Wand rifles are one of those "doesn't fit" elements.
Well, how about you just switch over to wand crossbows like this here...
Uh, sorry about that... I'm still having a bit of problem with not launching the wands with the magical discharge. Maybe I shouldn't have put a string on here.
You dinosaurs can regrow lost eyes, right?
And with just a bit of tweaking it can be modified for astronauts exploring the Golarion planetary system!
Golarion is indeed a world where you should be able to find somewhere you'd LOVE to run a game. That's VERY DIFFERENT than a world that has everything. A world is defined as much by what's in it as it is by what's NOT in it, after all.
Wait, wait, wait... so are you implying that there's no nation run by cutesy vampire catgirls? Man, how am I ever supposed to convince my wife to play a game in Golarion?
|
For some reason I have this amusing picture in my mind of someone in the party with a "wandbow" wasting thousands of gold pieces in treasure by grabbing up the party's wands and shooting them at enemies . . .
That is actually something I could see being very cool. As a Feat (chain) maybe, along the lines of the Arcane Archer. Obviously, it might be best to wait util they are low on charges, (or buy wands with one charge remaining).
|
For some reason I have this amusing picture in my mind of someone in the party with a "wandbow" wasting thousands of gold pieces in treasure by grabbing up the party's wands and shooting them at enemies . . .
Or an issue of Order of the stick. V freaking out because they are waisting the party treasure.
|
|
Golarion is indeed a world where you should be able to find somewhere you'd LOVE to run a game. That's VERY DIFFERENT than a world that has everything. A world is defined as much by what's in it as it is by what's NOT in it, after all.
I very much appriciate this, by the way. That is one of the reasons I've never carred for Forgotten Realms. When you take everything and cram it all together, it makes individual aspects of a setting unimoprtant or special.
|
|
in the update re release in a few years just call it a wand caster and order better.. um different, art work that is more in line with the "filters". You know when you finally have time to update the early modules to pathfinder, right before pathfinder mark 2.I don't expect we'll EVER update any of the modules, honestly. We've got PLENTY of stock on hand for one thing, and we'll continue to churn them out at a rate of 6 per year as long as they keep selling.
I should have made it more clear I was not being serious.
While I would love to see updates. I do not seriously expect or even want you to waste time in making fixes to what are really backwards compatible books.
Maybe we should do a thread or two fan updating some basic stuff from our favorite modules?
I very much appriciate this, by the way. That is one of the reasons I've never carred for Forgotten Realms. When you take everything and cram it all together, it makes individual aspects of a setting unimoprtant or special.
Oh, lots of it meshed just fine, when it was actually intended to be in the setting from the beginning. For example, you had Calimshan as your psuedo-middle eastern country.
The problem became that the more people pasted things onto the setting, and the less they cared about the original set up, the more it became a bit mind boggling.
For example . . . adding the Bedine as Bedouin stand-ins in Anauroch when it had previously been a wasteland populated by monsters, then making Semphar into a middle-eastern style nation when its not even close to Camlimshan because they wanted a "Horde-bordering" middle eastern country, and then adding in Zhakara (which was a great setting on its own) as yet another unconnected middle eastern style area . . . that's where you had a lot of "equivalency" issues starting to run wild.
|
|
I very much appriciate this, by the way. That is one of the reasons I've never carred for Forgotten Realms. When you take everything and cram it all together, it makes individual aspects of a setting unimoprtant or special.
Oh, lots of it meshed just fine, when it was actually intended to be in the setting from the beginning. For example, you had Calimshan as your psuedo-middle eastern country.
The problem became that the more people pasted things onto the setting, and the less they cared about the original set up, the more it became a bit mind boggling.
For example . . . adding the Bedine as Bedouin stand-ins in Anauroch when it had previously been a wasteland populated by monsters, then making Semphar into a middle-eastern style nation when its not even close to Camlimshan because they wanted a "Horde-bordering" middle eastern country, and then adding in Zhakara (which was a great setting on its own) as yet another unconnected middle eastern style area . . . that's where you had a lot of "equivalency" issues starting to run wild.
+10000000000
|
|
Oh, lots of it meshed just fine, when it was actually intended to be in the setting from the beginning. For example, you had Calimshan as your psuedo-middle eastern country.I very much appriciate this, by the way. That is one of the reasons I've never carred for Forgotten Realms. When you take everything and cram it all together, it makes individual aspects of a setting unimoprtant or special.
It isn't that it didn't mesh, it was hat it all became generic rather than different. In my opinion. They did with hundreds of deities what could have been done (better) with 20. For example, Dragonlance has a similar build, with an unknown land on the other side of the world. All the "normal" exist there, but in a very different way. Some have different alignments, names, causes, followers, etc. . . because the poples of Taladas have much different views and understandings of things. Trying to make FR open for everything possible, though just watered it down. Again, my opinion.
I actually liked Alkenstar and the firearms presented in the Campaign Setting. I don't expect they will ever be developed further and wouldn't be surprised if they were purged from a PRPG reprint, but I will be saddened by the loss.
And the Wand Rifle would make sense in a world that had firearms. Mages adapting the form of a mechanical weapon to magical purpose. It works. Of course without firearms, the rifle form doesn't fit. The Rod version mentioned would be a good adaptation.
Heh, never imagined this post going so far...lol.
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Heh, never imagined this post going so far...lol.
When you start a thread with an inflammatory subject line like "Wand rifles? C'mon..." what do you expect to happen? As much as I'd like to see these sorts of threads be ignored, you're starting by pushing people's buttons. And then you wonder why people go to the thread and either argue or support your stance.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
IF YOU DON'T LIKE SOMETHING, DON'T USE IT! Don't prevent those of us who enjoy this kind of thing, I can't remember how many times I've seen someone mad that Alkenstar was in the Campaign Guide. The rules for guns were in the 3.0 DMG, but didn't make it in Pathfinder RPG.
That's fine, if those who'd prefer not to have such things in their games can dodge them, but one of the things I really hated in D&D 3.5 is that psionics were ingrained. You didn't really have a choice.
Pardon my ignorance, but how was psionics ingrained and unavoidable in 3.5? They were always an expansion and never part of the three main core books. Maybe it's the groups you've played in, but I rarely seen it surface. Truthfully, I wish I've seen it more. ;)
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
Pardon my ignorance, but how was psionics ingrained and unavoidable in 3.5? They were always an expansion and never part of the three main core books. Maybe it's the groups you've played in, but I rarely seen it surface. Truthfully, I wish I've seen it more. ;)
Yeah, I played a lot of 3.5 and I never saw a single psionic PC or NPC. For something that's really ingrained, it sure was elusive. Now, wizards! Those bastards were ingrained. Good thing Pathfinder got rid of them, and exiled them to their own expansion rules set.
Oh, wait...nevermind.
Heh, never imagined this post going so far...lol.When you start a thread with an inflammatory subject line like "Wand rifles? C'mon..." what do you expect to happen? As much as I'd like to see these sorts of threads be ignored, you're starting by pushing people's buttons. And then you wonder why people go to the thread and either argue or support your stance.
Chill Yoda. This has been a good discussion and I made a point that even Jacobs agreed with. Wand rifles are just off. Was the word "C'mon" snide? Probably. But why are you so uptight? It's wand rifles we are talking about. Settle down.
<wields wand rifle>
*ZAP*
You're a toad.
So, wait...we have an egyptian-esque setting, Goa'uld-like staff weapons, and we have a problem with this? Wow! Course, way those are bandied about, they're a bit more like shotguns than rifles, but I have seen Teal'c ready himself with one of those as one would steady a rife for a precision shot...
"Wand Rifles" is weird as a concept yes, but in light of Goa'uld staff weapons, its freaking sweet that its made it to the table.
*Edit* Okay, so maybe not, but a revision of the idea to such would probably satiate the folks confused with how they worked; Ossiran Staff Weapons.
Damn. Now I want to run Pathfinder Stargate.
Howdy.
I'm just going to chime in with my own two coppers worth (and for a dragon to give up two coins from its horde is no small thing)...
I had a player create a character I really liked, had a great backstory that used the setting information very well, and I wish he'd have stayed with this character.
He was a half-orc fighter 2/sorcerer 6/eldritch knight 1 and he used one of the firearms from Alkenstar (the scatter gun I think) as his main weapon. "Krang; the Gun-Slinger" he was a really neat concept, but he "let him go" when another friend of ours wanted to join in and had a similar concept (and similar in the sense that he'd use one of the firearms as his weapon of choice) but I think this other character was a ranger, maybe a fighter/ranger. (And that guy rarely showed up.) :(
Anyway, put me in the camp of liking firearms in Golarion, but they aren't widespread IIRC, kinda limited to Alkenstar (and I know this was mostly about wand rifles, but firearms were mentioned).
Just lamenting the "loss" of a really neat character concept.
Dean; The_Minstrel_Wyrm
I don't think the wand rifle in Tomb of the pharaoh's is that big a deal when put into the context of the adventure. In the description it says its a peculiar prototype created by a Pathfinder, and it is used by an ex-Pathfinder rival adventurer. It's just there as an oddity to add some flavor to an npc and easily ignored. Personally I think the concept is fun and flavorful.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
So, wait...we have an egyptian-esque setting, Goa'uld-like staff weapons, and we have a problem with this? Wow! Course, way those are bandied about, they're a bit more like shotguns than rifles, but I have seen Teal'c ready himself with one of those as one would steady a rife for a precision shot...
"Wand Rifles" is weird as a concept yes, but in light of Goa'uld staff weapons, its freaking sweet that its made it to the table.*Edit* Okay, so maybe not, but a revision of the idea to such would probably satiate the folks confused with how they worked; Ossiran Staff Weapons.
Damn. Now I want to run Pathfinder Stargate.
Read here for other gate related ideas...
I happened to like the mechanics of the wand rifle, and the shape didn't bother me that much. Though an Alkenstar musket, with a shocking grasp wand modified into a bayonet...
Now I want to run Pathfinder Stargate.Read here for other gate related ideas...
I happened to like the mechanics of the wand rifle, and the shape didn't bother me that much. Though an Alkenstar musket, with a shocking grasp wand modified into a bayonet...
Thanks for that link; Matt. :)
Golarion has guns (in Alkenstar) so I don't see it as too much of a stretch.The function aspect is fine, the problem is obviously with the mixing of modern weaponry and D&D magic. It's just very awkward.Nope it is real and there was an in module reason for it and a lot of people have groaned since it was put out.I like them. I don't think they're overpowered (+1 to hit with Rays)and give some nice flavour to a "sniper" style caster.
+1 I came up with a similar idea, but it was usable by anyone. You could put wands in it, so long as it had a ranged attack.
in the update re release in a few years just call it a wand caster and order better.. um different, art work that is more in line with the "filters". You know when you finally have time to update the early modules to pathfinder, right before pathfinder mark 2.I don't expect we'll EVER update any of the modules, honestly. We've got PLENTY of stock on hand for one thing, and we'll continue to churn them out at a rate of 6 per year as long as they keep selling.
FYI, I love the wand rifle idea.
The fans of rifle-state of Alkenstar will be in this thread shortly in order, ahem, shoot apart anybody who dislikes guns in fantasy :)
I am here to chew bubblegum and fire wand rifles...And I'm all out of charges on my wand rifles.
<-----------likes wand rifles; doesn't blow his mind, considering the Andorian military uniforms and whatnot...
Yeah, for some reason, I think those uniforms are sexier than a lot of those "chainmail bikini" outfits. I'm weird, aren't I?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Pardon my ignorance, but how was psionics ingrained and unavoidable in 3.5? They were always an expansion and never part of the three main core books. Maybe it's the groups you've played in, but I rarely seen it surface. Truthfully, I wish I've seen it more. ;)
In particular, mind flayers and other monsters defaulted to using psionics whether you prefered to use the system or not. :)
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I'm suprised that a throwaway idea like a wand rifle has sparked so much discussion.
It's only a throw away idea if you have players who decide not to starting crafting themselves some wand rifles and handing them out to their NPCs. Once a modern idea is out of the bag, it's real hard to get it back in. Players don't like to hear 'no' without justifications.
I talked to a player in a book store one time whose character had an SR-71. He was dead serious. :)
|
|
You mean the falvor tht psionics could exist?
The MM1 Mindflayers use spell-like abilities and Supernatural abilities, possibly (?) described as psionic, but they have zero psionic rules. In fact, they do not work at all with the psionic rules, so you you want a real Psionic (as in Expanded Psionics Handbook) Mindflayer, they need to be completely rebuilt and their powers reexplained.
|
I'm suprised that a throwaway idea like a wand rifle has sparked so much discussion.It's only a throw away idea if you have players who decide not to starting crafting themselves some wand rifles and handing them out to their NPCs. Once a modern idea is out of the bag, it's real hard to get it back in. Players don't like to hear 'no' without justifications.
I talked to a player in a book store one time whose character had an SR-71. He was dead serious. :)
My players have used a wand rifle before, but they have not crafted one, yet.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
You mean the falvor tht psionics could exist?
The MM1 Mindflayers use spell-like abilities and Supernatural abilities, possibly (?) described as psionic, but they have zero psionic rules. In fact, they do not work at all with the psionic rules, so you you want a real Psionic (as in Expanded Psionics Handbook) Mindflayer, they need to be completely rebuilt and their powers reexplained.
Well, okay if that sorta distinction has to be drawn, then sure. You're technically right of course but these particular spell-like abilities are described in the text as "psionic" powers (yuan-ti is another example). It's pretty obvious that D&D 3.5 designers sorta fudged so they wouldn't make folks unhappy by binding classic D&D monsters to a later psionic rule set, so they (and we, for that matter) had their (our) cake and ate it too. :)
(Interestingly, the word psionic is excluded from the descriptive text in the 3.0 MMI.)
Nonetheless, I'd still like to chose the flavors in my game and having wand rifles proliferate wouldn't be my personal preference. I'd be hard pressed not to edit that out or limit them in some major way. :)
That having been said, wand rifles would fit in quite well in a Harry Potter style game because that's almost what a wand in Harry Potter boils down to. :)
I am in favor of "wand-rifles", but then I do like mixing genres. The idea of an apparatus that aids in the aim of ray spells seems reasonable in a game world where a spyglass is on the equipment list. The technology is there, it just needs the right application.
|
|
You mean the falvor tht psionics could exist?
The MM1 Mindflayers use spell-like abilities and Supernatural abilities, possibly (?) described as psionic, but they have zero psionic rules. In fact, they do not work at all with the psionic rules, so [if] you want a real Psionic (as in Expanded Psionics Handbook) Mindflayer, they need to be completely rebuilt and their powers reexplained.
Well, okay if that sorta distinction has to be drawn, then sure. You're technically right of course but these particular spell-like abilities are described in the text as "psionic" powers (yuan-ti is another example). It's pretty obvious that D&D 3.5 designers sorta fudged so they wouldn't make folks unhappy by binding classic D&D monsters to a later psionic rule set, so they (and we, for that matter) had their (our) cake and ate it too. :)
(Interestingly, the word psionic is excluded from the descriptive text in the 3.0 MMI.)
Nonetheless, I'd still like to chose the flavors in my game and having wand rifles proliferate wouldn't be my personal preference. I'd be hard pressed not to edit that out or limit them in some major way. :)
That having been said, wand rifles would fit in quite well in a Harry Potter style game because that's almost what a wand in Harry Potter boils down to. :)
I wasn't trying to be a jerk, I am just not sure what you were trying to say.
There are monsters that have "arcane" and "divine" spell-like abilities, as in specifically "divine". Psionics, itself, is mentioned in the 3.5 DMG (I think, could be one of the other Core books). I'm still not fully sure what the problem is, though?
By the way, most intellegent Aberations exibit "psionic" abilities, which harkens back to a bit of metaplot. Mindflayers are "aliens" from the future.
What I really enjoy about this discussion is the thought of wand rifles surviving as one of the early game´s oddities till many years from now in the heads of Pathfinder fans. So in 2040, some nerds will still be talking about how back when the game started off their mages proudly swung their wand rifles at foes. Then younger fans will go YOURE KIDDING YOU OLD FART and walk straight out of the virtual whatever store.
These things enhance a nerdy sort of shared community feeling that makes me warm inside.
I could see having:
Lesser Wand Rifle (+5 to Use Magical Device, Wand Only)
Wand Rifle (+10 to Use Magical Device, Wand Only)
Greater Wand Rifle (+15 to Use Magical Device, Wand Only)
As long as the costs of construction where appropriate.
But I'll bet there's someone out there thinking "double-barrelled wand rifles...yeah....oh!...GATTLING wands!"
I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire 50 charges or only fourty-nine?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself. But being as this is a wand of lightning bolts and would blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: Do I feel lucky? Well, do ya, punk? --Dirty Harrymenthotep, Entombed With the Pharoahs III, Lightning Force
This reminds me of a series of books Harry Turtledove wrote as a fantasy analogue to WW2. Into The Darkness, I believe was one of the books. Anyhow, the soldiers in those books all had wand rifles, and I thought it was a neat idea.
I wonder how many people wouldn't complain if it was a rod that you put a wand (or two) in and it gave the feats reach spell and widen spell...
Heck, why stop there? :P
I equip all my war mages with wand rifles.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Rod of range
Aura strong (no school); CL 17th
Slot none; Price 17500; Weight 5 lbs
Description:
This rod holds two wands, it takes a wand 24 hours to attune to the rod, then the following effects are available. Because the rod is over 3' long it must be used two handed by Small or Medium sized creatures.
- 3 times a day, the rod may enlarge the spell effect of one of the wands contained in it, as if the effect was affected by the Enlarge Spell feat.
- 3 times a day, the rod allows the weilder to have any wand with a range of 'touch' to affect a target up to 30' away as a ranged touch attack.
- The rod provides a continual +1 equipment bonus to any ray attack made with a wand it currently contains.
Construction:
Requirements Craft Rod, Craft Wand, Enlarge Spell, Spectral Hand; Cost 8750 GP
Feel free to add to the Pathfinder DB.