I've run several campaigns so far and the answer is...rarely
Guns in Pathfinder are not nearly as effective as they are in the real world, because they don't do realistic amounts of damage. However, they are still extraordinarily effective, because they (as in the real world) enable anyone to hit bad guys at moderate range, and there's not much one can do against them short of cover.
So a swordsman would still be at a severe disadvantage against a small group of mooks with guns, who could sandpaper his hit points away from behind an overturned table.
Guns Everywhere: Guns are commonplace. Early firearms are seen as antiques, and advanced firearms are widespread. Firearms are simple weapons, and early firearms, advanced guns, and their ammunition are bought or crafted for 10% of the cost listed in this chapter. The Gunslinger loses the gunsmith class feature and instead gains the gun training class feature at 1st level.
If advanced Firearms are prolific then I'd hazard to say that they are the superior option in many cases. The ability to resolve vs touch at 400 feet with a 1-0 (reliable enchantment) missfire.
Also misfires on advanced firearms only impose the broken condition (-2 penalty to hit and auto miss on a 5 or less (3 or less with gun training)) but carry no other more severe penalty.
It also looks like Gunslingers would get gun training and Dex to damage at level 1.
So I'd hazard a guess and say cheap, available advanced firearms would make guns the most attractive ranged martial damage option (and possibly best martial damage option in general).
Melee weapons would definitely be less attractive for sure as if you're building strength you probably have bad touch AC meaning all the gunslingers will just tear through you.
Also side note "Modern Firearms", i.e. automatic weapon rules.
It has for me, becoming a bit more like a pulp action sequence. There is more grabbing cover to combat ranged weapons, and disarm is used a lot more by melee characters to take down ranged people. It's not bad, just different. Gotta calibrate your expectations from LotR to Indiana Jones.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Advanced Firearms only advanced compared to Golarion's technology level.
The Modern Firearms are for WW1 weapons from a hundred years ago, and are closer to the mark, but still differ from modern firearms in a few key areas:
- Damage dice. Weapons that fire the same cartridge should do the same damage. The Madsen (in Russian service), the Maxim, and the Mosin were all chambered in 7.62x54mmR and as such should all have the same damage die. In the modern world, the so-called "intermediate" rifle rounds (smaller than full-sized rifle like 7.62x54R, larger than handgun e.g. 9mm) are commonplace and the standard used by the world's armies, police forces, and sport shooters. These would have advantages in lighter guns, smaller and lighter ammo, and more controllable recoil, but the lower damage would be significant in a world full of mythical creatures. Perhaps rifles and SMGs would be able to go full-auto in a line without penalty, or go full-auto in a cone rather than a straight line, at the expense of a lower damage die.
- Misfire chance. These are purportedly a balancing feature of firearms, but no modern firearm in any semblance of decent condition is going to malfunction once every twenty rounds. Its manufacturer would be laughed and/or sued out of existence. Considering a standard capacity magazine is 30 rounds, that's two jams every three reloads. Also consider that a WW1 Vickers Machine Gun used by the British once fired one million rounds in a row without a malfunction (though it underwent 100 barrel changes, and as a water-cooled machine gun it was only well-suited to static defense). It's standard for modern firearms to go several hundred, if not thousands of rounds without a malfunction (and without additional cleaning or lubrication in between).
- Range increment. A rifle should have a longer range increment than a handgun, period, yet the Nagant Revolver and Mosin-Nagant Rifle have the same range increment. Also, a modern rifle (let alone a bolt action in a full-sized cartridge) should have a range increment at least as good as a damned longbow.
Damage output on firearms is quite small when compared to melee plus strength modifier unless you're playing a Gunslinger.
That's okay, guns rarely kill by simple damage unless it is a large caliber round. Instead guns kill by bleeding, which is almost always easily treatable. What RPGS represent poorly is the bleeding caused by injuries.
The advantage of a gun over a sword is its long range and easy to use not the damage it does.
When ranged weapons become more powerful, melee warriors have to develop proper defenses (Dex, dodge, stealth, cover, concealment etc.) and enough speed to close quickly. Arcane casters have the 2nd level spell Bullet Shield which offers +4 .. +8 deflection AC vs. ranged attacks - might be a good start.
The classic two-handed glass cannon (putting most resources into offense, only some money into armor) will be in trouble, but that's not the only type melee warfare has to offer.
One big change in guns everywhere is that it makes heavy armor characters pretty useless unless you are going for adamantine or some other form of DR.
Most characters are going to have to accept that they are going to take more damage. If gunslingers are rare, then this won't be too bad. If gunslingers are common, then it's really going to hurt.
A crit from a gunslinger is going to hurt a lot. A couple of lucky rolls will drop a lot of characters.
I disagree with SheepishEidolon, two handed meleeists can do well, assuming that they have good mobility and pick and choose their fights. If you can get close to a gunslinger you can take them down quickly, but you have to avoid getting caught in the open. Spells like invisibility or blur or expeditious retreat can help some of this.
Monks are awesome. Deflect arrows lets you avoid one bullet per round (that you're aware of). Their high touch AC helps them avoid the rest of the shots.
Kineticists also rock in guns everywhere. Aerokineticists' defense ability is particularly useful against guns. A flat out miss chance for physical missiles. Geokineticists reduce the incoming damage, and can bounce a good part of the bullets from non-gunslingers. Aetherkineticists can simply absorb the first couple of shots. Water and fire suck against bullets. At 8th level you'll have two types of defense.
You should also consider nerfing named bullet. At least the type-based option. Being able to pull out a crit almost on demand is pretty nasty on either side. Even if you don't nerf it, remember that making a wand requires all exotic material components. So each wand is tuned to an individual or at least a type/subtype.
Melee first characters have trouble straying relevant in later levels as it is. Guns are a substantial improvement to ranged combat. So if the campaign is going past level 5 I'd say Swords become irrelevant. If one person went dual tower shield heavy armor tank and the rest of the party stood behind him with precise shot that would be pretty freaking strong.
Like in real life, there will be a move to lighter, more mobile combat since armor won't be as useful. There is also more of a focus on your terrain, since you want to move cover to cover. Deflect Arrows would be a good goto feat I think. Melee is still incredibly useful in modern day warfare in close quarters. Add magic melee items, and I feel it would be less of a last resort and more brought to the forefront.
I agree with some of the others that the setting certainly pushes towards nimble, DEX-based martial builds over high STR tanks.
Having said that, martials may still want at least STR 13 to leverage the Cut from the Air feat (which appears to work versus firearms). I think a martial character (perhaps a swashbuckler?) with high DEX, Combat Reflexes and Cut from the Air has a credible chance of surviving in such a setting.
Also, there can be greater research into ceramics and kevlar armor, bringing armor back into the front for melee people.
All that being said, modern body armor is actually fairly effective against most types of small arms. "Soft" vests that can possibly be hidden under clothing can stop handgun rounds, and the modern equivalent of heavy armor (plates made up of layered kevlar, ceramic, and metal) can stop up to and including armor piercing .30-06, at least once. It may be useful to track HP and Hardness of modern armor as it absorbs bullets, because it is severely degraded with every hit. But now we're talking even more houseruling, which you may not want.
I may even go so far as to suggest a differrnt system for a modern campaigb. Dark Heresy might be a better fit, just remove the sci-fi weapons and remove Perils of the Warp.
You probably could handwave the degrading of armor, since we do that already with swords and armor. Though a simple rule I've used takes the Black Hack's usage die and ties it to armor/weapon degrading. Each time you use your weapons and armor in a scene (like a long combat, or just hours without maintanence), you your your usage die. If you roll a 1, it drops a step (d8 to d6. If it's at d4 and you roll a 1, then the item is broken and useless. There are things that increase the range that you roll on (making it a 1-3 or 1-4). It's simple and only really rolled at the end of a major scene or a period of time.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know. When I think of Guns Everywhere, I really think of the late 1800's, early 1900's. And it was not difficult to get a gun, especially if you're out in the frontier. Hell, that's why the Winchester repeater and the Peacemaker are so iconic to use for western genre. They were common and used a lot by people out in the frontier.
Thanks to everyone who responded. I figured out a system I'm happy with.
cared to share?
You guys are forgetting about costs. Guns Everywhere doesn't stop advanced firearms from being well beyond the budget of most mooks. Even simple ones are pricey.
Guns everywhere drops the price of a rifle to 500 gp, which means 4th level Mooks could have guns.
Modern firearms are even cheaper assuming the 10% price thing still applies
There's another thing Pathfinder doesn't do well, namely translating the fantasy economy to that of the real world. A basic semi-auto or bolt-action rifle (let alone a cheap military surplus rifle) is easily affordable by most people at roughly $the, which is certainly not the equivalent of 500g. Mooks could easily have them, whether they are ordinary citizens, criminals, or private security (in which case the company may even provide one).
Modern firearms area lot cheaper (assuming they cost as well 10%), generally 50 or 100 gp
There's another thing Pathfinder doesn't do well, namely translating the fantasy economy to that of the real world. A basic semi-auto or bolt-action rifle (let alone a cheap military surplus rifle) is easily affordable by most people at roughly $the, which is certainly not the equivalent of 500g. Mooks could easily have them, whether they are ordinary citizens, criminals, or private security (in which case the company may even provide one).
Whoa, something got broken there and it's too late to edit. Basic rifles are about $500 US and nice handguns are about the same (cheap handguns are even cheaper).
Having guns everywhere is fine as long as a GM doesn't make everyone who wields guns a Gunslinger. There's a rather large difference between being a Gunslinger and simply being proficient in it, which imo, nearly everything should be the latter, if at all.
A Monk would be a melee god. High touch AC, and Deflect Arrows.
I have toyed around with an idea for a campaign that has guns at about the 1800 level of tech, but they have had them for almost 300 years. Long enough to develop plate that will stop hand guns, and super expensive versions that would stop a riffle.
They also have come up with different types of ammo.
Keeping revolvers and repeating rifles out of the weapon list should really even up odds. Home rule that loading a barrel takes 1 round, period.
I once played a ranger (with a homebrew "gun fighting style") in a Wyld West themed campaign (no gunslingers in the party, and we met none before the game petered out) and had a blast while it lasted.
I would imagine that Starfinder will have to address this issue, as it is basically a "guns everywhere" setting.
Which is something else i have been thinking about lately. did you catch James Sutter's comment last night that a Starfinder characters couldn't drop into Pathfinder since the underlying game mechanic and math balance is different? i am really interested in how they adjusted the system for that.I would imagine that Starfinder will have to address this issue, as it is basically a "guns everywhere" setting.
So am I. I would not be surprised if many of the changes were driven by the question "How can we make combat in a 'guns everywhere' setting work?"
I would imagine that Starfinder will have to address this issue, as it is basically a "guns everywhere" setting.
It's a "lasers everywhere" setting. That's way beyond "flintlocks everywhere", which is really what the OP is proposing.
It's a "lasers everywhere" setting. That's way beyond "flintlocks everywhere", which is really what the OP is proposing.I would imagine that Starfinder will have to address this issue, as it is basically a "guns everywhere" setting.
Do we actually have confirmation that a starting player character can afford a laser pistol?
Still -- Regardless of details, we can be pretty sure that starting level player characters will have access to ranged weapons that are at least as effective as the "advanced" firearms described in Ultimate Combat. Even with that bare minimum assumption, starting level Starfinder characters would have ranged combat abilities beyond those of a 1st level Gunslinger in Pathfinder. The implications of that change would necessarily ripple through the Starfinder combat rules.
It's a "lasers everywhere" setting. That's way beyond "flintlocks everywhere", which is really what the OP is proposing.I would imagine that Starfinder will have to address this issue, as it is basically a "guns everywhere" setting.
Do we actually have confirmation that a starting player character can afford a laser pistol?
Still -- Regardless of details, we can be pretty sure that starting level player characters will have access to ranged weapons that are at least as effective as the "advanced" firearms described in Ultimate Combat. Even with that bare minimum assumption, starting level Starfinder characters would have ranged combat abilities beyond those of a 1st level Gunslinger in Pathfinder. The implications of that change would necessarily ripple through the Starfinder combat rules.
Science Fiction roleplaying games have traditionally been far more lethal than standard D+D. I have yet to see ONE scifi game that did not feature energy weapons as starting gear. I don't think Starfinder will be the first.
Science Fiction roleplaying games have traditionally been far more lethal than standard D+D. I have yet to see ONE scifi game that did not feature energy weapons as starting gear. I don't think Starfinder will be the first.
Traveller. Although you could get laser pistols and rifles as starting gear, they were extremely expensive and many, if not most, characters couldn't afford them.
That said, Traveller itself was also "far more lethal than standard D+D." You didn't need to use laser pistols when you had a 50/50 shot of a one-hit kill using an ordinary 20th century automatic pistol.
Science Fiction roleplaying games have traditionally been far more lethal than standard D+D. I have yet to see ONE scifi game that did not feature energy weapons as starting gear. I don't think Starfinder will be the first.Traveller. Although you could get laser pistols and rifles as starting gear, they were extremely expensive and many, if not most, characters couldn't afford them.
That said, Traveller itself was also "far more lethal than standard D+D." You didn't need to use laser pistols when you had a 50/50 shot of a one-hit kill using an ordinary 20th century automatic pistol.
Which again, is leagues beyond the flintlock which is the standard tool for a Golarion gunslinger.
That assumes that laser weapons are going to be super lethal. Who says they won't just be doing 1d6 damage per shot or something?
If it's based on Pathifnder/3.X I assume the core combat mechanics/balancing will remain largely untouched. I.e not hyper leathal
We basically don't know anything at this point about the cost or effectiveness of lasers or firearms in the Starfinder setting. If laser pistols don't do more damage than bows, they could still be lighter or more accurate or easier to use (by not requiring Starfinder's equivalent to martial weapon proficiency, for example). Alternatively, they could do much more damage and be unaffordable by low level characters.
