|
Rules need to be added for firearms crafted from adamintine, Mithril or Noquel. Perhaps adamintine firearms could have their misfire chances lowered and thier misfire explosion chances halved or removed.
I don't know what the Dev's should do about mithril fire arms except lowering the weight of the firearm.
I have no clue about Noquel since the Dev's have not put out any information on it.
SOme rules need to be added for Sliver bullets and bullets made of other metals.
Just somemore grist for the mill.
Rules need to be added for firearms crafted from adamintine, Mithril or Noquel. Perhaps adamintine firearms could have their misfire chances lowered and thier misfire explosion chances halved or removed.
I don't know what the Dev's should do about mithril fire arms except lowering the weight of the firearm.
I have no clue about Noquel since the Dev's have not put out any information on it.
SOme rules need to be added for Sliver bullets and bullets made of other metals.
Just somemore grist for the mill.
Typically for ranged weapons, special materials is covered in the ammunition. I believe the same will be said of guns.
|
The rules work fine for firearms made of other materials. I personally don't think there SHOULD be an exception for misfires made of any particular metal, otherwise that would mean that ALL users would eventually only ever be using skymetal guns which while being rare in the case that they are firearms, are doubly (If not more so) rare because of the incredible rarity of the metal itself.
The pricing for ammo works the same as it does for arrows, shuriken, and bolts, you pay the price it would cost for any other weapon over the stacks you have to buy it in, in this case in single stacks. In this case they are purchased at the ammo price of 60g for adamantine, 2g for silver, 500g per pound of weight for mithral, & double the normal cost for cold iron bullets.
At the point you are spending 6k for a mundane weapon -- yeah I'll be nice and drop a point off your misfire chance... or I'll give you one of the following options:
Same misfire 5 more feet on your range increment (more powder can be withstood for longer shots),
OR
Same misfire increase damage some (again more powder = bigger hurt since there is more energy behind the shot).
|
|
I think this comes more with the nature that people don't buy the fact that any kind of skymetal can simply break from something short of an intentional attempt to destroy it or some MAJOR effect (Usually magical) interacting specifically with the weapon. The same can be said about even steel shuriken, there is NO reason to assume they are expended when thrown but by RAW they do so as to keep granularity and consistency of the game system.
For example, if slings & bows of any kind could be made from metal would you then give it the same treatment?
Sorry if I jump middle thread.. but what noquel and skymetal are?
|
|
Skymetal is just the grouping description for any kind of exotic metal not native to the planet (Typically in this case Golarion). Adamantine and Noqual are the only two we currently have stats for although there is another (As yet unnamed) one that will be making an appearance in the upcoming "Dungeons of Golarion" Pathfinder Chronicles book that is part of the giant alien ship that crashed in Numeria.
Noqual and other skymetals are covered in this article if you are interested.
Noqual has something which remembers me Oerhblood, color included :)
Well, I hope there will be a non-setting compendium for this stuff one day.
Thank you for your answer (sorry for the derail, OP).
Considering admantine armor provides DR, I think decreasing the misfire by 1 is not bad. Effectively, this just offsets the increase from paper cartridges in early fireames and has no reall effect in advanced firearms.
Alternatively, you can have the firearm's hardness subtract from any explosion damage, since the weapon can take more punishment.
I don't see a harder metal increasing the craftsmanship of the gun to reduce misfiring, it doesn't misfire because the iron is breaking, it's just a harder more durable gun. The overloading gunpowder is an interesting idea, but in the end I think i'd expect a magic enhancement to reduce misfire, magic can do anything.
On the other hand, pistol whipping golems, that's a good use of an adamantine gun.
Guns don't really misfire because their metal is fragile - they misfire because of the complexity of their mechanisms. It would not make sense if that weren't the case, because Quick Clear lets you fix a misfired gun in a jiff, the equivalent to unjamming a gun.
However, I have always felt that masterwork guns should have a lower misfire chance. Masterwork quality indicates superior craftsmanship, so it would seem to make sense.
Guns don't really misfire because their metal is fragile - they misfire because of the complexity of their mechanisms. It would not make sense if that weren't the case, because Quick Clear lets you fix a misfired gun in a jiff, the equivalent to unjamming a gun.
However, I have always felt that masterwork guns should have a lower misfire chance. Masterwork quality indicates superior craftsmanship, so it would seem to make sense.
Well most misfires are also simply a failure to fire, which is easily fixed (so to speak) -- not the "OMG you broke your gun and it will EXPLODE if you do this again" bs that we currently have.
The exploding tendencies of firearms are almost completely limited to extremely complex guns (such as wheel-lock pepperboxes) or cannon with inexperienced crews.
|
|
Guns don't really misfire because their metal is fragile - they misfire because of the complexity of their mechanisms. It would not make sense if that weren't the case, because Quick Clear lets you fix a misfired gun in a jiff, the equivalent to unjamming a gun.
However, I have always felt that masterwork guns should have a lower misfire chance. Masterwork quality indicates superior craftsmanship, so it would seem to make sense.
Well most misfires are also simply a failure to fire, which is easily fixed (so to speak) -- not the "OMG you broke your gun and it will EXPLODE if you do this again" bs that we currently have.
The exploding tendencies of firearms are almost completely limited to extremely complex guns (such as wheel-lock pepperboxes) or cannon with inexperienced crews.
I disagree, based wholly on the fact that the only weapons that can misfire are the ones that are (Of modern standard) made with early designs, shallow mechanics, and rudimentary design. If you jam a single shot pistol, then reload it with the jam still in place, and fire it again you are ASKING for trouble. I cannot assume anything less than destroying the flint, hammer, or trigger mechanism. Yeah it may not be as dangerous as the rules may suggest but that is more for flavor and to add an element of legitimate danger to any untrained user from just picking it up and using it at the -4 penalty to hit touch AC.
I disagree, based wholly on the fact that the only weapons that can misfire are the ones that are (Of modern standard) made with early designs, shallow mechanics, and rudimentary design. If you jam a single shot pistol, then reload it with the jam still in place, and fire it again you are ASKING for trouble. I cannot assume anything less than destroying the flint, hammer, or trigger mechanism. Yeah it may not be as dangerous as the rules may suggest but that is more for flavor and to add an element of legitimate danger to any untrained user from just picking it up and using it at the -4 penalty to hit touch AC.
hm... I'm not sure we are talking the same thing...
Most misfires were simply the spark not 'touching off' the powder. As such you would simply fire again without reloading.
Several guns were designed very early on in a manner similar to the 'firestorm' caseless ammunition systems of modern times:
That is you would simply load in several shots in the same barrel and fire multiple times.
Anyway about it designing an iron/steel weapon out of adamantine would greatly reduce the chances of it ever exploding since the materials would control and resist such an explosion much better.
|
|
hm... I'm not sure we are talking the same thing...
Most misfires were simply the spark not 'touching off' the powder. As such you would simply fire again without reloading.
Several guns were designed very early on in a manner similar to the 'firestorm' caseless ammunition systems of modern times:
That is you would simply load in several shots in the same barrel and fire multiple times.
Anyway about it designing an iron/steel weapon out of adamantine would greatly reduce the chances of it ever exploding since the materials would control and resist such an explosion much better.
That is not the case, when you misfire the ammo is still expended and with no ammo in the gun you cannot fire it. Check the misfire rules again.
That is not the case, when you misfire the ammo is still expended and with no ammo in the gun you cannot fire it. Check the misfire rules again.
Carbon I'm not talking about the rules in this case -- I'm talking about actual misfires from black powder weapons.
|
|
Oh, ok.
Yeah but the case you are arguing I wouldn't so much call a misfire as I would call it a dud. A misfire implies something mechanically went wrong with the shot that caused the ammunition to be caught, only partially fired, or when the powder doesn't immediately fire when shot. Any of these can and are potentially hazardous to the firearm.
Additionally, the typical black powder weapons (Not advanced firearms) that are represented mechanically are MUCH simpler than even the most rudimentary of modern black powder shotguns or rifles we use today. In fact with the exception of collectors, and the like the kind of weapons that the typical gunslinger would use (Or start off using at the least) are illegal in most states for the fact that they are not fully safe to operate.
Well I would suggest that "dud" is incorrect in this case since "dud" tells you the round was no good -- a "misfire" is so named because the fire missed the flashpan (or spark from the flint which amounts to the same).
Honestly the only way to actually make a firearm explode is either to double load a jam (like you pointed out) or to use entirely too much powder for the barrel.
"Normal" operation of any firearm isn't going to cause the thing to catastrophically blown up on you.
Cannons had the problems of being bronze, having hidden defects, and people not understanding how much powder to use, and finally of having powders of different effectiveness.
While I am aware that the material really wouldn't affect the misfire chance, it should protect you from suffering damage if your firearm blows up.
Typically such a case is the result of a pop-no-bang. That is a bullet that misfires and gets stuck in the barrel. Fire again, and the barrel will likely explode.
That situation should not occur with an early firearm. So, the only other option is to view a misfire as having dammaged the weapon in some way (likely using to much powder). In that case the material should matter.
Personally, I think an exploding firearm should deal damage to itself first and any remaining damage to the person holding it. Still, I can see why they went the way they did.