Firearms huh?


Lost Omens Campaign Setting General Discussion

51 to 100 of 100 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Eugh. : p

I mean, I get why they do it, but the patchwork nature of Golarion makes my head hurt.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Welcome to the Kitchen Sink.

But seriously, Firearms are fine, generic fantasy is so bland and tasteless. I like the oddball stuff in the setting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I never had a problem with the kitchen sink and don't even really see it as unlike real world history. For example ...

At the same time the Turks were using cannons to destroy the Byzantine Empire and the Byzantines were fighting back with flamethrowers, French knights were fighting English longbowmen. At the same time Portuguese caravels were exploring the coast of Africa and beginning the age of exploration. At the same time the Chinese were sailing gigantic multi-hundred foot long ships in navies numbering in the hundreds all around Asia using tech that would have astounded Europeans. At the same time in the America's, East Indies and Australia people lived basically prehistoric hunter gatherer existences.(early modern, medieval and prehistoric all existing at the same time)

If you look at the ancient world the Romans were using water wheels to create factories to grind grain and living in cities with populations in the hundreds of thousands and in Rome's case millions at the same time Germanic barbarians only a few hundred miles away were living in huts. At the same time inventors in Alexandria were experimenting with advanced math, hydraulics, steam power and robotics in the creation of "magical" entertainments for the people.

Kitchen sink seems real to me especially on a planetary scale.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Funnily enough those Chinese ships were something that the Mediterranean world had done much earlier.


You are probably talking about Hellenistic gigantism? Yea some of that stuff was awesome.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
rgrove0172 wrote:
Im a new Pathfinder DM but a 30+ year gamer. Im loving the InnerSea and am building my campaign within it. Ill admit however that the inclusion of firearms is a big turn off. Sure, easy enough to just drop them but Im wondering how much of a problem this is for you guys? Are there that many gamers who want to include gunpowder in their fantasy setting out there to warrant its inclusion? I would have thought it a pretty rare notion.

As you can see by the profusion of gunfighter posts on this board, and the sales of Ultimate Combat, the answer is yes.

Keep in mind that the notion of fantasy with firearms isn't that new. The original Red Sonya of Rogatine, from the books of Conan, was a three flintlock wielding pirate. Also the gunslinger as fantasy, got a major boost with the popularity of Stephen King's Gunslinger series.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
R_Chance wrote:
That's pretty much it for me too. Some things fit a setting, others just don't.

I think you meant to say, "Some things fit a personal taste, others just don't."

Because, guns and whatnot fit the setting (Golarion as designed by Pazio) just fine. This is usually where contention lies when these sorts of discussions come up. It may not be for everyone, which is understandable, but it's not a setting mistake.

People often make the error of saying guns don't belong in "THE setting", when they mean to say "MY setting". Granted, there are those on the boards who actually do mean "THE setting", but those people are less reasonable.

@Abraham Spalding and Mike Franke: That's something you don't see enough of in fantasy settings - Polyremes.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes -- Every culture has done amazing things, and deserve credit and time for them... but lets not forget what Europe and the Mediterraneans have done while watching other cultures.


The Block Knight wrote:


R_Chance wrote:


That's pretty much it for me too. Some things fit a setting, others just don't.

I think you meant to say, "Some things fit a personal taste, others just don't."

Because, guns and whatnot fit the setting (Golarion as designed by Pazio) just fine. This is usually where contention lies when these sorts of discussions come up. It may not be for everyone, which is understandable, but it's not a setting mistake.

People often make the error of saying guns don't belong in "THE setting", when they mean to say "MY setting". Granted, there are those on the boards who actually do mean "THE setting", but those people are less reasonable.

No. I meant exactly what I said. That said, it's an opinion, no better or worse than yours. I wasn't referencing Golarion specifically when I referred to "a setting", but generic D&Desque fantasy settings. And for that matter my own setting. I am fully aware of it's presence in Alkenstar. Obviously it fits Golarion. Gunpowder does fit in a lot of settings, commercial or otherwise. It needs to be built in, given how it would alter the standard tropes, or "fenced off" (as in Alkenstar). Still, all imo.


Excluding settings such as arcanis, and 7th sea of course.


As mentioned by a few others, there is plenty of real historic precedence for blackpowder to exist alongside armor and melee weapons.

My personal favorite setting for a campaign has always been right around the 1700s to the 1800s. The post-Industrial Revolution-type eras are where you lose me personally, but so does the Arthinian-type eras.

I don't hate those eras, mind, they're just not my favorite.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

What I was trying to get at with my origonal post referencing the glass house with one opaque wall is this.

First, every major published setting has had guns. By this I mean greyhawk forgotten realms golarion.

2) I'm pretty sure eveey set of rules from 1st ed to pf have had rules for guns.

3) many elements of the game are contemporary of guns or preceded by them. Additionally, as I said before there are many fantasy elements that already share themes in comkon with sci fi. But no one puts their foot down over gollems and says not in my game!.

Which isn't to say they belong in every game. But their inclusion won't shatter the world. Just put them under a " I want a small essay for bg rule" and move on. If someone really wants to play one they'll do the work. Otherwise they remain rare and mysterious.

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
rgrove0172 wrote:
Im a new Pathfinder DM but a 30+ year gamer. Im loving the InnerSea and am building my campaign within it. Ill admit however that the inclusion of firearms is a big turn off. Sure, easy enough to just drop them but Im wondering how much of a problem this is for you guys? Are there that many gamers who want to include gunpowder in their fantasy setting out there to warrant its inclusion? I would have thought it a pretty rare notion.

As you can see by the profusion of gunfighter posts on this board, and the sales of Ultimate Combat, the answer is yes.

Keep in mind that the notion of fantasy with firearms isn't that new. The original Red Sonya of Rogatine, from the books of Conan, was a three flintlock wielding pirate. Also the gunslinger as fantasy, got a major boost with the popularity of Stephen King's Gunslinger series.

And let's not forget about Solomon Kane who carried a dirk, a rapier, a brace of flintlock pistols, and was given a juju staff (that turns out to be the mystical and mythical Staff of Solomon) by an African shaman.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Odraude wrote:

But but... Arthur C. Clarke told me that technology IS magic...

That liar!!!

;)

Unfortunately, in D&D it's pretty easy to tell the difference between technology and magic. One of them glows under a detect magic spell.


Abraham spalding wrote:


Excluding settings such as arcanis, and 7th sea of course.

I'm not familiar with Arcanis. 7th Sea has gunpowder baked in of course.


Blayde MacRonan wrote:
And let's not forget about Solomon Kane who carried a dirk, a rapier, a brace of flintlock pistols, and was given a juju staff (that turns out to be the mystical and mythical Staff of Solomon) by an African shaman.

The movie adaptation was pretty rad - I really need to sit down and give the books a shot :)

I especially enjoyed the Devil's Reaper looking like a live-action Norgorber :))


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mojorat wrote:


What I was trying to get at with my origonal post referencing the glass house with one opaque wall is this.

First, every major published setting has had guns. By this I mean greyhawk forgotten realms golarion.

2) I'm pretty sure eveey set of rules from 1st ed to pf have had rules for guns.

3) many elements of the game are contemporary of guns or preceded by them. Additionally, as I said before there are many fantasy elements that already share themes in comkon with sci fi. But no one puts their foot down over gollems and says not in my game!.

Which isn't to say they belong in every game. But their inclusion won't shatter the world. Just put them under a " I want a small essay for bg rule" and move on. If someone really wants to play one they'll do the work. Otherwise they remain rare and mysterious.

The rules for gunpowder weapons in pre 3E were pretty minimal after Chainmail (pre OD&D). They were there in Blackmoor ("First Fantasy Campaign"). Blackmoor had crashed starships too. 1E mentioned the arquebus iirc. Core 2E ditto. The 2E historical (green) setting books included material on them, the "A Mighty Fortress" book on 17th century Europe for example. 2E "Players Options: Tactics and Combat" had significant rules for firearms. Firearms were always around the fringe of the system. They were never considered as part of the "norm" for settings or games. Golarion has a more significant inclusion of them in the setting via Alkenstar and the Gunslinger. Pathfinder has more extensive rules for guns than prior editions of D&D (including 3.x).

Gunpowder will not "shatter" a setting. It will make for a considerably different setting. And for every gunpowder friendly or neutral setting there are others which aren't suitable. Dark ages, ancient world, Arthurian, Norse, etc.

Just because an option exists doesn't mean it has to be included in every setting. People who think things should be jammed in to an existing game on the theory "it can be done" aren't considering the effects on the setting as a whole. If you wall them off and / or keep them exotic it is far more manageable. If the setting includes gunpowder or is "under construction" it is, of course, quite reasonable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
R_Chance wrote:


Just because an option exists doesn't mean it has to be included in every setting. People hwo think things should be jammed in to an existing game on the theory "it can be done" aren't...

One could also argue that magic would have a greater impact on a setting than blackpowder and low-tech firearms.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Personally, I'm fine that they have the option to include things like Asian setting and firearms. I'd rather have the option that I can remove (which is much easier) than not have the option that I have to homebrew.


Tirisfal wrote:


R_Chance wrote:


Just because an option exists doesn't mean it has to be included in every setting. People hwo think things should be jammed in to an existing game on the theory "it can be done" aren't...

One could also argue that magic would have a greater impact on a setting than blackpowder and low-tech firearms.

Magic has a major impact. It's also one of the basic assumptions of the system and is built into it. Firearms, not so much.

The arquebus, by itself, is not a huge game changer. Cannons, explosives and more advanced firearms are certainly potentially greater agents of change.


Odraude wrote:


Personally, I'm fine that they have the option to include things like Asian setting and firearms. I'd rather have the option that I can remove (which is much easier) than not have the option that I have to homebrew.

I agree. Having options for the game is always a good thing.


Wait, are people saying Golarion is a setting full of guns?

Except for remote Alkenstar in a <heart of Africa> type location at the edge of the map, I've never seen them mentioned in an AP or sourcebook anywhere else.


Jeven wrote:


Wait, are people saying Golarion is a setting full of guns?

Except for remote Alkenstar in a <heart of Africa> type location at the edge of the map, I've never seen them mentioned in an AP or sourcebook anywhere else.

Not really. People are just commenting on the existence of them in the setting. I have referred to them as being isolated / walled off myself. I don't believe I've seen anyone state they are widespread. Just a possibility in the setting.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Blackmoor, as has been stated already, had gunpowder. But as there are those not entirely familiar with that setting, it should be noted that it wasn't the only D&D setting to include guns and gunpowder:

Grayhawk had gunpowder. In fact, the hero-god Murlynd carried a pair of 'hoglegs' that he acquired from visiting Earth (Boot Hill). His followers (read: priests) also carried firearms as well.

The Forgotten Realms had gunpowder (called smokepowder there). Khelben Blackstaff was notorious for his distrust of them and engaged in elaborate stings to confiscate it whenever he could, as it was banned in Waterdeep.

I personally have never had a problem with firearms and black powder existing side by side with magic. There were plenty of books, movies, and shows that did this and I sought to emulate that. Now, I'll readily admit that early on in my DM'ing days I didn't handle their use by my players well. Heck, I've had players simulate silo explosions using flour and flame in my games. But I've gotten better with it over the years (made easier as the rules for their inclusion have gotten better).

I don't know if I have a point really, except to say that firearms are only as bad as you allow them to be. Take a chance. You may find that they're not as bad as you think they are.


Blayde MacRonan wrote:

Blackmoor, as has been stated already, had gunpowder. But as there are those not entirely familiar with that setting, it should be noted that it wasn't the only D&D setting to include guns and gunpowder:

Grayhawk had gunpowder. In fact, the hero-god Murlynd carried a pair of 'hoglegs' that he acquired from visiting Earth (Boot Hill). His followers (read: priests) also carried firearms as well.

The Forgotten Realms had gunpowder (called smokepowder there). Khelben Blackstaff was notorious for his distrust of them and engaged in elaborate stings to confiscate it whenever he could, as it was banned in Waterdeep.

I personally have never had a problem with firearms and black powder existing side by side with magic. There were plenty of books, movies, and shows that did this and I sought to emulate that. Now, I'll readily admit that early on in my DM'ing days I didn't handle their use by my players well. Heck, I've had players simulate silo explosions using flour and flame in my games. But I've gotten better with it over the years (made easier as the rules for their inclusion have gotten better).

I don't know if I have a point really, except to say that firearms are only as bad as you allow them to be. Take a chance. You may find that they're not as bad as you think they are.

Although, from that Murlynd link
Quote:
Although Gygax did not allow the use of gunpowder in his Greyhawk setting, he made a loophole for Kaye by ruling that Murlynd actually carried two "magical wands" that made loud noises and delivered small but deadly missiles.[4] (Many years later, Gygax created a similar item called "Kaydon's Thunderous Bolters" for the Lejendary Adventures role-playing system. Gygax made it clear that these items fired their six charges using magic, not gunpowder.)

That approach lasted at least through 1st edition. I didn't pay a lot of attention to official settings in 2nd edition, so I'm not sure how broad the changes were or how firearms were used, if they were.

It also doesn't look to me like "smokepowder" was actually used for firearms.

More generally, I don't have any problems with firearms and magic (Shadowrun, anyone?) I'm not fond of firearms mixing with most of the other traditional fantasy/D&D tropes. A world where firearms exist and are effective enough to base a character around, but everyone except for a few elite specialists (PCs and elite NPC villains) use more non-firearm weapons instead just doesn't ring true to me. You pretty much need 18th century flintlock level tech to even pretend to be able to fire them fast enough to usable as a primary weapon. Even in the flintlock age, in close combat you'd fire once then draw a melee weapon because there was no way you could reload the thing before you'd be hacked apart. That was traditional pirate era combat. :)

And at that point, everyone in the west had access to guns. Not just secretive elites, but the pirates and highwaymen and average soldiers. In Golarion, one country has apparently developed centuries of military technology without any other country noticing it might be useful or being able to copy even the more primitive versions of it. But there are Gunslingers found wandering the whole world who can make guns and ammo from scratch.

A setting where blackpowder was known, but only the most primitive guns existed might be fun: firelances and early mortar/cannon type things.
So might a setting where the best firearms were flintlock level and maybe only gunslingers could fire them more than once a minute or so, but pretty much anyone could get a hold of them or of slightly earlier versions.
Granted the goblins would probably exterminate themselves in a generation, but bands of orcs able to open the ambush with a round of musket fire or kobolds firing small blunderbusses at you then disappearing back into the walls to reload? Could be fun. And deadly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It doesn't work for me, I exclude them from my game. I simply feel that don't fit and makes little sense to me. In a world with magic there is no real need to develop a gun as spells do the equal job. And there can't be some disconnect to argue that the people who could and would make guns would do so because they didn't have the capacity to learn magic....as it requires an exceptional amount of intelligence to make such a weapon which is the only requirement to learn spells in the first place.

For those that like them...more power to you. For those like me...it is incredibly easy to take them out. No harm done on either side.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kayland wrote:

It doesn't work for me, I exclude them from my game. I simply feel that don't fit and makes little sense to me. In a world with magic there is no real need to develop a gun as spells do the equal job. And there can't be some disconnect to argue that the people who could and would make guns would do so because they didn't have the capacity to learn magic....as it requires an exceptional amount of intelligence to make such a weapon which is the only requirement to learn spells in the first place.

For those that like them...more power to you. For those like me...it is incredibly easy to take them out. No harm done on either side.

Of course, the same thing could be said about pretty much any other technological development.

Many of which weren't made by individual brilliant geniuses, but by long slow incremental development.

Why develop steel, when you can just enchant iron? Why develop forging techniques for iron when you can just enchant bronze? Or stone for that matter.

Why stop at standard high-fantasy medieval/renaissance tech instead of earlier?

Mind you, if you prefer to play without guns, that's great. I do myself. But most of the arguments against it other than genre tropes and subjective preferences don't really stand up. Of course, those are perfectly valid arguments.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

As far as Gygax's proclivities are concerned, yes that's true. But the link also pointed out how the use of black powder and firearms progressed from 1st to 3.5 as well. Only Murlynd's priests used firearms with any regularity.

Ed Greenwood wrote articles in Dragon talking about black powder and smokepowder in D&D in general and the Realms in particular. Having gone back and re-read them, I'll concede to you the point that smokepowder was meant to be used in one particular way and one way only: blowing stuff up.

Gunslingers are a rarity in the Golarion setting, as usually firearms were limited to the dwarves of Alkenstar and Dongun Hold. However, outside the setting they are as common as the DM allows them to be. In my own games since I've been using Golarion, I've only had to deal with firearms a total of three times: during Legacy of Fire (the alchemist and the paladin both used them), during Skull and Shackles (pirates) and during Jade Regent (a paladin of Abadar [shieldmarshal] and his goblin deputy that are both from Alkenstar). Only one of the characters in those games was or is of the gunslinger class (the goblin). Sure, I have a player that prefers using firearms and would every chance he got if I let him. But I don't, as the I keep firearms under the core setting assumption that though they've begun to spread slowly throughout the Inner Sea, they're still emerging and not commonplace. That won't change even after I run them through Reign of Winter or Iron Gods, unless I deem otherwise.

My players accept that.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Given how expensive magic is and how it can only be made really by magic users, I could still see the common man banding together to create the technological marvels. Especially if magic is looked upon with superstition.


Of course, the real reason firearms are mostly limited to Alkenstar and occasional wandering gunslingers is so they're easily removable from the setting if you don't want them.

But it's not as unjustifiable in-world as all that: maybe nobody else wants them -- as mentioned upthread, wands of magic missile (and probably scorching ray), and so on, are probably used instead.

The real advantage of guns early on was that they were easily learned -- it took a long time, AIUI, for them to match longbows in actual effectiveness and range, and even longer to match them in rate of fire. But a good longbowman had to be trained for life, while guns could be taught to anybody comparatively quickly.

But in a world with powerful and destructive battle magic, "standard" tactics are probably focused around making the best use of a comparatively few magic users in an army of melee types, with maybe some archery support, and thus guns may not easily fit in (especially if people try to slot them into the roles of "magic types"). And battle magic is powerful enough that it may mask the weaknesses of this "standard" method.

Alkenstar is different because it's in a magic-unfriendly region. But if the Alkenstarians get gun tech a bit farther, if they get cheap mass produced guns or faster firing weapons, things will change.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Guns were invented in a dead/wild magic zone on Golarion. Having something powerful that was reliable makes sense. Honestly, I have always hated how in so many other fantasy settings they have magic and alchemy, and the dwarves are supposed to be these master craftsmen and weapon smiths but no one had ever accidently stumbled across gunpowder before and then figured out that it could be used to make cannons and firearms.
It’s like “I discovered how to make napalm (Alchemists fire), and how to summon demons from the outer planes of existence, and infused this bow with punch your mother dead through your uncle’s anus ability while experimenting with all this stuff to discover it” but never accidently made gunpowder.
It wasn’t like one day some random guy just knew how to use magic and nearly every fantasy setting I’ve ever played in has reference to magical experiments and alchemy. It would make sense that eventually guns would exist.


rgrove0172 wrote:
Im a new Pathfinder DM but a 30+ year gamer. Im loving the InnerSea and am building my campaign within it. Ill admit however that the inclusion of firearms is a big turn off. Sure, easy enough to just drop them but Im wondering how much of a problem this is for you guys? Are there that many gamers who want to include gunpowder in their fantasy setting out there to warrant its inclusion? I would have thought it a pretty rare notion.

.

I absolutely HATE the inclusion of guns in fantasy role-play. Game of Thrones & Lord of the Rings (the screen versions of each) are the sort of fantasy I and my group enjoy. If I wanted to pit technology against sorcery I'd be playing Rifts or Shadowrun or something. Those options are out there and available and everyone of them handles guns better than Pathfinder does.

Having said that, just because I hate something is no reason to exclude it. I hate pork rinds and from what I hear there are plenty of places where they're damn popular. To each his own. The vast majority of Golarion play we do is through AP's and - thankfully - guns haven't made an overwhelming appearance there. Sure, I'll probably kill my AP subscription for 6 months during 'Iron Gods' or whatever and use that time to catch up on old AP's I've missed, but I'm pretty likely to pick it up again on the other side.


Jeven wrote:

Wait, are people saying Golarion is a setting full of guns?

Except for remote Alkenstar in a <heart of Africa> type location at the edge of the map, I've never seen them mentioned in an AP or sourcebook anywhere else.

Well, they play a pretty big role in the Skull n Shackles AP, a pretty big role in a portion of the Reign of Winter AP and will likely play a big role in the Iron Gods AP when it comes out. To many people, it seems as if the presence of guns and technology is definitely growing in Paizo-produced products for better or worse.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:
Well, they play a pretty big role in the Skull n Shackles AP

You are completely incorrect.

Skull and Shackles (which I am currently running) is written to almost completely exclude firearms.

What it does supply for firearms, however, is a small inset blurb in each chapter that gives a GM some guidance on where they could make changes to the AP to include guns if they wish. None of these blurbs is larger than a couple of paragraphs and they are only the most sparse of guidelines for altering the AP chapters.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Personally, I tend to veer away from firearms in my fantasy. (I just plain don't find kinetic guns very interesting unless they're like, Gatlings of something - and my least favourite period of history is the period between when firearms really came in to the invention of proper combat vehicles, vehicle freak that I am.)

"Veer away" being different to "not existing." In my last campaign world, the main continent had discovered black powder, but not really done anything with it because magic was better and more available - except fdor the little-known Orc Empire across the sea which had nearly Napoleonic-level firearms.

My current (and vastly better one) doesn't have firearms (or at least not in any capacity) for several reasons. Firstly, the big good and evil nations have decidedly non-Medieval standing armies (basically being Romans and Evil Romans in set-up). Those that don't have greater access to magic, which would fill that role, or they have both. And the continent is mostly land-locked, so the need for naval-based gunpowder is smaller. Finally, as the world runs on real-world timescales, firearms of roughly the period would be short ranged an inaccurate - which is really bad when you consider the prevalance of flying enemies. (On Dreemaenhyll, you carry a ranged weapon or suffer the consequences.)

So about the only country in the currently detialed bit that would stand to have developed them is the one "feudal knight" country, or possibly the rich "merchanty-gothic-y" country and the latter is an annex of the not-Romans.

For Golarion, then, since I use my own house rules and not Pathfinder (well, I use bits of Pathfinder), firearms will exist, but good luck the PCs getting hold of them in Varisia!


Lamontius wrote:
Wiggz wrote:
Well, they play a pretty big role in the Skull n Shackles AP

You are completely incorrect.

Skull and Shackles (which I am currently running) is written to almost completely exclude firearms.

What it does supply for firearms, however, is a small inset blurb in each chapter that gives a GM some guidance on where they could make changes to the AP to include guns if they wish. None of these blurbs is larger than a couple of paragraphs and they are only the most sparse of guidelines for altering the AP chapters.

.

Completely incorrect, eh? Having run this campaign as a GM (halfway) and played through it as a player (all the way), I seem to remember a bit more inclusion than that... you know, little things like a canon golem or the fact that the BBEG is a gun-toting, gun-loving maniac? As is his lieutenant? And of course the blurbs in every volume detailing how firearms can be included and used. Seems like a bit more than a 'small insert' to me.

Would it have been better for you if I had simply said 'they play a bigger role in Skull n Shackles than any AP before it'? The point was the growing use of them in Paizo products and Skull n Shackles is definitely where the biggest jump in firearm population takes place.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Franke wrote:
At the same time the Turks were using cannons to destroy the Byzantine Empire and the Byzantines were fighting back with flamethrowers, French knights were fighting English longbowmen. At the same time Portuguese caravels were exploring the coast of Africa and beginning the age of exploration. At the same time the Chinese were sailing gigantic multi-hundred foot long ships in navies numbering in the hundreds all around Asia using tech that would have astounded Europeans. At the same time in the America's, East Indies and Australia people lived basically prehistoric hunter gatherer existences.(early modern, medieval and prehistoric all existing at the same time)

To take this one step further, there are still hunter/gatherer societies living near information-age societies in this day and age.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:

Completely incorrect, eh? Having run this campaign as a GM (halfway) and played through it as a player (all the way), I seem to remember a bit more inclusion than that...

And of course the blurbs in every volume detailing how firearms can be included and used. Seems like a bit more than a 'small insert' to me.

Would it have been better for you if I had simply said 'they play a bigger role in Skull n Shackles than any AP before it'? The point was the growing use of them in Paizo products and Skull n Shackles is definitely where the biggest jump in firearm population takes place.

There are six chapters in the AP, each of which averages 80-100 pages.

The 'Adding Firearms' blurbs, one per AP chapter, take up, on average, about 1/4 of one page apiece.

All of the items you just mentioned (which you should spoiler) take place in:

Spoiler:
The latter half of the very last chapter. Switch the golem, give three npcs a different weapon in their stat block and poof, you have just de-firearm'd the entire AP.

Do not potentially have people shy away from a great AP experience by generalizing about firearms. Give them the facts and let them decide for themselves.

If you do not like firearms, that's fine, but Skull & Shackles can be played and enjoyed by folks of a similar outlook with little to no alteration. In fact, it is written explicity to cater to those who do NOT want firearms in their fantasy. If anything, you have to do a fair amount of alteration work, as I am doing, to accomodate PCs who use firearms as well as to alter the AP content to facilitate their inclusion.


Lamontius wrote:
If you do not like firearms, that's fine, but Skull & Shackles can be played and enjoyed by folks of a similar outlook with little to no alteration. In fact, it is written explicity to cater to those who do NOT want firearms in their fantasy. If anything, you have to do a fair amount of alteration work, as I am doing, to accomodate PCs who use firearms as well as to alter the AP content to facilitate their inclusion.

.

You're presuming a lot here. The Skull n Shackles AP we played was far and away the best campaign any of us can remember in all our combined years of gaming. Our GM (Story Archer) is constantly on the forums giving advice and sharing our experiences, and we didn't have a single firearm in our campaign.

I'm simply stating facts and pointing out a trend of growing popularity and acceptance of firearms amongst the designers and players alike. There is absolutely no need to be so defensive about this one AP, especially not with someone who sings its virtues at every opportunity.

Silver Crusade

Wiggz wrote:
I absolutely HATE the inclusion of guns in fantasy role-play. Game of Thrones & Lord of the Rings (the screen versions of each) are the sort of fantasy I and my group enjoy. If I wanted to pit technology against sorcery I'd be playing Rifts or Shadowrun or something. Those options are out there and available and everyone of them handles guns better than Pathfinder does.

First I would argue that just because a game system was designed with guns in mind that it does them better or more effectively than Pathfinder. Comparing different rule systems with different balancing issues has always been pointless in my mind. Something must be considered in the context in which is exist. People have the misconception that guns are “broken” in pathfinder because they hit on a touch attack but they balance out in other ways. Plus I have yet to see a solid gunslinger that impressed me compared to some of the builds that I have seen from other classes.

Second I would argue that while Game of Throne and Lord of the Rings share common elements (fantasy elements) that they are in fact two different genres of fantasy. Also I HATE (SUPER HATE) when people say "fantasy" and what they really mean is "high fantasy"

Honestly I hate high fantasy and the fact that Pathfinder isn't a hardcore high fantasy campaign setting is what really made me fall in love with it. (think of a Ravenloft and Dark Sun player here) Even before guns made an entrance it wasn't high fantasy anyone who tells themselves otherwise is lying to themselves. Golarion is a mix of several different fantasy archetypes in one world which means you are going to get bleed over. Is there high fantasy in Golarion? Yes, but there is a lot more dark fantasy present then what I would deem traditional high fantasy.

People keep getting up in arms about the guns in pathfinder but that’s because they want the world to be complete and true high fantasy. Paizo doesn't advertise Pathfinder as “High Fantasy” or “Traditional Fantasy”. They advertised it as an extension of the 3.5 rule system with some reworking.

I’m going to use the same argument that you just used against guns in Pathfinder to justify Pathfinder being fine just the way it is (with consideration that nothing is perfect). If you want to play high fantasy there are lots of other table top RPG systems that do it better "everyone of them handles" High fantasy "better than Pathfinder does"

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Wiggz wrote:


I'm simply stating facts and pointing out a trend of growing popularity and acceptance of firearms amongst the designers and players alike. There is absolutely no need to be so defensive about this one AP, especially not with someone who sings its virtues at every opportunity.

Actually to be fair I wouldent call it growing acceptance since from the very first time he was ever mentioned (Origonal world setting hardback If I'm not mistaken) The storm king has been said to be interested in and activly collecting firearms.

Coincedently all the actual firearm's and related things you mentioned only actually show up when it involves the guy who it has been established has them from the very begining of the setting.

As for Reign of winter considering where and when you go it would be rather odd not to have firearms.


Some one asked earlier how many time firearms show up in APs or modules. 3: 1/2 of part 6 of Skulls and Shackles, part 5 of Reign of Winter (can't be stopped in that one) and one module that takes place in Alkenstar. As people have said above, Alkenstar is smack dab in the middle of the Mana Wastes a magic dead/wild magic area that still has trolls, giants, and other large bruser type monsters. Those there needed something to level the playing field, technology did that for them. Every where else you hire a 4th level sorcerer with a few scrolls of fireball and a 3rd level wand of magic missiles and you have a portable rocket/machine gun. Add a few of them and evoker wizards and your army is doing just fine (and more reliable too). But yeah I find it weird in setting with that much alchemy no black powder, especially with setting with dwarfs, gnomes, and the rare smart goblins.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Uh...*trying to remember 1st edition AD&D DMG*
Weren't there rules on pistols, black-ray guns, torc grenades?

Oh wait what's this module sitting in my storage bins...Barrier Peaks?

Firearms have been around in DND settings since the early days of AD&D. Doesn't mean you had to use them of course. Pathfinder/Golarion is early firearms and at least in Society Play I have seen far more guns discussed on the forums than ever in play.

I consider the rules as more options. I like having the choice presented if you wish to use them. Doesn't mean you have to.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

OffTopic and sorry about it but,
@ Abraham and Mike: I now have the perfect post campaign idea for my S&S game... Thanks bundles!


I love guns, slightly modified of course, they are a regular part of my games. just my 2 cp


Rerednaw wrote:


Uh...*trying to remember 1st edition AD&D DMG*
Weren't there rules on pistols, black-ray guns, torc grenades?

Oh wait what's this module sitting in my storage bins...Barrier Peaks?

Firearms have been around in DND settings since the early days of AD&D. Doesn't mean you had to use them of course. Pathfinder/Golarion is early firearms and at least in Society Play I have seen far more guns discussed on the forums than ever in play.

I consider the rules as more options. I like having the choice presented if you wish to use them. Doesn't mean you have to.

I don't have my stuff out (I'm grading papers into the wee hours) but...

You can take that back to OD&D if you want science fiction in your D&D. Blackmoor, Temple of the Frog - not the later basic D&D adventure, the one in supplement 2 Blackmoor (1976) - had rayguns in it iirc. You find them in the original Blackmoor campaign supplement from Judges Guild by Dave Arneson, First Fantasy Campaign (Judges Guild 1977 iirc), as well in an area with a crashed starship (the City of the Gods). This has links to the Barrier Peaks AD&D module; both Greyhawk and Blackmoor were set within the Castles and Crusades Society for medieval fantasy miniatures campaigns originally. If you want all kinds of nifty technological goodies take a look at Empire of the Petal Throne by M.A.R. Barker (TSR 1975). EPT used a variation of the original D&D rules and was loaded with high tech relics from the far past as well as psychic and ritual magic and aliens galore. There was quite a bit of crossover between D&D and Gamma World when that came out as well and there were articles in the Dragon (and, I think, the old Strategic Review magazine) on "Sixguns and Sorcery", a mix of Boot Hill (an old west RPG) and D&D and Sturmgeschutz and Sorcery (WW II miniatures and magic).

Oddly enough I'm relatively fine with science fiction tech in a "fantasy" game although there is none in my homebrew game. But not gunpowder. Gunpowder is too easy to manufacture and, for me, just doesn't fit in a fantasy setting (mine at least). For me gunpowder marks the advance of technology and the death of magic. Ymmv.


Just out of curiosity, didn't Tolkien have gunpowder? If not, how did he have fireworks?
Seriously asking: I've actually forgotten over the decade of not reading it compared to the movies.


Tacticslion wrote:

Just out of curiosity, didn't Tolkien have gunpowder? If not, how did he have fireworks?

Seriously asking: I've actually forgotten over the decade of not reading it compared to the movies.

I'm not sure if it was ever explained whether they were conventional fireworks or something Gandalf had enchanted. If the former, I'd feel it was an alchemy thing he had special knowledge of.

On the topic at hand - I tend to go with limited availability of firearms (you'll probably not find them for sale in every city) and advanced firearms being something only two or three people on the planet are able to make at the moment (with Gunslinger PCs usually getting one of those people as a contact.)


Matt Thomason wrote:
Tacticslion wrote:

Just out of curiosity, didn't Tolkien have gunpowder? If not, how did he have fireworks?

Seriously asking: I've actually forgotten over the decade of not reading it compared to the movies.

I'm not sure if it was ever explained whether they were conventional fireworks or something Gandalf had enchanted. If the former, I'd feel it was an alchemy thing he had special knowledge of.

On the topic at hand - I tend to go with limited availability of firearms (you'll probably not find them for sale in every city) and advanced firearms being something only two or three people on the planet are able to make at the moment (with Gunslinger PCs usually getting one of those people as a contact.)

Given the descriptions, if they were conventional, they were more advanced than modern fireworks and they were definitely associated with Gandalf, so I'd say at least some of them were enchanted. OTOH, they were also supposedly dwarf-made, so maybe at least some of them were conventional.

Looking a little deeper, the line between "enchanted" and "conventional" isn't a particularly firm one in Middle-Earth, so the question may not apply. Pretty much everything elves make is magical to Men's eyes at least. That's part of what elves are. Much of the craft of Numenor had something of the same quality. Dwarves as the master craftsmen can be assumed to be the same.

More relevantly, even in the real world it was a long time from gunpowder to guns, much less guns as effective personal weapons. Fireworks came first.


thejeff wrote:


Looking a little deeper, the line between "enchanted" and "conventional" isn't a particularly firm one in Middle-Earth, so the question may not apply. Pretty much everything elves make is magical to Men's eyes at least. That's part of what elves are. Much of the craft of Numenor had something of the same quality. Dwarves as the master craftsmen can be assumed to be the same.

True, especially when carving out doors that open to spoken words, or where the keyhole can only be found at a certain time on a certain day appear as examples of Dwarven stonemasonry.

51 to 100 of 100 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / General Discussion / Firearms huh? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion