It can be argued that the primary reasons why guns beat out bows, knights in armor, etc were as much economic as tactical. Guns ended up being the cheaper, more efficent option for projecting force. It takes years to train a good archer, weeks to train an effective musketeer. Bullet proof armor can be made, but it's heavy and expensive.
IMO, the designers did not need to gimp guns or made them so hard to learn to use. They didn't even need to make the guns so outrageously expensive. No, all they needed to do was to limit the availability of powder/gun cotton. A good rule to adopt would be that the PROCESS of creating these explosives is very dicey anyplace with magic- the 'mana' interferes. Workshops blowing up, dud batches, excessive waste, etc will tend to make powder or gun cotton quite rare and thus quite expensive outside the magic-dead zone of Alkenstar. Other nations won't bother to invest in the technology, as it's just not good economics for them to do so. Within Alkenstar, creating the exposives is easy and cheap, and guns are much more common.
Make guns simple for natives of Alkenstar and martial for others, perhaps.
Paizo guys reading this- please give this idea consideration. I think that it would go a long way to explaining in a logical and internally consistent way why Alkentsar looks as it does, in contrast to most of Golarion.
Other posters, what are your thoughts?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm all for that, or a variant of your suggestion. Of course, I'm a bit biased.
It can be argued that the primary reasons why guns beat out bows, knights in armor, etc were as much economic as tactical. Guns ended up being the cheaper, more efficent option for projecting force. It takes years to train a good archer, weeks to train an effective musketeer. Bullet proof armor can be made, but it's heavy and expensive.IMO, the designers did not need to gimp guns or made them so hard to learn to use. They didn't even need to make the guns so outrageously expensive. No, all they needed to do was to limit the availability of powder/gun cotton. A good rule to adopt would be that the PROCESS of creating these explosives is very dicey anyplace with magic- the 'mana' interferes. Workshops blowing up, dud batches, excessive waste, etc will tend to make powder or gun cotton quite rare and thus quite expensive outside the magic-dead zone of Alkenstar. Other nations won't bother to invest in the technology, as it's just not good economics for them to do so. Within Alkenstar, creating the exposives is easy and cheap, and guns are much more common.
Make guns simple for natives of Alkenstar and martial for others, perhaps.
Paizo guys reading this- please give this idea consideration. I think that it would go a long way to explaining in a logical and internally consistent way why Alkentsar looks as it does, in contrast to most of Golarion.
Other posters, what are your thoughts?
Dear Mr. Cummins,
This debate has already been had before to a large extent *link* (posts commencing towards bottom of page), and at this point you could just wait and see what the revised Alkenstar entry loks like when the new version of the Campaign Setting hits the streets.Hoping that this has been Helpful and that you now have time free to go and torment a baatezu or two. (Devil for those who don't speak 2nd edition... ;) )
Yours,
Ask A Succubus.
My impression is that Vudra and Tian Xia also have their own sources of firearms, or at least gunpowder weapons, since the CS states the Inner Sea region imported the technology from there. This may have changed in the new Inner Sea Guide, however.
My impression is that Vudra and Tian Xia also have their own sources of firearms, or at least gunpowder weapons, since the CS states the Inner Sea region imported the technology from there. This may have changed in the new Inner Sea Guide, however.
True, true. I've accounted for all that, though.
Gunpowder could have been invented in a region with functioning magic. It would just be hard, and quite dangerous, to make sizeable quantities of the stuff. That stituation would tend to retard further development of gunpowder tech everywhere but the magic dead zones- which is just what we see in the CS. It helps to explain why Alkenstar has early revolvers and scatterguns, while other nations are doing well to have crude matchlocks. That dramatic tech gap must exist for some reason. If you live in a place(most of Golarion) where powder and the weapons that employ it will forever remain expensive curiosities, then the incentive to invest in the technology and infrastructure will be a lot lower than it is in magic-dead Alkenstar.
Hoping that this has been Helpful and that you now have time free to go and torment a baatezu or two. (Devil for those who don't speak 2nd...
Umm...did you just try to thread cap me? If so, that may have been the most polite thread capping attempt ever.
:)
My impression is that Vudra and Tian Xia also have their own sources of firearms, or at least gunpowder weapons, since the CS states the Inner Sea region imported the technology from there. This may have changed in the new Inner Sea Guide, however.True, true. I've accounted for all that, though.
Gunpowder could have been invented in a region with functioning magic. It would just be hard, and quite dangerous, to make sizeable quantities of the stuff. That stituation would tend to retard further development of gunpowder tech everywhere but the magic dead zones- which is just what we see in the CS. It helps to explain why Alkenstar has early revolvers and scatterguns, while other nations are doing well to have crude matchlocks. That dramatic tech gap must exist for some reason. If you live in a place(most of Golarion) where powder and the weapons that employ it will forever remain expensive curiosities, then the incentive to invest in the technology and infrastructure will be a lot lower than it is in magic-dead Alkenstar.
I believe the new upcoming revamping of the campaign setting is going to bust down Alkenstar's gun-tech to flintlock/matchlock tech, due to the fact that they've (by setting history) only had it for a few hundred years at most. So, no more revolvers, as far as I know.
I believe the new upcoming revamping of the campaign setting is going to bust down Alkenstar's gun-tech to flintlock/matchlock tech, due to the fact that they've (by setting history) only had it for a few hundred years at most. So, no more revolvers, as far as I know.
Hummm...well, If I run Golarion, they'll still have revolvers. :)
My solution allows for it to make sense.Even if they do roll back the tech, it still wouldn't explain to my satisfaction why cannon and flintlock muskets aren't more common elsewhere. There are very good reasons to adopt cannon, for example. The 'but we have wizards' excuse is kind of flimsy; as it isn't used to eliminate things like armored knights, castles, siege engines, etc.
YMMV
This would seem to indicate the guns will be early western in stlye at least. Presumably cap and ball pistols and rifles maybe even cartridge fired.
As to the monopoly i have no trouble with it as i'm certain there are many factions, most of them magical in nature, that would do their best to prevent the spread of guns.
I imagine one of the themes of Alkenstar adventures will be finding and stopping plots to destroy the gunworks either from internal machinations or external factors.
This would seem to indicate the guns will be early western in stlye at least. Presumably cap and ball pistols and rifles maybe even cartridge fired.
As to the monopoly i have no trouble with it as i'm certain there are many factions, most of them magical in nature, that would do their best to prevent the spread of guns.
I imagine one of the themes of Alkenstar adventures will be finding and stopping plots to destroy the gunworks either from internal machinations or external factors.
That's an interesting notion, but why would multiple magic wielding factions be against guns? Is there some reason for spellcasters to worry? I'm not seeing it.
Look at the stats the guns are given.Guns are not a threat to mages and clerics, anymore than are crossbows.
I do like your idea about enemies of Alkenstar trying to wreck the Gunworks.
EDIT-From the 'wad of gun cotton and lead bullet' description of the revolvers and the loose shot and powder description of most other guns, I'd expect that metallic cartridges have not been developed. Paper cartridges would probably exist, though.
I would imagine that they can make percussion guns, although these might be a recent development and also banned from export. Flintlock revolvers can be built,but the description and art in the equipment books indiocates a more advanced caplock weapon.
The revolver uses guncotton, by which I assume that they mean nitrocellulose 'smokeless powder.' That was invented in the 1880s, in the real world. Alkenstar practical chemistry must be good- and that does make sense.
If the fulminates in the caps can only be cooked up safely in a no mana zone, then you don't need to worry about other nations stealing that tech and making much use of it.
For the magic using factions i was mostly working on the idea established power bases don't tend to like new powers especially ones tht anyone can use but i may have been overstating the case a bit.
Guns are certainly no more threat than other ranged weapons however cannons and bombs are a different story. Stopping them from leaving a small area would be a safer bet than letting the rebelious hordes get them.
The way i see it is the mana wastes enabled Alkenstar to perfect it's craft in a good part due to no magical community interference (well they can send spy's and sabeteur's but can't fly over and "nuke" the problem.)
I think Bertious has the most of it. Also it could be Alkenstar only shares its lower grade guns -- their battle guns might be much more powerful possibly being similar to gatling guns and the like.
Also guns do have the exploding dice -- granted the average adventurer isn't going to see much out of this, but with millions of guns out in the world there will be the 1 in a million shot that drops something really nasty often enough to have stories spreading among those that see guns on an irregular basis (MAN! DID YOU SEE THAT! HE dropped a "X" with a single shot!) could cause an overestimation of what guns are capable of: Also with wizards well aware of what magic can do they might actually be more willing to believe such stories -- after all the idea that a gun can drop something dangerous in one shot isn't so crazy to a guy regularly summoning devils/demons/elementals or creating undead, dropping fireballs or whatever else.
I think I'd prefer Golarion dropping gun technology back to flintlock level, rather than having percussion cap weapons. I mean, imagining a gun using ranger from Alkenstar dual-wielding Colt Army revolvers while traveling with an adventuring party is cool. And actually that sounds like a really fun character to play, if he could keep an alchemist around to create the black powder and the percussion caps. Anyways , I guess I lost my argument, maybe it's better to include different gun technologies and let the DM decide which to use, if any, for his campaign.
We do realize that revolvers have been around for a long while right? Right there with the multi-barreled designs (and everything has been built multi-barreled at some point or another), as a matter of fact many early revolvers were multi-barreled affairs that simply turned all the barrels so that you only needed one firing mechanism.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I find it an odd belief that guns are too powerful with an assumption they'd all be one hit kills.
I mean, swords are kinda known for killin' dudes too, but we have them just fine in the game :p
HP is an abstract.
We do realize that revolvers have been around for a long while right? Right there with the multi-barreled designs (and everything has been built multi-barreled at some point or another), as a matter of fact many early revolvers were multi-barreled affairs that simply turned all the barrels so that you only needed one firing mechanism.
Those early multi-chamber and/or multi barrel weapons were not nearly as good as the 19th Century revolvers, though. For one thing, you don't need to rotate the chamber by hand in order to fire in sequence a cap-and ball piece like the Colt Paterson. Percussion caps are a better ignition system, especially for something like a revolver. They are much better in damp weather. Faster to prime ansd fire, too. Some primitive parts of the world held on to flintlocks for a long time, because that's what the local smiths could make and perhaps because caps were in short supply. If Alkenstar's gun tech is like the United States in the early 19th, then maybe Vudra is like early 19th century Afghanistan. Ever seen one of those old jezzails?
If you prefer to scale back Alkentsar's tech to finicky, very expensive one-off flintlock multi barrel weapons, revolving or not, go right ahead.
Heck, remove guns entirely if you really don't like them. It's YOUR setting. Pazio makes the books, but as the DM you own the world in which your games will be run. Rule Zero is always in effect, and it applies to 'canon' as much as to mechanics.
ps-You may have missed it, but I did actually mention those early (rare and experimental) flintlock revolvers in a previous post.
I find it an odd belief that guns are too powerful with an assumption they'd all be one hit kills.
I mean, swords are kinda known for killin' dudes too, but we have them just fine in the game :p
HP is an abstract.
Agreed!
I give guns a good crit range, but I never use that exploding damage dice rule. It made no sense in AD&D 2E, either. As you say, a single sword blow can kill a man. Why don't swords, big rocks, spears, clubs, daggers, etc have exploding damage dice? Would you rather be shot with a .38 or run through with three feet of cold steel? Either way, you face a risk of death- but you might live. Guns are not magic death wands. I've treated GSWs in real life. People live through them all the time. It depends on numerous factors: energy transferred, cavitation, placement of the shot, etc, etc.
We do realize that revolvers have been around for a long while right? Right there with the multi-barreled designs (and everything has been built multi-barreled at some point or another), as a matter of fact many early revolvers were multi-barreled affairs that simply turned all the barrels so that you only needed one firing mechanism.
Yes there were, but from at least one image of a revolver in Alkenstar it's clear that tat the very least they use percussion cap technology, and some of the guns look even more modern.
good stuff
So you did. I won't ever say those really early works were great -- just wanted to point out that they were there though.
People live through them all the time. It depends on numerous factors: energy transferred, cavitation, placement of the shot, etc, etc.
And that golden hour -- best argument ever against caliber elitist.
good stuffSo you did. I won't ever say those really early works were great -- just wanted to point out that they were there though.
I think you are right in having done so.
I personally love Alkenstar as an anomalous high tech country in a magic-dead region. Instead of downgrading the tech, I tried to come up with a plausible reason for it to exist but not have spread like wildfire to the rest of Golarion.
Did I mention my abiding love for Boot Hill? :)
People live through them all the time. It depends on numerous factors: energy transferred, cavitation, placement of the shot, etc, etc.And that golden hour -- best argument ever against caliber elitist.
Yup. Fast response time is a life saver with many serious injuries and conditions. That's one of the first things we learned as medics.
Of course, this is fantasy game we're on about, so if people really want exploding damage dice for guns and single roll damage dice for pretty much all other weapons- go ahead. It's not like D&D in any edition, including PF, is a simulationist game aimed at realistic combat.
I'm just saying that, to me, the exploding dice thing is inconsistent with the handlling of other weapons, hard to justify logically in a system with abstract hit points, and not perhaps very well balanced in actual play.
YMMV
I'm more concerned with the whole "Only bows can have a full attack!" It's what lead to the death of crossbows and throwing weapons.
Oh 2e dart fighter, what happened to you :<
Also, I'm one of the types that has no problem at all with guns in the setting. Alkenstar does it just fine, I think, in keeping them as rare weapons with plenty of flavor.
Personally I pulled the shuriken back out to the simple list and renamed it the dart.
I'm more concerned with the whole "Only bows can have a full attack!" It's what lead to the death of crossbows and throwing weapons.
Oh 2e dart fighter, what happened to you :<
Also, I'm one of the types that has no problem at all with guns in the setting. Alkenstar does it just fine, I think, in keeping them as rare weapons with plenty of flavor.
I'm in favor of giving bows a better RoF, but crossbows should then be bumped up a bit in damage or maybe crit range. Medieval crossbows came in a variety of draw weights/pulls- but the ones actually used for warfare were significantly more powerful than bows. The Victorian era myth of uber powerful longbows and crappy crossbows is annoying and just plain wrong. AD&D handled crossbows very poorly- outside the fixes in Birthright and C&T.
Personally I pulled the shuriken back out to the simple list and renamed it the dart.
Kewl beans.
Do any of you guys miss the weapons vs armor table in AD&D 1E?
Maybe I should ask- Do you play AD&D 1E? It still has an active fan community, after all.
Crossbows: I allow them to be bought at "strength ratings" like bows, but it costs double and you don't actually have to have the strength (heavy crossbows don't cost double).
1st AD&D: Sometimes but not much. I wish some of the weapons were different in pathfinder -- but a lot of it is close enough for me.
Disclaimer:
Ask A Succubus is a CE aligned succubus subject to fits of whimsy and capriciousness. Whilst it's a possibly fatal mistake to fail to take her seriously, it may well consign you to the Abyss for an eternity of being made to groom her pet snail collection (as if she'd ever do anything which involved coating herself with mucus except in very occasional cases of exceptional Fun) if you do. And that, as they say, ladies and gentleman is being caught between a rock and a hard place.
1) Wasn't there this debate a short while ago on another thread?
2) Hang on, is he basing this thread on the Alkenstar version from the first edition Campaign Setting which has been revised, and if so does he know it's been revised?
1) I'm discussing ideas, not engaging in a debate. I'm not here to tell anyone that he's wrong- just to make suggestions about how I'd handle things and to see what others think. If others find my ideas useful, kewl beans. If not, that's also cool.
2) The campaign setting revisions are not in effect in a given campaign unless the DM makes them so. The DM, not the designers, is in charge of his campaign. While I'm certainly interested in what Paizo puts out, I will never feel bound by it if I have an idea that works better for me and my players.
I think there's a few solutions.
One thing I considered is to remove the RoF difference between the two and give the bows one extra attack per turn automatically. So a crossbow can fire however many attacks you have, a bow can do it that many times plus one extra. That was fairly similar to how it worked in 2e, if I recall correctly.
Maybe give repeating crossbows the same benefit.
2) The campaign setting revisions are not in effect in a given campaign unless the DM makes them so. The DM, not the designers, is in charge of his campaign. While I'm certainly interested in what Paizo puts out, I will never feel bound by it if I have an idea that works better for me and my players.
I understand and like homebrew -- but when in the campaign settings forum its probably a great idea to remember to discuss what "canon" is as opposed to "in my world."
The thread started on what is and what might be -- so someone trying to keep it to that and remind you that what you have doesn't match that is probably done in the interest of the forum we are in and continuity of canon.
We do realize that revolvers have been around for a long while right? Right there with the multi-barreled designs (and everything has been built multi-barreled at some point or another), as a matter of fact many early revolvers were multi-barreled affairs that simply turned all the barrels so that you only needed one firing mechanism.Yes there were, but from at least one image of a revolver in Alkenstar it's clear that tat the very least they use percussion cap technology, and some of the guns look even more modern.
Yeah, that was the impression I had received, as well.
I like the caplocks as fairly new technology.
Of course, as always, this stuff is entirely up to the DM. There is 'canon' that actually matters in play but the in-house canon of the campaign.
[
I understand and like homebrew -- but when in the campaign settings forum its probably a great idea to remember to discuss what "canon" is as opposed to "in my world."The thread started on what is and what might be -- so someone trying to keep it to that and remind you that what you have doesn't match that is probably done in the interest of the forum we are in and continuity of canon.
It's always 'my world.' James Jacobs isn't going to come down from Olympus and run your game for you. Nor should he want to, I expect. Paizo is selling a setting as an aide for play, not a substitute for the creativity of DMs and players, or a straightjacket for their imaginations. Each individual DM sets the stage as he sees fit. Each campaign, even if drawing heavily on published sources, will be different. Thank goodness for that!
Please stop telling me not to use my imagination and not to discuss ideas about how to use the Golarion setting material. This is the appropriate forum for such discussions, musings, etc. We are all talking about Golarion.
[
I understand and like homebrew -- but when in the campaign settings forum its probably a great idea to remember to discuss what "canon" is as opposed to "in my world."The thread started on what is and what might be -- so someone trying to keep it to that and remind you that what you have doesn't match that is probably done in the interest of the forum we are in and continuity of canon.
It's always 'my world.' James Jacobs isn't going to come down from Olympus and run your game for you. Nor should he want to, I expect. Paizo is selling a setting as an aide for play, not a substitute for the creativity of DMs and players, or a straightjacket for their imaginations. Each individual DM sets the stage as he sees fit. Each campaign, even if drawing heavily on published sources, will be different. Thank goodness for that!
Please stop telling me not to use my imagination and not to discuss ideas about how to use the Golarion setting material. This is the appropriate forum for such discussions, musings, etc. We are all talking about Golarion.
Dear Mr. Cummins,
There are some people around who run things strictly by the book. As you have (most excellently) made clear that adherence to the form of the setting is not the strictest concern to yourself and your group, and not being a fiend with much interest or knowledge of most mechanical things which go *bang* (or at least not which I will admit to) I shall gracefully duck out and drag the recalcitrant Mr. Evans with me. He would like to let you know how sorry he is for having disturbed your equilibrium of mind. If you so desire it, he will be even sorrier by the time that I have finished with him...
Hope that you have found this post Helpful.
Yours,
Ask A Succubus.
Dear Mr. Cummins,
There are some people around who run things strictly by the book. As you have (most excellently) made clear that adherence to the form of the setting is not the strictest concern to yourself and your group, and not being a fiend with much interest or knowledge of most mechanical things which go *bang* (or at least not which I will admit to) I shall gracefully duck out and drag the recalcitrant Mr. Evans with me. He would like to let you know how sorry he is for having disturbed your equilibrium of mind. If you so desire it, he will be even sorrier by the time that I have finished with him...
Hope that you have found this post Helpful.Yours,
Ask A Succubus.
Arrr, I say you oughta polymorph him into flail snail and set him to guarding your snail collection. :)
To Mr Evans- No hard feelings, dude. I was just laying it all out there.
-Ewan