|
Chris Columbus,
I can easily say YUCK to guns. That is my reaction. My personal preferences in terms of a feudal medieval fantasy are to have monks with tonsures who illuminate manuscripts. I would also make sure that no corn or potatoes are present. In our world these crops were introduced from the new world to the old world after 1492. But those are my own personal tastes when it comes to running a medieval fantasy game.
I don’t mind the monk, the martial artist, in fact I would be much happier if the name of the class monk was changed to marital artist, I think that such a name change would open the class to many more character concepts just as when the thief class was changed to rogue. I much prefer to toss the monk class in with the ninja and samurai, and to put them on the other side of the “world “ so to speak.
Now weather it all melds nicely also is a matter of taste and opinion. (Feudal medieval you get your samurai ninja and guns).
As I said that was an initial reaction. When I said “onto samurai and ninja” I meant I was going on to look at those other classes.
People are going to run around and around the mulberry bush trying to make the point that gunpowder existed then, no it didn’t. But all that being said, it doesn’t matter it is a moot point. If I may cut and past from Jason Bulmahn earlier in this thread, this is what he said:
“Hey there folks
Two quick points... (that I seem to be making over and over...)
1. The Pathfinder RPG is not intended to model history. We use history as an influence to be sure, but we are not beholden to it. While firearms surely had something to do with the death of medieval armor, that is not something we are terribly concerned with when it comes to our rules and our game world. That is not to say we did not model some of its effect into the rules, but we are not going to retcon everything to take this into effect (even if there are counterarguments that make this out to be not true, it is irrelevant to us either way). Some folks like a little bit of guns in their games. We are giving that option.
2. Please read the most important rule on page 9 of your core rulebook. Note that we understand that these three classes (but guns in particular) are a area of great contention in the hobby. Thats ok. We expect some folk will not use them. You have nothing to worry about concerning our future products or campaign products. Guns will be no more prevelant in our world than they were two weeks ago, which is to say, very rare and fairly restricted to one nation that can be overlooked by those uninterested in firearms.
That is all... As a note, threads like this serve little purpose to the playtest, but I am going to let this one go for a bit and see if something useful cant come out of it.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing"
Now I have gone on to do two play tests. One Play Test with a five-man 1st level party consisting of a samurai, ninja, magus, oracle and gunslinger, which I ran through “Masters of the Fallen Fortress”. I have tried to provide a link to the play test. i hope it works.
The next play test I did was for a four man 4th level party consisting of a gunslinger, the iconic ranger Harsk, and the iconic alchemist Damiel, and the iconic cleric Kyra. I ran them through an adventure of my own devising, called “Porthos gets Sargavaed”.
I also posted my thoughts on the gunslinger on this thread "my thoughts on the ultimate combat classes especially the gunslinger." .
I hope this helps. This thread was my initial visceral reaction to guns and gunslingers. I then tried to actually work with the new materiel play test it and to try and give it a “fair shake” so to speak. While I may not like guns, i feel at least i have tried to work with the materiel.
it's funny the things people focus on. so I'll adress the corn and potatoes thing. first if your game isn't on earth why does this matter? secondly by the time we had plate armor we also had....wait for ti.... corn and potatoes. and guns also. I guess my question ist this why use highly compartmentalized aspects of history to cite your fatally when they contradict each other.
The decline of armor had more to do with weight than uselessness.
Hmm ... really? I'm not sure about this. Modern day troops wear equipment that's just as heavy as medieval knights ... we're talking about 50 - 60 lbs, right? Plus, the armor was custom fit. From what I've read, the weight was distributed really well.
I wish I could remember the source, but somewhere out in the Internets, a historian was writing about medieval armor being too heavy. His point was that it wasn't. The popular misconception we have of knights needing a crane to get plopped down on their horses stems more from Mark Twain's Connecticut Yankee in King Arther's Court, rather than from historical fact. In reality, knights could do cartwheels in their gear.
I think it was the longbow which finally overcame the advantages of mounted knights ... firearms just finished the job some years later.
I guess my question ist this why use highly compartmentalized aspects of history to cite your fatally when they contradict each other.
Because there's a certain perception of what a medieval should look like, not what the medieval period really was. Most folks, probably myself included to some degree, would lump full plate fighters in the same period as pre-gunpowder and Henry & Eleanor and stone castles and Vikings and King Arthur.
At any rate, D&D & Pathfinder are pastiches, not a 1-size-fits-all. Use what you like and drop what you don't.
Personally, I kinda like the idea of a gunslinger. It'd be pretty cool to see a campaign that looks something like Pirates of the Caribbean.
|
|
I have a feeling that this thread may need to be put to bed so to speak. It has more then run its course.
My initial post was to express my initial and visceral reaction to the gunslinger, which was one of dislike.
In the intervening time I have done two play tests with the class, and I did post some thought on it.
Here is a link to my thoughts on the gunslinger. "my thoughts on the ultimate combat classes especially the gunslinger."
I am sure I am not going to say something that was not said before and with more eloquence.
Now while I still don’t particularly like the class, I have at least taken the time to play test it and I have tried to objectively look at the rules and the class.
From a GM’s perspective and a rules perspective, I don’t think the Gunslinger will wreck one of my campaigns.
From a player’s perspective, I found the gunslinger to be a disappointment. The 11 gp a shot I found to be cost prohibitive. While I liked the grit mechanic, I found at level 1 and level 4 the only thing I wanted to spend my character’s grit on was Deadeye.
I am sure the developers will do a good job at working on the class.
One thing I do like is that the people at Paizo are willing to take a risk put out stuff they are developing and they let us work on the stuff.
Another thing I like about Golaron’ Paizo’s world is that it is Sand box like, or rather there are lots of sandboxes next to each other.
If you want “Thundar the barbarian” or “expedition to the Barrier Peaks, “ or “Eberron” styled War forged, you have Numeria.
If you want Dinosaurs you have the Mwangi expance.
If you want “Gothic Horror” you have Ustalav.
If you want a “game of Thrones “ style campaign you have Brevoy.
If you want a “war time “ type campaign you have Nirmathas and Molthume.
If you like psionics and an Indian styled setting, there is Vudra.
If you like Samurai’s ninjas Monks, etc, a more “eastern” styled setting, there is Tien Xian.
If you want guns you have the Mana wastes and the Dutchy of Alkenstar.
While I may not like or want everything on that list, I realize that Paizo has to reach a wide audience. So in short I think there is something there for everyone.
It is a matter of taste. Just as some people like psionics, and others don’t (game mechanics, feels to Sci fi etc) I think there are some people who like having guns in their fantasy setting, and others who don’t ( don’t like game mechanics, gunslinge feels too western etc).
While guns aren’t my cup of tea, I by no means would want to begrudge someone else their guns because they find them fun and they like them.
Lastblack knight, I do hope that, while I am expressing my opionon I am not coming across as rude, nor disrespectful of others on these boards who happen to have a different opinion. I am not sure if you post is directed at me or someone else.
If I was at a Pathfinder Society Organized Play game, and someone showed up with a Gunslinger, I wouldn’t do nor say anything to the other player at the table. Also if I were GMing a PFS table, I wouldn’t single out nor “pick on” the player at my table running a gunslinger. Most likely I would ask him about the class, and how he put his character together, and I would probably ask him some questions about the rules. As a GM I would do my best to be a fair and balanced arbitrator of the rules, and I feel it would be my responsibility to see that a good game is run, and that everyone at the table, Players, and the GM alike are having a good time.
Anyways I wish the Developers good luck with everything, and I will move on to other threads.
|
A lot of well thought stuff, among them, this...
Another thing I like about Golaron’ Paizo’s world is that it is Sand box like, or rather there are lots of sandboxes next to each other.
If you want “Thundar the barbarian” or “expedition to the Barrier Peaks, “ or “Eberron” styled War forged, you have Numeria.
If you want Dinosaurs you have the Mwangi expance.
If you want “Gothic Horror” you have Ustalav.
If you want a “game of Thrones “ style campaign you have Brevoy.
If you want a “war time “ type campaign you have Nirmathas and Molthume.
If you like psionics and an Indian styled setting, there is Vudra.
If you like Samurai’s ninjas Monks, etc, a more “eastern” styled setting, there is Tien Xian.
If you want guns you have the Mana wastes and the Dutchy of Alkenstar.
While I may not like or want everything on that list, I realize that Paizo has to reach a wide audience. So in short I think there is something there for everyone.
Agreed. Well said sir!
|
|
Arim, Thank you.
Oh and i almost forgot.
If you like a more "traditional" fantasy area where there are ancient wizard overlords, who are trying to re awaken and take over the world....there is Varisia.
I hadn't thought of Brevoy as "Game of Thrones!" Good call!
And if you want a Crusades type campaign, there is always Last Wall or Mendev.
|
|
Thank you Arim,
I think i remember James Jacobs suggesting that Brevoy was supposed to be like russia mixed with westros, but I'm not sure where he posted that on these message boards.
Perhaps i should listen to my own post and go lurk elsewhere.
and yeah I had forgotten about Mendev and the crusaders. The module Paizo wrote set in Mendev was excellent. What was it called? "the Demon within"? something like that.
I think that what people are upset about is that adding too much "alternate" world material into a game system that has traditionally been Sword & Sorcery style might mutate the game beyond recognition, turning it into another Gamma World, RIFTS or Shadowrun.
Personally, I am supportive of any GM who runs a campaign based on his own ideas of how the world should work. Having guns, light sabers, spaceships and zeppelins are all well and good for a personal campaign that is tailored to them, but I think it would an error for Paizo to make such things a large part of a core rules set or of the "Official" campaign world.
Releasing such things in a splat book for alternate settings would be ok.
Having a sandbox world is cool, but if there is too much crap in your sandbox, then you have a litter box.
Very few want to play in the litter box.
|
|
LastBlack night, thank you for your kind words.
I do hope the developers change the name Gunslinger to something like Musketeer, and that they change Grit to Panache, or something like that.
Type2 demon you bring up a very good point. I happen to agree with you.
and i find your comment about a litter box to be very amusing. ha ha.
|
|
Releasing such things in a splat book for alternate settings would be okay.
More than anything, I was surprised to find a Gunslinger class would be in Ultimate Combat. I expected it in the Pathfinder Chronicles line in an Alkenstar setting book. That way, whether to use it in PFS (or any campaign) could be completely compartmentalized by the designer/developer. As it is (in Ultimate Combat), all of these have to be accepted and expected in the PFS Organized Play system.
Releasing such things in a splat book for alternate settings would be okay.More than anything, I was surprised to find a Gunslinger class would be in Ultimate Combat. I expected it in the Pathfinder Chronicles line in an Alkenstar setting book. That way, whether to use it in PFS (or any campaign) could be completely compartmentalized by the designer/developer. As it is (in Ultimate Combat), all of these have to be accepted and expected in the PFS Organized Play system.
you can have a guy shoot lightning out of his hands but a gun is overboard? You can turn into a dragon but a pistol is crazy talk?
Besides, guns were in the first Inner Sea guide. they've been in the Pathfinder universe from the beginning.
Releasing such things in a splat book for alternate settings would be okay.More than anything, I was surprised to find a Gunslinger class would be in Ultimate Combat. I expected it in the Pathfinder Chronicles line in an Alkenstar setting book. That way, whether to use it in PFS (or any campaign) could be completely compartmentalized by the designer/developer. As it is (in Ultimate Combat), all of these have to be accepted and expected in the PFS Organized Play system.
What about people that don't buy the setting stuff? You publish that on the Alkenstar book and I, for instance, would have to go buy that book just for the class when I don't even play in Golarion.
you can have a guy shoot lightning out of his hands but a gun is overboard? You can turn into a dragon but a pistol is crazy talk?Besides, guns were in the first Inner Sea guide. they've been in the Pathfinder universe from the beginning.
That's why they call it a "fantasy role playing game". Lightning and dragons, that is. Guns fit mostly in science fiction and modern settings. Or in the case of weapons like this a historical setting. No reason you can't mix the two, fantasy and science fiction, of course.
Ultimate Magic is not a Golarion specific book. That's why the surprise that it wasn't in a setting specific book like, logically enough, Alkenstar. It doesn't really bother me that it is in the book, it's just a part that I won't use in my own homebrew setting. No big deal, and probably an interesting read anyway.
you can have a guy shoot lightning out of his hands but a gun is overboard? You can turn into a dragon but a pistol is crazy talk?Besides, guns were in the first Inner Sea guide. they've been in the Pathfinder universe from the beginning.
That's why they call it a "fantasy role playing game". Lightning and dragons, that is. Guns fit mostly in science fiction and modern settings. Or in the case of weapons like this a historical setting. No reason you can't mix the two, fantasy and science fiction, of course.
Ultimate Magic is not a Golarion specific book. That's why the surprise that it wasn't in a setting specific book like, logically enough, Alkenstar. It doesn't really bother me that it is in the book, it's just a part that I won't use in my own homebrew setting. No big deal, and probably an interesting read anyway.
No, guns are fantasy.
Go on.
Prove me wrong.
No, guns are fantasy.Go on.
Prove me wrong.
As I said, there's no reason you can't mix the two (science fiction and fantasy).
Well, I'll take the bait, you must feel like expounding on it :)
Let's see... guns have some basis in reality, magic, not so much. You can posit fantastic guns of course, its a staple of science fiction, but there are real guns. You can imagine some fairly unusual guns, but your imagined weapon has some basis in the real thing. No matter how much you posit magic, you're not too likely to run across the real thing outside of a stage magician's act and that's not the same "magic", is it?
Then there's "science-fantasy" which I've always thought of as SF with unlikely science :D In the broadest sense you can fantasize about anything of course, so have at it PC.
No, guns are fantasy.Go on.
Prove me wrong.
As I said, there's no reason you can't mix the two (science fiction and fantasy).
Well, I'll take the bait, you must feel like expounding on it :)
Let's see... guns have some basis in reality, magic, not so much. You can posit fantastic guns of course, its a staple of science fiction, but there are real guns. You can imagine some fairly unusual guns, but your imagined weapon has some basis in the real thing. No matter how much you posit magic, you're not too likely to run across the real thing outside of a stage magician's act and that's not the same "magic", is it?
Then there's "science-fantasy" which I've always thought of as SF with unlikely science :D In the broadest sense you can fantasize about anything of course, so have at it PC.
Well, I don't know about science fantasy and where you draw the line between science fiction and fantasy, so sticking as purely as I can to fantasy here's my Fantasy with Guns list, feel free to add to it if anyone knows something I don't.
-The Dark Tower series, and yeah this is fantasy rather than science fiction in my book-The Temeraire books, think Napoleonic Wars+Dragons if you don't know about them
-Almost every, or maybe every if the first one had guns anywhere, Final Fantasy game
-The Wheel of Time, in the form of Cannons at least
-The Dresden Files, modern fantasy is still fantasy rather than science fiction
-The Coldfire Trilogy
-Fullmetal Alchemist, and I'm sure dozens of other Anime/Manga that I've never heard about.
-And probably anything Steampunk, but at least the game Arcanum:Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura which I've played.
I'm sure there's many other examples but I can't think of any to add. Anyways, this list is just to show that some people's view of fantasy can include guns, and not everyone's fantasy includes lightning and dragons. There's plenty of fantasy with room for all or even none of the above, which is why I think guns make perfect sense for adding to a generic, non-world specific book, just like it makes perfect sense to have ninjas and samurais in there despite the fact that plenty of people's fantasy doesn't include specifically "Oriental" flavored classes.
No, guns are fantasy.Go on.
Prove me wrong.
As I said, there's no reason you can't mix the two (science fiction and fantasy).
Well, I'll take the bait, you must feel like expounding on it :)
Let's see... guns have some basis in reality, magic, not so much. You can posit fantastic guns of course, its a staple of science fiction, but there are real guns. You can imagine some fairly unusual guns, but your imagined weapon has some basis in the real thing. No matter how much you posit magic, you're not too likely to run across the real thing outside of a stage magician's act and that's not the same "magic", is it?
Then there's "science-fantasy" which I've always thought of as SF with unlikely science :D In the broadest sense you can fantasize about anything of course, so have at it PC.
How is that different from swords, bows, sheilds? These are real things how is it that this is different for guns?
Primitive firearms are not a big deal in fantasy setting (but do not really belong in a Sword & Sorcery setting).
One of the big problems with using guns in a d20 based game is that the system suffers a sharp decline in realism when trying to show the effects of any gun that can fire more than once before needing reloading.
Lots of rules tweeks are needed to make guns realistic.
Consider a modern war vet with combat experience.
He's probably 10th level by Pathfinder standards.
In real life, 1 bullet from a master sniper or 1 bullet from a 13 yr old street punk with a zip gun would kill him equally dead if he was hit in the chest.
In Pathfinder rules, You would have to empty the magazine of an M-16 six times into his chest just to get him down to half hit points...not very realistic.
To make guns realistic in pathfinder you would have to ramp up the damage they do to a level that would make a wand of lightning bolts look like a pea shooter. If you give this type of firepower to a first level character, you will seriously unbalance a traditional campaign.
Better to play D20 Modern or another game that is gun centric with the appropriate rules rather than try to force Pathfinder into the same mold.
Primitive firearms are not a big deal in fantasy setting (but do not really belong in a Sword & Sorcery setting).
One of the big problems with using guns in a d20 based game is that the system suffers a sharp decline in realism when trying to show the effects of any gun that can fire more than once before needing reloading.
Lots of rules tweeks are needed to make guns realistic.
Consider a modern war vet with combat experience.
He's probably 10th level by Pathfinder standards.In real life, 1 bullet from a master sniper or 1 bullet from a 13 yr old street punk with a zip gun would kill him equally dead if he was hit in the chest.
In Pathfinder rules, You would have to empty the magazine of an M-16 six times into his chest just to get him down to half hit points...not very realistic.
To make guns realistic in pathfinder you would have to ramp up the damage they do to a level that would make a wand of lightning bolts look like a pea shooter. If you give this type of firepower to a first level character, you will seriously unbalance a traditional campaign.
Better to play D20 Modern or another game that is gun centric with the appropriate rules rather than try to force Pathfinder into the same mold.
Actually, it would be really easy to stat a modern war vet as a 2nd, even 3rd level character if you keep a few things in mind. First, 6th level is the superhuman cut off point. At that point every fighter is firing two aimed arrows and moving 30ft in 6 seconds, more if he has rapid shot/multishot. With max ranks in a skill they can jump higher and further than any human in existence, craft the greatest works with ease, heal wounds, follow tracks, and climb surfaces that are incredibly difficult, and otherwise are above and beyond the limits of human possibility.
If you consider it that way, 5th level represents the pinnacle of human existence. At 5th level you have Albert Einstein or Newton for science, Michael Jordan, Pele or Muhammad Ali for sports, Clausewitz or Sun Tzu for strategy, Mozart or Shakespeare for the arts, and other world famous, once in a generation figures. 4th level is an "average" Olympic athlete or similarly influential figure who is one of the best in the world at their field, but not someone who will be remembered through the ages. 3rd level are really accomplished, maybe top 5-10%, while 2nd is slightly below that and 1st level is everyone else.
You don't have to look at it that way of course, but to me it makes sense that reality breaks down for characters at 6th levels and up if you notice that the current limits of humanity seem to be paralleled roughly by the abilities of a 5th level character.
Well, I don't know about science fantasy and where you draw the line between science fiction and fantasy, so sticking as purely as I can to fantasy here's my Fantasy with Guns list, feel free to add to it if anyone knows something I don't.
-The Dark Tower series, and yeah this is fantasy rather than science fiction in my book
-The Temeraire books, think Napoleonic Wars+Dragons if you don't know about them
-Almost every, or maybe every if the first one had guns anywhere, Final Fantasy game
-The Wheel of Time, in the form of Cannons at least
-The Dresden Files, modern fantasy is still fantasy rather than science fiction
-The Coldfire Trilogy
-Fullmetal Alchemist, and I'm sure dozens of other Anime/Manga that I've never heard about.
-And probably anything Steampunk, but at least the game Arcanum:Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura which I've played.I'm sure there's many other examples but I can't think of any to add. Anyways, this list is just to show that some people's view of fantasy can include guns, and not everyone's fantasy includes lightning and dragons. There's plenty of fantasy with room for all or even none of the above, which is why...
*sigh* Like I said, there is no reason you can't mix guns with magic (or science fiction with fantasy if you like). You've given any number of examples. Good. I'm familiar with most of them and many others besides. There are numerous genres / categories for fantasy and science fiction. Guns don't fit every setting and neither does magic. Some can take both. All I did was invite Professor Cirno to expound on his statement...
How is that different from swords, bows, sheilds? These are real things how is it that this is different for guns?
I didn't say it was. The comparison was guns vs. magic in any event. Magic is often mixed with swords etc. (swords and sorcery) but more rarely with guns / gunpowder weapons (although obviously it can be done). The point about the relative grounding of guns and magic in reality was made for the sake of allowing Professor Cirno to expound his point. I've rendered my opinion on the effects guns have on a game. Their place in that game depends on the desired setting / style. They are appropriate for some and not so much for others.
You forgot about Final Fantasy.
If you need a movie, there's Final Fantasy: Advent Children. Swords, magic, and guns all combined. Looks like it works to me.
You forgot about Final Fantasy.
If you need a movie, there's Final Fantasy: Advent Children. Swords, magic, and guns all combined. Looks like it works to me.
No, idilippy mentioned Final Fantasy and yes, I've seen Advent Children and the Spirit Within as well as pretty much every FF game. And yes, it certainly works in that setting(s). FF is not every setting.