|
Hi, I am getting ready to start using Golarion in my campaigns, however there is one thing I really don't like about Golarion, and that is the use of firearms.
I want my games to have a stronger fantasy feel to them that I don't feel guns have. How much of the campaign world (I have yet to buy it) would I have to alter to eliminate guns from Golarion? I am all for replacing them with crossbows or bows in the regions that have them.
Thanks in advance,
Terek
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Almost none. There's only one nation whose background is tied to the firearms (Alkenstar). To my knowledge, there isn't any NPC in any AP who uses guns or are there guns as treasure. There might be in Skulls and Shackles, since a certain Pirate Lord has a magical gun and a ship outfitted with canons, but it's the only one in Golarion.
They aren't very common. They came about in one magic dead area and they tend not to be exported. Keeping them for home defense.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Golaron has a kind of kitchen sink design philosophy. There is a bit of everything in the setting. The “core “ areas such as Varisia, and the Inner Sea have a strong “sword and Sorcery” feel to them. When you begin to get further away from these regions you begin to have more variation.
For example, North of Varisia, you have the Land of the Linorm Kings, where the Ulfen live (Vikings).
To the east of the Vikins is the land of Irissien. It is a land locked in eternal winter and ruled by frost witches.
To the East of that region lies the “land of the Mammoth Lords”. If you want your Pleistocene large mega fauna……Woolly Mammoths Wooly Rhinos etc there they are .
To the east of this region is the World Wound. It is a rent in the fabric of the world that leads into the Abyss. Out of this tear pours an endless hoard of Demons. To counter these screaming mass of demons, you have the crusader kingdom of Mendev.
To the south of the world wound and Mendev, you have a nation reminiscent of “expedition to the barrier peaks” Numeria. There you have a crashed spaship, and strange technological monstrosities.
There is also a horror themed area called Ustalav.
If you like Dinosaurs there is the Jungles of the Mwangi Expasne..
and yes there is the Magic Dead Mana wastes where they have the Grand Duchy of Alkenstar…they have guns there.
Oh I almost forgot Vudra its “off the map” and an Indian Themed area…if you like Psionics they come from that region.
So in short, you can use what you want. Like you I also happen to dislike guns, so they can stay in the mana wastes, and I don’t have to use them. I think Goloron was designed like this, so that everybody has something they like to play with, but nobody has to play with everything.
Exactly, Pathfinder/Golarion is most most definately a "if you don't like - don't use it" sort of place.
Unless your entire campaign is set in the mana wastes, you have nothing to worry about, firearms are subject to DM fiat anyway.
|
|
In another thread on this topic, one poster had a good idea that stated that guns only worked reliably in null magic zones when he GM’ed Golarion. In areas where magic exists, the alchemy and fire involved with operation with firearms goes wild and makes guns either a useless or suicidal option. Unless you’re in Alkenstar.
Hope this helps :)
Magical sweatshops mass producing golems is ok but not a gun.
Wands that fire off magic 'bullets' that always hit their target is ok but not a gun.
Gnomes that can create mechanical servants out of of scrap metal are ok but not a gun.
Alchemists that can create bombs and explosives are ok except if they use that explosive to shoot a piece of lead out of a tube.
Not telling you how to run your game but the basic Pathfinder isn't anywhere near a "stronger fantasy experience."
|
|
Xabulba- it is a kitchen sink....you can take what you want and discard what you don't want.
If you want and like guns by all means, they can be everywhere....in the UC, they have the fire arm rules, and if you want the guns to be common, you simply drop their price, and allow advanced fire arms like revolvers.
As for "magical Sweatshops mass producing Golems, Perhaps you are refering to the Aradoc family in Kaer Maga? As much as i like Kaer Maga, In my home game I would have those golems, individually crafted, not mass produced.
I happen to dislike Numeria and its "clockwork Spawn" so as far as i am concerned, in my home games, the red redoubt of karamos outside of Absolom doesn't exist. and what rumbles about in numeria stays there.
in my home games gnomes can't create mechanical servants, but if they wish to use an "unseen servant," i have no problem with that.
Alchemists, in general i find distasteful....if my players want to play one....well all right. its their personal magic the alchemsit is bottling and drinking, and their personal magic that is augmenting their "toys".
oh and one last thought..i have never envisioned a wand of "maggic Missle" to launch projectiles, just magical force energy ( whatever that is).
The published materiel is there for a larger audience, with a broad range of tastes. you can take what you want and discard what you don't.
Magical sweatshops mass producing golems is ok but not a gun.
Wands that fire off magic 'bullets' that always hit their target is ok but not a gun.
Gnomes that can create mechanical servants out of of scrap metal are ok but not a gun.
Alchemists that can create bombs and explosives are ok except if they use that explosive to shoot a piece of lead out of a tube.Not telling you how to run your game but the basic Pathfinder isn't anywhere near a "stronger fantasy experience."
My apologies about my previous post, it came out as an attack and I'm sorry if it angered anyone. I waited too long in my decision to delete it and now it's there for good.
I have a player who wanted to play a gunslinger, and I let him, but under the caveat that we're using the "guns are virtually nonexistant" version of the rules. This worked well with his idea that he dropped through a wormhole from the Wild West.
Sure, there's rumors about some boomsticks in Alkenstar, but nobody anywhere knows what a gun is or anything; they figure they're some kinda weird magic item.
Not really gamebreaking, since he has to craft all his own ammo. Which reminds me of a question about crafting powder and bullets I want to ask in another thread ...
|
I have a player who wanted to play a gunslinger, and I let him, but under the caveat that we're using the "guns are virtually nonexistant" version of the rules.
This works really well when considering the whole scope of Golarion. Outside of Alkenstar, as gbonehead said, no one knows really what a gun is. I believe that something less than twenty are made in a year, yet Alkenstar can make exponentially increase their production in times of war for territory defense.
I don't like guns either in a fantasy setting. I run with the "guns are virtually nonexistent" rule listed in the Ultimate Combat supplement. One player is interested in a gunslinger in my group and I've told him no and told him why. He understood my reasoning and elected to play a craft-mage instead.
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --Ekralc C. Ruhtra
Ha.... Nice one.
Seriously though. You're the DM, and like people have said, if you don't want it in your game, just hand wave it off. Basically it's the "This is MY version of Golarion. I don't answer to the Gods designs... The gods answer to ME."
Thematically speaking I can understand the PoV of the many people who dislike guns in a fantasy setting. Mechanically speaking they are underpowered compared to stuff like bows and the gunslinger class is extremely tied in powerlevel to the kind of firearms allowed in game (for example uless your GM allows advanced firearms you basically can't shot more than once per turn even at lvl 20 unless you try some really weird firearms withpretty huge downsides...)
|
|
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --Ekralc C. Ruhtra
So that is who said that quote. I thought it was Arthur C Clark.
I happen to be a big fan of Babylon 5, and the Techno mages...."Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --
I dont mind guns, as long as they are in a "pirates of the Caribean" themed setting. Now the Shackles may be a region like that.
However thematically speaking, I don't feel they fit into what is my concept of a "traditional" fantasy setting To me Plate mail and guns don't mix. Its much the same as people saying Psionics feels to Sci Fi for them, and has no place in a fantasy setting.
Each to his own. But then that is the genius of Golaron. you take what you want and leave the rest.
Oh Xabulba, no worries. I think i wrote the post at 1:00 am. I was probably a little tired and cranky. so i hope i didn't come across to sharply.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I don't have a problem with guns in Golarion or my game. But the character must hail from Alkenstar and I make building a gun a much harder DC to create due to chance of explosion.
In my Mendev crusade campaign, the party had to intercept a cultist trying to bring a cannon into the Worldwound. The demons wanted to replicate the technology and use the cannons to destroy the wardstones on the border. Sure the party received a cannon, but it only had enough powder for 3 shots.
|
Pretty much what has been said above is true. Your map of Golarion could really end at the confines of the country you are playing in. I might also suggest you can rip your favorite country (countries) right out of the map and build a new map around it. If you like Steampunk, I would just rip Alkenstar out of the map and put it in a Steampunk world. If you like Cyberpunk, rip out Numeria and build a new map around it.
These themes are all varied and almost exclusive individually on their own like a toolbox. If you are looking for a cohesive world where everything is built to some pecking order than I think you missed the point of what Paizo was going for. Paizo doesn't think in the "big sense" because their stories revolve around regions that are tied to a theme.
As for me, my next story will feature undead and a lot of shootin' within the Mana Wastes.
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --Ekralc C. Ruhtra
So that is who said that quote. I thought it was Arthur C Clark.I happen to be a big fan of Babylon 5, and the Techno mages...."Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --
I dont mind guns, as long as they are in a "pirates of the Caribean" themed setting. Now the Shackles may be a region like that.
However thematically speaking, I don't feel they fit into what is my concept of a "traditional" fantasy setting To me Plate mail and guns don't mix. Its much the same as people saying Psionics feels to Sci Fi for them, and has no place in a fantasy setting.
Each to his own. But then that is the genius of Golaron. you take what you want and leave the rest.
Oh Xabulba, no worries. I think i wrote the post at 1:00 am. I was probably a little tired and cranky. so i hope i didn't come across to sharply.
You do realize that in the real world, plate armor only came into existence after guns? Not only that, but plate armor was developed in response to guns?
The existence of guns (albiet those of a primative type) in a medieval setting is far less of an anachronsism than most peope think.
Thematically speaking I can understand the PoV of the many people who dislike guns in a fantasy setting. Mechanically speaking they are underpowered compared to stuff like bows and the gunslinger class is extremely tied in powerlevel to the kind of firearms allowed in game (for example uless your GM allows advanced firearms you basically can't shot more than once per turn even at lvl 20 unless you try some really weird firearms withpretty huge downsides...)
Thematically, the GM has the option of allowing or banning firearms based on the setting. For some people, it violates their "suspension of disbelief" in a "late medieval" setting, even though firearms and gunpowder artillery were developed about the same time as plate armor in Europe (i.e., late-1200s to early-1300s). For others, they feel uncomfortable mixing fantasy ("magic") and sci-fi ("technology") elements; firearms are too "high-tech" for their tastes. However, D&D has always had crossover elements (i.e., the Greyhawk quasi-deity Murlynd and his .45 caliber revolvers, the crashed spaceship and super science of S3 Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, etc.) because the pulp novels that inspired the game often had such crossover elements. Some RPGs (RIFTS and Shadowrun, to name a couple), actually make both magic and technology central elements to the game and the setting.
Mechanically, firearms are not as poor as you are making them out to be. Granted, they are not in the same overall power level as the composite longbow (which is perhaps the best weapon in the game from a DPR standpoint), but the ability to target touch AC and/or make an area of effect attack (depending on weapon and ammunition) without spellcasting (not to mention various tricks available through gunslinger deeds and grit feats) provide firearms with a viable niche (IMO).
Rapid Reload + alchemical cartridges = free action to reload a one-handed firearm. Weapon cords are cheap substitutes for gloves of storing (yes, it's a swift action to retrive vs. free action and the "free" hand can't be used to make attacks with another weapon); check out some of the discussions on gunslingers getting six or more attacks per round using two double-barrelled pistols (Improved Two-Weapon Fighting + Rapid Reload + Rapid Shot). A 3rd level musket master gunslinger "can reload any two-handed firearm as if it were a one-handed firearm" with the Fast Musket deed. The increased chance of misfire with alchemical cartridges can be mitigated or eliminated with the reliable or greater reliable weapon abilities (certain gunslinger archetypes get this benefit at 13th level, as well).
When someone mentions that he doesn't like firearms in his fantasy campaign, I think it is not very helpful to point out when they were used in Earth's history. I think most people have no problem with female characters being equals to their male counterparts and being able to take on roles such as Knight, or business owner, or what have you. Isn't the mayor of Sandpoint a woman? If we were to compare this to Earth's history, this would be a huge anacronism. But we're not bothered by this because it doesn't interfere with our notions of the types of fantasy worlds we like to envision--if anything, it makes *more* sense. But, while guns might make sense, even apart from any references to Earth, for many of us, guns just don't feel right. There is no right or wrong answer to this. It is more a question of aesthetics. If you like them in your campaign, with swaggering gunslingers on every corner, ready to test their skill against anyone who looks at them sideways, that's cool. Similarly, if you disallow them entirely, that's cool, too--as long as your players know that going in.
I'm more in the latter camp. Of course, my concept of fantasy has always been heavily influenced by Tolkien more than anything else. But, as I say, to each his own. You can have ray guns and trains and sentient robots as pcs if you want--it just isn't my cup of tea. But neither way is "correct" or "incorrect."
Just my opinion. :-)
When someone mentions that he doesn't like firearms in his fantasy campaign, I think it is not very helpful to point out when they were used in Earth's history. I think most people have no problem with female characters being equals to their male counterparts and being able to take on roles such as Knight, or business owner, or what have you. Isn't the mayor of Sandpoint a woman? If we were to compare this to Earth's history, this would be a huge anacronism. But we're not bothered by this because it doesn't interfere with our notions of the types of fantasy worlds we like to envision--if anything, it makes *more* sense. But, while guns might make sense, even apart from any references to Earth, for many of us, guns just don't feel right. There is no right or wrong answer to this. It is more a question of aesthetics. If you like them in your campaign, with swaggering gunslingers on every corner, ready to test their skill against anyone who looks at them sideways, that's cool. Similarly, if you disallow them entirely, that's cool, too--as long as your players know that going in.
I'm more in the latter camp. Of course, my concept of fantasy has always been heavily influenced by Tolkien more than anything else. But, as I say, to each his own. You can have ray guns and trains and sentient robots as pcs if you want--it just isn't my cup of tea. But neither way is "correct" or "incorrect."
Just my opinion. :-)
Tolkien had bombs in Middle Earth.
My problem isn't that some people don't like guns in they're fantasy. I just don't like it when people say that firearms have no place in fantasy because they're an anachronism, which isn't true. Like when people rail and complain against the inclusion of firearms in Ultimate Combat based on that faulty premise.
Who are fantasy?
My who point was that, anacronism or no, there are valid reasons to include them or not, based on one's personal preference.
My friend, what you want is "a mash bag of many elements of European technology over the course of a thousand years except for firearms, mixed with ancient egyptian / roman / greek technology, as well as some dawn-of-man level technology."
What you don't want is "fantasy".
What's the saying? Firearms are more closely related time-line-wise to Full Plate than Rapiers are.
Who are fantasy?
My who point was that, anacronism or no, there are valid reasons to include them or not, based on one's personal preference.
I addressed that point...
I addressed that point...Who are fantasy?
My who point was that, anacronism or no, there are valid reasons to include them or not, based on one's personal preference.
So...it sounds like we agree, then. If the reason is that guns are "anachronistic," then that's not a very valid reason. If it is simply a matter of personal taste, then that's good enough. Is that what you're saying?
My who point was that, anacronism or no, there are valid reasons to include them or not, based on one's personal preference.
Indeed... what is "fantasy" but something we pull out of our imaginations? As a result Golarion is going to be at least a little bit different for ever DM out there. Make "your" Golarion whatever you want it to be.
If you don't like firearms... well, it's good that perhaps magic in your world tends to cause gunpowder to become unstable.
If you love the idea of gunning down orc legions, it's great that firearms in your world are gaining popularity amongst members of the pathfinder society and the rulers of the world are starting to ponder what they might mean for their armies... Perhaps the PCs might be hired to train an elite unit of the guard?
To quote the creed of Valdemar "There is no one true way."
Edit: Fixed a typo.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology." --Ekralc C. Ruhtra
So that is who said that quote. I thought it was Arthur C Clark.
No. Arthur C. Clark said "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic"
It's not certain who first stated the one you mentioned (though it wasn't Arthur C. Clarke spelled backwards :P), though Niven and Pratchett are candidates.
And there's "Any technology that is distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced".