culture, religion, and tension between races - but it hasn't happened yet.
As for those that want no limits - to use an analogy, kites rely just as much on the string that restrains them as the wind to fly, without the string the kite crashes.
A little rambling - maybe I should of posted this on the rant page.
For a really interesting look at technology being introduced into a D&D type world, check out Joel Rosenberg's "Guardians of the Flame" series. The first book in the series is "The Sleeping Dragon." Book one sees the very beginnings of tech (mostly gunpowder) being introduced. As the series progresses along, more and more (low) tech gets added, such as a telegraph system.
Overall, I highly recommend these books. they're very entertaining.
Hmm gatling crossbow...
Repeating Crossbow
But with magic anything is possible. I'd settle for a +5 Arbalest, the bigger is better strategy.
If you want something slightly diffrent a melee could have a sword in the weapon hand and a parrying dagger in his off-hand.
Medieval Weapon list
Italian shield so unusual yet so cool
Just a thought, since armor improvements neccesitate weapon improvements it might not be unusual for your D&D world to have weapons to nullify even the most impressive defences (much like the halberd against armored calvalry in the medieval ages).
I can see technologies like cannons, basic guns and so forth being developed in a mediaeval world, and it might be interesting to have them pitched against wizards and ogres...
DM: Roll a D20 for Reflex Save
Musketeer Player:(rolls) 17DM: The Great Bombard blows a 20 foot hole through the parapet beside you.
Musketeer: (shakes nervously)
The DMG already supports gunpowder weapons. There is nothing wrong with those types of weapons in D&D. Hell, in FR I play a cleric of Gond, the god of invention. I developed a pistol that uses six barrels(have to cock every time as a old revolver), but nothing special about it. This makes me no better than an archer with a longbow, because he has both better range and damage, and besides it takes a full round action to load each and every barrell.
If you want real world refrence, when gunpowder was developed in China, before the Europeans knew what soap was, they added gunpowder weapons to staff weapons. The same kind of inovations developed in Europe in later centuries. My point being, gunpowder has existed since BEFORE the Dark Ages. There is nothing wrong with a little tech creeping into D&D. But, having said that, I still hate Eberron and stuff like steam engines and stuff. That to me is a bit to much.
to add to this post, i have seen alot of possable changes that would happen if a dm would let a chain-crossbow, or a gattling gun, but are we really going far out of the game. Yes gun powerpower is almost a battle of gods, and it would change alot, but when you think of it, you would just change what you wear , heavy steel armor would suck agest gun power, but them bullet armor is just refabricated cloth/silk, so stop bullet, but still bulky and mr axe or mr sword would still cut thought it good, and you can add blistic plates, but then it is like wearing a big pan on a sling.
So one thing changes, but things stay the same. I have read alot on Ebberon, and yes magic is around, and it seems to just be as in use in the magic rich citys like Sharn, as say Waterdeep in FR. Flying ships are know as well in the southen end of FR, and north they have gunpowder, but nether have taken over the known world, and even fewer from the city of towers have taken the great magic past many of the great cities.
So who is wrong, a pc wants to make a crossbow-gattling gun, well what would he beable to do shoot 5 or 10 bolts a around, unload a 100, that is alot of weight, and he will not be spending alot of money on anything but ammo and repairs. Ok then they make it magic.. ok well magic is never free, so they have 200 magic bolts a day, as fast as they want to shoot... any smart vilain will be loading up on ani-magic and lots of bolt fodder.
I have yet to see a pc come up with an idea that can't have 100 bad things following them. So i think, well if you can figure it out, and explain why you want it, and even spend a good amount of time on it, why not. In a D&D it should not only be about killing the dragon, why not put him to work, or useing some new gear on him, might work, might piss it off, might kill of pc.
Just for the hardcore D&D player who say the rule book is what the rule book says, no excepations, to the first player that wants to play a good goblin, or a semi-evil drow. It is not like they might not be real. Or make a crossbow that shoots moldy cheece.. let them, it might be fun.
If there is a demand for gatling crossbows, I'd like to see them in an optional supplement, not the core rules. I'm already sick of spiked chains; I find them silly and over-useful.
|
If there is a demand for gatling crossbows, I'd like to see them in an optional supplement, not the core rules. I'm already sick of spiked chains; I find them silly and over-useful.
I suspect that a gatling crossbow would be more feasible, mechanically, than an effective spiked chain...
The Romans had some sort of 'gatling ballista' that involved a bunch of tubes lined up and placed on a swivel mount. Each tube had a javelin or spear shoved into it, and a large board was bent backwards by a couple of men behind it and released to smack into the butt ends of all of the spears simultaneously, launching them all forward in a volley. That sounds like an awesome pre-cannon pirates of Freeport sort of weapon for ship combat.
Hmm gatling crossbow...
Repeating Crossbow
But with magic anything is possible. I'd settle for a +5 Arbalest, the bigger is better strategy.
I followed your link and read up. I discovered this:
The Chinese repeating crossbow (Chinese: 諸葛弩; pinyin: Zhūgě nǔ; Wade-Giles: Chu-ke nu; literally "Zhuge crossbow"; sometimes masturbated as Chu-ko-nu) is a device with an extremely simple design.
Someone tell me there is a meaning of the bold word I am not aware of. BTW, the numbers are the Chinese characters, which won't display on Paizo's boards.
|
|
The Romans had some sort of 'gatling ballista' that involved a bunch of tubes lined up and placed on a swivel mount. Each tube had a javelin or spear shoved into it, and a large board was bent backwards by a couple of men behind it and released to smack into the butt ends of all of the spears simultaneously, launching them all forward in a volley. That sounds like an awesome pre-cannon pirates of Freeport sort of weapon for ship combat.
Not at all what I was thinking of, but still neat, from Wikipedia;
The Polybolos.
According to some sources, the Roman military, at one time in its history, also fielded 'repeating' ballistae, also known as a polybolos. Reconstruction and trials of such a weapon carried out in a BBC documentary 'What the Romans Did For Us' showed that they "were able to shoot eleven bolts a minute, which is almost four times the rate at which an ordinary ballista can be operated".[9] However, this has not yet been found archaeologically. They operate using a cam to pull the mensa (the place where the projectile travels on) backwards and the string along with it. At the rearmost position, the string is unlocked and propels the projectile forwards. The mensa is then pushed forward and pushes a bolt out of the magazine above it, and latches on to the string, all done with the rotating cam. The cycle then repeats.
I dunno, it seems a lot of self-proclaimed "historical purists" aren't giving our predecessors enough credit.
A mail system? The ancient Persians came up with that. Most major civilizations that followed had one too.
Archimedes of Syracuse (287 BC – c. 212 BC) created a screw system for efficiently pumping water (a similar mechanism is common in moving grain today) and a freaking heat-ray.
Hero of Alexandria created vending machines (for dispensing holy water), remote-opening doors (you burned a sacrifice and the fire heated steam below the temple and opened the doors via pipes and pulleys), a programmable robot-cart, a fire extinguisher, and yes, Virginia - a steampunk rocket engine - in 1st century AD.
The Romans had indoor plumbing, central heating, and built aqueducts that still deliver water to this day.
The medieval populace would have been familiar with machinery - waterwheels, grain mills, etc.
The printing press was around in ancient China.
Gunpowder, as has been discussed, was also around for a really long time, but it didn't supplant swords, bows, and metal armor overnight. You'll notice soldiers still had swords long into the age of gunpowder (Napoleonic wars), and even conquistadors wore breastplates. Early firearms were dangerous (to the user), unreliable (even a bit of water would ruin your powder), loud (give away your position in ways bows wouldn't), inaccurate (especially before the invention of rifled barrels), took a long time to reload, required massed infantry formations (you literally had to throw a wall of fire at your enemy to hit anything outside of point-blank range). The big advantage they had over bows is that they didn't take a lifetime of training to master.
People back in the olden days weren't idiots - they just had to have a different set of skills to survive in their world.
Oh yeah, one more thing I forgot to mention: nobody ever seems to have a problem with the proliferation of Alchemist's Fire in the D&D/PF world (regardless of the setting). Any ol' schmoe with a half-decent Craft (Alchemy) skill can cook some up (or buy a few flasks) and toss it around like it ain't no thang.
In real life, Greek Fire was such a fiercely-guarded military secret by the states that possessed it, that we still don't know the exact chemical composition to this day - it has been lost to history.
Here are my quick-n-dirty stats for the Polybolos, [stat-wise] the bastard child of the light ballista and the repeating crossbow:
Polybolos: as light ballista, except:
- Cost: 3750gp, can fire every round, 20-bolt hopper, refillable
On the subject of repeating crossbows, those should have 30' - 40' range increments [a maximum range of 120 meters, with an effective range of 80 metres (260 ft) - from Wikipedia and other sources]. They were less powerful than regular crossbows because of the added strain on the mechanism. That's still plenty generous for the range most combats take place at - it's just not an effective sniping weapon.
It does bug me when game designers pull a real-life weapon's range (or weight) out of their rear - c'mon guys, damage dice might be debatable and arbitrary, but range is not. Take the max effective range, divide by 10, [b]BOOM![b/] there's your range increment.
And on a slightly pedantic note, I was slightly disappointed to see that PF never fixed D&D's "falchion" (read: "great scimitar").