|
I vote yes for Guns. Keep them a rare exotic weapon. If you don't wanna use them you don't have to etc. etc. etc.
I wanted to introduce them in the STAP I'm running. I had my PC's find a very ornate MC flintlock in Lavinia's father's posessions on board the Nixie. The PC's were intrigued. Non more than the halfling rogue. She was the only one that showed interest in trying to learn to use it. When she had downtime she sought out someone who might know something about this exotic new item. Found out what it did. Spent time training with it, mostly on her own time. I decided as a GM that she could take the firearms feet from D20 Past, when she earned enough levels to pick a new feat. Only problem is that she is unable to craft any new bullets and it is currently unusable due to a misfire. She's at sea on her way to the Island where she is hoping there will be someone to fix it. I havn't yet decided to set that up. ALthough since I set the intro of the gun up as it belonged to her father I imagine that some old associate of his could be on the island that would know something about it. SO she may get to get it fixed. OH and to date she's only hit I think 2 enemies with it. May seem useless but she has had a ton of fun playin around with it.
Like I said...as long as they remain an option that the GM can use or not use then that's great. I"m excited and pleased that you plan to include them.
Yes for guns.
I think that firearms in some sort of fashion are becoming a common theme in fantasy gaming of late. Ptlous has em, Iron Kingdoms has em in spades, Greyhawk, FR, even Eberron has mages wielding a belt full of wands the way a pistoller would wield his firearms. Actually, in Eberron wand mages are more akin to field artillery then pistols.
|
He he! N'Ra is my diety of steam and smoke. He holds the secret of blackpowder and his followers believe everyone should have the right to bear arms.They also drive carriages with flat beds in the rear with runes on the back that state things like "I'll give up my thunderstick when they pry it from my cold dead fingers" and "If thundersticks are outlawed, only outlaws and goblins will have thundersticks". Another favorite is "Thundersticks don't kill people, dragons do." Their clerics tend to wear a lot of flannel or camouflage during inappropriate social occasions and refer to their followers as "sportsmen" even though most have not seen a jogging track...well....ever! They prefer to drink their ale in strange half dozen mini-casks assemblages manufactured by fine gnomish metalsmiths.
F2K (a real world NRA member)
From one Texan to another: Amen!
Yes for guns.
I think that firearms in some sort of fashion are becoming a common theme in fantasy gaming of late. Ptlous has em, Iron Kingdoms has em in spades, Greyhawk, FR, even Eberron has mages wielding a belt full of wands the way a pistoller would wield his firearms. Actually, in Eberron wand mages are more akin to field artillery then pistols.
I agree with your observation about the frequency of firearms in setting. Although some have argued that their inclusion in the Pathfinder world makes it distinctive, your observation effectively shoots that theory in the head (pun intended). While Paizo may do something distinctive with them (as they did with goblins), their inclusion by itself doesn't do so.
BPorter
Also, while I can appreciate that this is the Internet and all, there seems to be an awful lot of discussion about how guns don't impact games from a mechanics standpoint. True enough, but it dodges my original objection.
From a game mechanics standpoint, I agree, a gun may not be much better than a crossbow or longbow. It's certainly inferior to Fireball or other magic. However, wielding magic of that magnitude is supposed to be done by people that are exceptional, have had years to develop their ability, or both. It doesn't take that long to train someone to use a boomstick - which is one of the reasons firearms changed warfare when there were more reliable weapons available.
My argument is against the change in style and tone that firearms brings to the table if an established tech baseline isn't set and adhered to. Based on the feedback we've gotten from the Paizo folks I am less concerned that this will occur, but I can point to Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, and Scarred Lands as three examples of how settings were changed/modified to the setting's detriment. Whether these changes for the worse occurred because the original devlopers moved on, a good idea had poor execution, or the desire to sell more books overrode their critical analysis, I can't say. Because "primitive" firearms cover such a large period of time in our own history, you can have a jarring impact on a setting if a writer/developer decides to take the setting in a radically different direction. It is my opinion that firearms are one of the larger "Pandora's Boxes" that can negatively impact a setting in such a way if not handled properly.
And apparently, I'm not alone in recognizing this can happen. The Paizo folks have also stated that the setting will be Middle-magic. Not over-the-top High-magic . They've stated that face-to-face interactions with deities won't occur (so conceivably the gods won't just by high-CR opponents). You won't see magic shops on every street corner, etc. They've chosen those stances for a reason folks.
Now as I said, I trust the Paizo team to develop the Pathfinder world into something exceptional. Based on their input, I feel much better after hearing that firearms will be relegated to the rare or exotic. But don't dismiss the thematic issues they can introduce just because the game mechanics aren't significant.
Another example: Vikings. Longships against ships of the line = slaughter for the Vikings. Paizo said to expect Vikings. Hopefully they won't have to fight pirates in 17th century ships with cannon.
BPorter
I'll start by saying, yes, of course I can just delete them from an adventure if I so choose. The substitutions won't be hard unless the guns are hardwired into the narrative.
My personal preference is to never use guns, and these are my thoughts on the matter. My name is Earl.
For all the allegedly cool cinematic cliches that can pilfered for a rousing adventure if one allows the inclusion of primitive guns, I think they limit a story's bang. To me they scream, "Sure I'm weaker than a fireball... but technology ain't just for gnomes, baby. The nuclear juggernaut is coming and your fantasy world isn't long for this world."
I don't mind playing through an eschatological setting from time to time. But I don't want the end of the world to mean the end of fantasy in the world. Then I'm just left with the mundane crap I see when I look left and right. "Hey guys, come over to my house and we'll roll dice on this new game I got called B&B, Bills and Ball Juggling."
Pathfinder will establish its own tone, and use any template Paizo desires. Done deal. I'll absolutely pick up a subscription. However, if I wanted guns I'd play a different game. I've never liked the fusion, and though I understand many people want to be able to roleplay all there is to roleplay through the D&D game, it is D&D, not Gamma World despite those paltry conversion notes in the 1st edition DMG. I begrudge no ones attempt to expand its borders, I just know what I can use. It seems like the Warhammering of D&D all over again. "Hey, they've got something we don't have. Let's borg with them and turn it into a strategic minis game! That'll start a fire!"
I have never had use for guns in a fantasy game--though the ending of Wizards by R. Bakshi rocked. I think they're a fantasy world buzzkill.
As you loiter about King Sarr's Close a deep rumbling shakes the streets from below... up from the underground tunnel roars Mordenkainen on his Suzuki Ninja. He hurtles towards you like a report of lightning then screeches to a halt before your feet. He removes a rather odd looking helmet, saying only, "Time travel and one world over, yo. Check dat. Knoooooooow dat."
|
Repeating crossbows in China in 250 BC? I'm not quite sure if you are saying this, if you are, they didn't have them contrary to their inclusion in recent famous Chinese "Hero" movies, or so I am told by a Chinese history buff... here in China.
Huh... I've got a link here, but I'm trying to track down a better source.
I've read that the repeating crossbow (zhuge-nu) is traditionally attributed to Zhuge Liang (181-234 AD), but examples have been found in a Chu tomb, predating Mr. Zhuge by a few centuries.
... imagine if Aragorn used a gun instead of a sword. It kind of ruins the romance...
I skipped about the last 25% of this discussion, but I'd just like to point out that Aragorn didn't use a gun, and adding guns to Pathfinder will not somehow change LotR. I realize that's not what you were saying, but it just seemed such an odd comment I couldn't help but reply.
You want to keep a very LotR setting? Fine, do that, we've already heard that guns are going to be so minimal that you can drop them without batting an eye.
Additionally, thanks to all those who pointed out that FR and other settings already have guns, and they are far, far from dominating.
And, as others have said, guns are no more obtrusive to D&D than psionics (*spits*) or Asian elements.
I know some will gnash their teeth at this, but there are guns in WoW. As a matter of fact, there are freaking tanks and aircraft (steam tanks and gyrocopters); believe it or not, the setting remains a very high fantasy feeling, and all it does is add some nice background flavor to the world.
Personally, I love the idea of dwarves and gnomes with guns. It just fits. Also, I like the thought of a character opening a combat with a shot from his matchlock or flintlock, and dropping it to join the fray with spells or swords or whatever. And that's about the level of involvement I see them being, too.
I say make guns a simple weapon, with good damage, a x3 critical, but a horrendous reload time and terrible range increments. Then, make a couple of feats that can be taken to remedy this for someone who really wants to play a rifleman. Thus, you still get the historical nature of guns being inferior (in their early days, as will be in Pathfinder) to a bow, but heroes wishing to be heroic with them can. However, by and large, bows will remain far more prevalent because of the ease of their use for adventurers.
I'm for primitive guns in Pathfinder, as I think it further adds to the setting's identity (note that I despise d20 Modern, Future, etc., so this comment surprises even me, really).
I think it's all a matter of personal preference. You can't be wrong or right in these matters.
I think it's all a matter of personal preference. You can't be wrong or right in these matters.
Leave it to our resident master wordsmith to sum up this entire discussion/thread in two sentences.
|
|
And I prefer.....
Ogre mages with blunderbusses, werewoofs with Colt 45's,
Kobolds with double barreled shotguns, this fire range is live.
Beholders with m60's, holding the ammo belt in their teeth
Sharks with lasers on their freakin heads, swimming underneath,
Ooooooh....grugaches with bandoliers fully loaded with grenades,
hobgoblins with AK-47's and banana clips tied to their haids
just a little something I'm working on....
I like goblins running at you awkwardly with oversized tactical nukes strapped to their foreheads.
"Yiiiii-AAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!"
This particular squadron calls themselves the Gobbooms.
All I want is some sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads...
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
Since I think this is my chat comment that touched off this debate, let me chime in. I think we are going to be walking a very, very fine line when it comes to guns. Just as I don't want magic to be a "mundane" part of our setting, I do not want guns to become commonplace. I think that should you ever see one in an adventure (and that has not come up yet at all, and we are already planning out modules for next year), it will certainly not be an ordinary occurance. You will not see a line of bugbears with rifles (although that image does intrigue me to some extent), but instead one lone inventor who has cracked the secret and needed magic to do it. There might be one or two places where they are slightly more common.. but I want to be clear, they are not going to be an everyday occurance.
I would actually think that writing them out would be as easy as it would for a Greyhawk campaign.
Just some thoughts...
Jason Bulmahn
GameMastery Brand Manager
So...you're saying no lasers either?
I recently tried putting guns in one of my regular games for the first time and for someone who'd previously been a no-gun DM with no-gun players, we all really enjoyed the game.
Drat, now I'm the Charlton Heston of D&D.
I'll call you bright eyes.
So...you're saying no lasers either?
Only on sharks.
And only on their freakin' heads.
Yeah. No shark ass-lasers. It's undignified and they usually miss.
And sharks shouldn't have ipods either.
Great. There's another idea for my d20 Modern game blown out of the water...
|
Director of Narrative
|
And only on their freakin' heads.
Ya know, we've gotten kinda head-heavy on the armaments. It all starts with laser-headed monkeys, with the now inevitable urge to propagate this laser technology onto the aquatic hunters, more specifically sharks. Then we end up with goblins sportin' nukes. What was so wrong with a gaze attack? You had me at....
Hey there all,
Since I think this is my chat comment that touched off this debate, let me chime in. I think we are going to be walking a very, very fine line when it comes to guns. Just as I don't want magic to be a "mundane" part of our setting, I do not want guns to become commonplace. I think that should you ever see one in an adventure (and that has not come up yet at all, and we are already planning out modules for next year), it will certainly not be an ordinary occurance. You will not see a line of bugbears with rifles (although that image does intrigue me to some extent), but instead one lone inventor who has cracked the secret and needed magic to do it. There might be one or two places where they are slightly more common.. but I want to be clear, they are not going to be an everyday occurance.
I would actually think that writing them out would be as easy as it would for a Greyhawk campaign.
Just some thoughts...
Jason Bulmahn
GameMastery Brand Manager
Great to hear and thanks for the clarification!
BPorter
I vote for guns. Whether you like it or not the tone of generic fantasy has changed since the 1970s and 80s and many people can easily comprehend primitive firearms and magic beside each other, and like it. The feel now has been influenced by new original fantasy like the Final Fantasy games and Iron Kingdoms. Even Eberron has significant steampunk elements. Face it, the days of Elminster are over.
I always use guns, and they have never overshadowed anything else in the game, ever. I just don't understand what people's problem is...
I just don't understand what people's problem is...
That's probably its own post, chief.
I remember when I was just getting into warhammer back in well gosh late 80's ealry 90's(4th-5th grade) I was really struck by an Issue of white dwarft and it is the issue that really sucked me in. I remember cause it was a Bday present with a bunch of orc minis. Anyways in it was a warhammer battle report between orcs and dwarves. The Dwarves had a huge number of rifle men and a cannon. That image of Dwarves has always stuck in my head. Other armies even have steam tanks and reapeting hand guns. It was nice color to the game world. Gun powder weapons never really over powered any army and gave it some nice flair. Of course I was also raised on the FF games too, so yeah I am all kinds of messed up in regards to gun. The most I ever used them was in a victorian ravenloft london thing with Ad&D.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
It's like setting the level of magic in a campaign, which Paizo is saying will be "mid-magic". It's easier to add elements in than it is to pull them out. If firearms aren't going to be a significant or obtrusive part of the setting, why include them? Individual DMs can add them in as they see fit. Trying to strip them out could be a much larger undertaking for a DM, especially if Pathfinder morphs from a medieval setting to an Age-of-Sail kind of setting.
BPorter
Personally I don't see a problem with guns as part of the setting. Eberron has Cyborgs and trains for frick's sake. It's not like they are that technologically advanced or anything. Most people don't even realize that firearms are a part of the Forgotten Realms also, but that doesn't stop people from buting FR products.
I also don't understand how it is that difficult to "strip" them out of the Campaign Setting. If you don't want to use them there is a simple answer to your problem... don't use them! If an adventure says that someone has a pistol, replace it with a hand/light crossbow or a shortbow. If they have a rifle, replace it with a heavy/repeating crossbow or a longbow. It's really not that difficult.
It also comes down to the availability of guns in the world. If they are expensive/rare, then players may not be able to afford/find them. Also, think about this: A gun takes along time to reload in most D&D rulesets. Any kind of multi-attacks are therfore useless, so you might hit for 1d10 every 2 rounds with your rifle. Mr. Elf over here with his Rapid shooting Longbow has a plethora of 1d8 attacks available to him in that same time frame... who is the more efficient ranged fighter?
Honestly I feel that they are more included for flavour than anything else and I think it's fine. If my players want to use guns then they can use guns... if they don't then they won't. Simple.
flash_cxxi
Face it, the days of Elminster are over.
Kill the defiler!
No for guns, btw.
daedel, el azote.
Just keep the guns, there's plenty of examples where guns and fantasy mix perfectly, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and World of Warcraft for starters.
I would very much like the guns getting D&D-treatment, magical muskets, magical, silver and cold iron shots for those who hunt fiends, undead and werebeasts etc.
Also angry old prospector dwarves that fire rocksalt at tresspassers.
This is small potatoes and I understand that Pathfinder isn't going to offer an adventure called "Mony Tontana... Say Hello To My Li'l Gnome!"
But I'm still not into it and there's no persuasive argument that makes something that's big yawn to me suddenly become tantalizing. You're all going to have to find a constructive way to deal with your shocked indignation and frustration. Maybe take up gardening. Read a good book. Try a new hair-du. Or maybe... be a big brother to a child in need. You'll be glad ya did.
Big Slow Open-Mouthed Wink for effect! ;)
Kahoolin raises some good points about precedents for the fusion, but the fact that the Final Fantasy line began to include guns is actually why I, a FF fan, stopped playing the FF line. It wasn't a political anti-gun statement and I didn't scream gun related death statistics at the screen and tear my shirt down the middle in mourning of a dying traditional--I just lost any and all interest and moved on to straight epic fantasy offerings. For me, playing with guns is like playing with spreadsheets. Whee.
Funny thing, growing up I was a crack shot. Even funnier, my bow and arrow skills leave much to be desired. You'd think I'd want to go gunboat on mine enemies and tell the elves and their twangy one-note guitar weapons to fo FLICK themselves.
The Steampunk setting is fine and dandy. It's a setting. A choice. One I don't prefer or spend money on. I spend money on regular old epic fantasy. That's not to say that Call of Cthulu won't entice me... but I can't see myself dropping the super wad on it come treat-myself time. Eh, never say never. The Elder Gods have a way of corrupting a man's mind. Moving on.
I'm guessing that game writers, and players, became bored by the same ol' same ol' and wanted for that next boost o' fun. So, over the past couple decades they decided to jam guns and the glamor that goes with them into epic fantasy. Sounds to me like a natural evolutionary offshoot. It doesn't have to be the new reality for everyone. Just like psionics... for some it feels like a tone change from what they like, a meshing of fantasy set long ago with modern or futuristic mind powers. Some people don't like like reggae-metal or the Japanese use of black pepper with chocolate. Respect that. There's room for everybody's tastes. Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens populated the world at the same time for awhile. Clearly you non-traditionalists killed them in gory fashion because they had funnier more olden style heads. Please, please can't you let the 'thals live unmolested? Instead of screaming, "Be a Homo or die!" (Oh, it was too easy. Apologies to all my gay buds out there.)
I am voting For.
Way back in the day, I use to read a series of choose your own adventure books about a Kai Lord named Lonewolf. Some of you may be familiar with the series. Within the setting you had the Dwarven Kingdom of Bor, which made use of dwarven gunners armed with flintlock rifles.
That image of magic and early tech stuck with me. While you never got a hold to any firearms, you occasionally fough beside allies that had them. They did not turn the tide, but added an interesting mix when facing the forces of the Darklords of Helgedad.
Since then, I have run a number of games that included firearms. These ranged from tratitional Forgotten Realms games with the odd flintlock to Spelljammer games to Final Fantasy style games that heavily mixed tech and magic.
It depends largely on the presentation on how much of an impact guns have on a game. This is true with all aspect of a fantasy game.
Personally I like the aspect of a dynamic development of magic and technology, much like Eberron's use of Magewrights as working class mages. Conflicts push the development of weapons, be it magical or mundane. A mundane explosive device, such as a blackpowder bomb, becomes an assassin's tool that magic cannot detect or dispel. That alone has the potential for an interesting adventure, be it defending against such a device or delivering it against a rival kingdom.
I am voting For.
Way back in the day, I use to read a series of choose your own adventure books about a Kai Lord named Lonewolf. Some of you may be familiar with the series. Within the setting you had the Dwarven Kingdom of Bor, which made use of dwarven gunners armed with flintlock rifles.
Heh, I loved Lone Wolf back in the day. I still have all the books too. His world is a good one. A little on the black and white side at the extremes, but a lot of the feuding countries in the middle are nice "shades of gray".
But I'm still not into it and there's no persuasive argument that makes something that's big yawn to me suddenly become tantalizing. You're all going to have to find a constructive way to deal with your shocked indignation and frustration. Maybe take up gardening. Read a good book. Try a new hair-du. Or maybe... be a big brother to a child in need. You'll be glad ya did.
NEIN!! I DEMAND ZAT YOU CONVERT TO MY VAY OF THINKING ZIS INSTANT!! I am deeply and personally offended that somewhere in the world someone thinks guns in fantasy aren't cool.
On second thought... meh. "Horses for courses" as my Grandma used to say. Whatever that means.
Anyone remember the Red Steel setting? AIR, it was pretty hard to be smokestone (gun powder) in that setting and the guns stopped working after you left the Savage Coast. Legacies and the Red Curse really sucked (my face is melting!) but that's way off-topic.
James, Mike,
How will firearms be implemented? Just pick up dirt and put in the chamber....pull trigger? Buy lots cartridges? Something different? Harder? I'm not against firearms in the setting but implementation would have to be very carefully done.
--Ray.
|
|
NEIN!! I DEMAND ZAT YOU CONVERT TO MY VAY OF THINKING ZIS INSTANT!! I am deeply and personally offended that somewhere in the world someone thinks guns in fantasy aren't cool.
On second thought... meh. "Horses for courses" as my Grandma used to say. Whatever that means.
hmmm...fantastic guns cool; horses yummy.
No guns please.
|
I wish people would read the thread before post their random thoughts.
If they did they would realize that Paizo has stated over, and over, and over, and over ......that guns are NOT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE! and that they will play no bigger of a role then they do in Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk. Read, instead of throwing around uninformed thoughts.
FH
Read, instead of throwing around uninformed thoughts.
Oh sure, taunt us with your logic and reason :p
|
Contributor
|
If they did they would realize that Paizo has stated over, and over, and over, and over
So let's state it again, to see if we can say it on each page of the thread...
• Will guns exist in the setting? Yes. That was one of the first things we decided (because it was one of the first things I brought up at one of our first meetings). They will be included partly because they exist in the core rulebooks of the world's most popular fantasy roleplaying game, and we are dedicated to supporting as many kinds of campaigns as GMs might want to run. :)
• Will guns be common? No. We're not going to make guns as common as magic. Period. I haven't seen them come up and the only time I've heard them mentioned in relation to the setting is in this thread.
• Will guns be common? Nein. You will probably not see them randomly thrown into adventures (except maybe for adventures I write, just out of contrariness). ;)
(And yes, I repeated that second question twice, because it seems like nobody is paying attention to that bit of information. Hmm...)
• Will guns be common? Nopers. You probably won't see them unless you look, and even then not for some time.
• Will guns be common? Nyet. The soonest we might even introduce them is 2008, and only then if I get all contrarian and make a strong push for them. ;)
• Will guns be common? No, no, a thousand times no.
There. :)
Does that assuage any of your fears at all? :)
So that dose means Guns will be Common?
I also read a good point a few posts back, Sharks with lasers on there heads. Common too I take it right. I really like sharks and lasers. I also like cheese.
