| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm positive that guns with a higher capacity that 1 round will all be advanced. Because they will be mental. Just imagine two revolvers, six shots each, 6 rounds of Paired Shots and one action each turn to do whatever.
To that end we will almost certainly get Advanced Weapon Training at level 6.
With the level of technology you have in the gun producing parts of the world, something like a Collier revolver would probably be like a one-of-a-kind master gunsmith's finest accomplishment, but there should absolutely be pepperboxes.
I could see something like a 4-barrel pepperbox where you can spend 1 action to reload one barrel, or 3 actions to fully reload. The drawback to these, naturally, would be bulk.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Tech level doesn't really need to matter that much, guns can be different from Real ones in a few ways to make it work mechanically and in the setting. I don't expect a Browning LMG, but I could buy into 3-4 round revolvers or magazines. Maybe Dragoon gear has really caught on since 1e.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer the Era of firearms in the current playtest for one.
Simple frontloaded firearms mix better with high fantasy settings than repeating ones to me.
Stuff like double barreled muskets and similar would be nice however.
With firearms and gunslingers being uncommon they can go wild however giving GMs the power to decide for themselves how far they want to go.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer the Era of firearms in the current playtest for one.
Simple frontloaded firearms mix better with high fantasy settings than repeating ones to me.
Stuff like double barreled muskets and similar would be nice however.With firearms and gunslingers being uncommon they can go wild however giving GMs the power to decide for themselves how far they want to go.
How would you feel about PCs getting typically more advanced guns, with NPCs that have guns mostly only having muzzle loaders, and PCs who are restricted to using only muzzle loaders have options to boost their relative power up to advanced guns?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I prefer the Era of firearms in the current playtest for one.
Simple frontloaded firearms mix better with high fantasy settings than repeating ones to me.
I disagree. Muzzle loaded firearms don't mix well with fantasy imo, and really the gunslinger doesn't mix well with fantasy in general.
But we're getting the Gunslinger, a class who's schtick has a certain fantasy behind it. It's feats are largely based on tropes that are associated with the Wild West, like pistol twirl, Pistolero's Challenge and True Grit (I mean, if you haven't seen True Grit, then I guess you could disagree).
So from a style standpoint, flintlocks don't make sense. From an action economy standpoint, flintlocks don't make sense. So why have flintlocks be the standard for firearms in the setting?
But we each have our opinions. I do hope that revolvers and the like don't end up suffering for being made Advanced weapons however. They simply aren't, and they shouldn't suffer a de facto accuracy penalty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But we each have our opinions. I do hope that revolvers and the like don't end up suffering for being made Advanced weapons however. They simply aren't, and they shouldn't suffer a de facto accuracy penalty.
I am almost 100% certain that all weapons with more than 1 shot will be advanced. They have to be.
But that is not a massive problem, for the Gunslinger at least. Just like the fighter, we will almost certainly get Advanced Weapon Training at level 6, which makes an entire weapon group (e.g. firearms) count as martial for the purposes of proficiency. Also Unconventional Weaponry (human lvl 1 ancestry feat) that does the same for a single weapon, but that can be really cheesy.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
But we each have our opinions. I do hope that revolvers and the like don't end up suffering for being made Advanced weapons however. They simply aren't, and they shouldn't suffer a de facto accuracy penalty.I am almost 100% certain that all weapons with more than 1 shot will be advanced. They have to be.
But that is not a massive problem, for the Gunslinger at least. Just like the fighter, we will almost certainly get Advanced Weapon Training at level 6, which makes an entire weapon group (e.g. firearms) count as martial for the purposes of proficiency. Also Unconventional Weaponry (human lvl 1 ancestry feat) that does the same for a single weapon, but that can be really cheesy.
Why though? The Composite long/short bows are straight upgrades on existing weapons, and don't get shackled down with the advanced trait for the privilege. The balancing factor could easily be handled several ways. You could increase the DC for Misfire on multi-shot weapons to show the cost of their more finicky construction. You could increase their ammunition's cost due to being expensive jacketed rounds, rather than cheaper paper cartridges. Not to mention them likely being some of the most expensive up front costing weapons anyway.
I could see them being slapped with the Rare tag quite easily as well, serving to ensure that GM's have pretty much full control over whether they are present in their game or not.
Why though? The Composite long/short bows are straight upgrades on existing weapons, and don't get shackled down with the advanced trait for the privilege.
Balance, pure and simple. While the weapons we currently have are held back by constant reloading, a revolver with 5 or 6 shots wouldn't be in most fights.
Let me give you an example: slap just a capacity of 6 shots on the dueling pistol, which would make sense for the standard revolver. Get two of those and Paired Shots at level 8. 6 rounds of 2 attacks without MAP plus an additional action each turn to do whatever. Now take Two-weapon Flurry at 14, so its now 4 shots per round for 3 rounds, 2 with no MAP, one with -5 and one with -10. Do one better and take your magical pistol brace (which is indeed planned) and get even just 2 more revolvers. Each of those shots that crits is equal to more than 3 regular hits from about any ranged weapon.
While that is admittedly an extreme example, that is still just three feats and a bit of gold. There is no way to balance single-shot martial guns against this kind of potential. Even bows would quickly eat your dust with even a bit of tweaking or a feat or two more.
The balancing factor could easily be handled several ways. You could increase the DC for Misfire on multi-shot weapons to show the cost of their more finicky construction. You could increase their ammunition's cost due to being expensive jacketed rounds, rather than cheaper paper cartridges.
Both of those ways of balancing are extremely unfun, not to mention not particularly effective. Misfire is irrelevant unless you use Risky Reload and why would you? Expensive ammo might theoretically be slightly more effective, but that kind of design was even terrible in 1e and from what I can tell everybody hated it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How would you feel about PCs getting typically more advanced guns, with NPCs that have guns mostly only having muzzle loaders, and PCs who are restricted to using only muzzle loaders have options to boost their relative power up to advanced guns?
I'd want relatively equal access between PCs and NPCs.
I disagree. Muzzle loaded firearms don't mix well with fantasy imo, and really the gunslinger doesn't mix well with fantasy in general.
But we're getting the Gunslinger, a class who's schtick has a certain fantasy behind it. It's feats are largely based on tropes that are associated with the Wild West, like pistol twirl, Pistolero's Challenge and True Grit (I mean, if you haven't seen True Grit, then I guess you could disagree).
So from a style standpoint, flintlocks don't make sense. From an action economy standpoint, flintlocks don't make sense. So why have flintlocks be the standard for firearms in the setting?
But we each have our opinions. I do hope that revolvers and the like don't end up suffering for being made Advanced weapons however. They simply aren't, and they shouldn't suffer a de facto accuracy penalty.
Gunslingers in high fantasy settings to me are really just pirates, you're right that the class is borrowing a lot if not most from western instead.
The intersection of a sort of medieval weaponry and 19th century weaponry would be fairly stark to me (haven't looked into the inventor yet).
Action economy isn't much of argument imo, 2 seconds to shoot a longbow without the arrow already notched is already stretching it. But that's alright if it leads to better gameplay.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So crossbows are simple ranged weapons with 1 shot per reload. Bows are martial weapons with multiple shots without reload. Could we not take that model to firearms? Drop flintlocks completely. Make the current martial simple and make some firearms with capacity into the martial firearms? We then have simple firearms that are similar to crossbows and martial firearms that are similar to bows. I’d probably limit it to 4 shots otherwise you’re not likely going to need to reload at all in combat.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Balance, pure and simple. While the weapons we currently have are held back by constant reloading, a revolver with 5 or 6 shots wouldn't be in most fights.Let me give you an example: slap just a capacity of 6 shots on the dueling pistol, which would make sense for the standard revolver. Get two of those and Paired Shots at level 8. 6 rounds of 2 attacks without MAP plus an additional action each turn to do whatever. Now take Two-weapon Flurry at 14, so its now 4 shots per round for 3 rounds, 2 with no MAP, one with -5 and one with -10. Do one better and take your magical pistol brace (which is indeed planned) and get even just 2 more revolvers. Each of those shots that crits is equal to more than 3 regular hits from about any ranged weapon.
While that is admittedly an extreme example, that is still just three feats and a bit of gold. There is no way to balance single-shot martial guns against this kind of potential. Even bows would quickly eat your dust with even a bit of tweaking or a feat or two more.
I don't think that's how Two Weapon Flurry and Paired Shots interact. Paired Shots doesn't state that both shots count as 1 shot, they are individual strikes. So using Paired Shots with Two Weapon flurry would give you 4 shots at -0, -0, -10, -10. Basically you skip straight to full MAP on your flurry shots. A slight difference, but important to note.
I will point out that most ranged weapons used currently can put up similar numbers in many situations. Double shot gives a fighter 2 shots at -2 to hit each starting at level 4 for one example. And there's always the ever popular Flurry Ranger with Hunted shot to compare to as well. -0, -3, -6, -6 is a pretty standard turn for an archer Ranger at level 1. Adjust that to -2, -5, -8, -8 to account for the innate accuracy advantage that the Gunslinger enjoys.
With this comparison in mind, the Gunslinger does still seem to be the overall winner by a considerable margin, simply because they get 2 shots at no MAP in any case. But maybe that isn't the Rangers fault. Maybe that is Paired Shots being designed with single shot weapons in mind. Why not adjust Paired shots to instead operate as the Fighters Double Shot, 2 shots at -2 both counting against your MAP normally?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I disagree. Muzzle loaded firearms don't mix well with fantasy imo, and really the gunslinger doesn't mix well with fantasy in generalI prefer the Era of firearms in the current playtest for one.
Simple frontloaded firearms mix better with high fantasy settings than repeating ones to me.
how does a cowboy mix in better with fantasy than a witch hunter using flintlocks?
Why do other fantasy themed games succeed with muzzle loaders and are not mixing in mid-late 19th century guns?
And it is not like western fluff did not have an era with flintlocks/percussion oneshots (zorro etc.).
Alot of modern games skip logic of loadtime just because muzzleloaders fit with the theme alot better.
Take a dwarf with a "boomstick" in a fantasy group with a bard, a cleric and sword n board user.
We have moba game characters using muzzle loaders because it fits fantasy better
Now replace it with a repeater.
Capacity weapons should be more "experimental stuff" or stuff from numeria.
Just gonna mention reload times of firearms in vermintide, fast, unlogical and fun to use.
As in pf1, "advanced weapons" (era wise)
should be rare and in a certain setting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There's a reason that they gave us the single shot weapons only for the playtest I figure. Reloading is a deliberate and intentional cost for guns, and the goal is to figure out what the balance point is for weapons that need to be reloaded every time, since those are going to be the vast majority of guns in the setting.
If you gave us revolvers and the like, even if those come with "RARE" and "UNIQUE" tags those are the guns people are going to focus on for their white room testing scenarios.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
We could have pepperboxes for multi-shot guns, a concept introduced in the 15th century. They existed for all action and ammunition systems: matchlock, wheellock, flintlock, snaplock, caplock, pinfire, rimfire and centerfire. Most where sidearms but a few long guns. Fun fact, Samuel Colt owned a three-barrel pepperbox matchlock musket and an eight-barrel pepperbox shotgun. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
how does a cowboy mix in better with fantasy than a witch hunter using flintlocks?Why do other fantasy themed games succeed with muzzle loaders and are not mixing in mid-late 19th century guns?
And it is not like western fluff did not have an era with flintlocks/percussion oneshots (zorro etc.).
Simple: That is my opinion. Black Powder weapons are, to me, part of an era where "fantasy" was largely being pushed aside in favor of industrialism. I really don't see too many examples of heroic fantasies that involve characters who live in the time of black powder and flint locks, Zorro aside.
And Zorro was arguably more about his skill with a sword, and his dashing nature, rather than the prevalence of flint locks. Then again, I'm not too familiar with Zorro beyond the Antonio Banderas movie. It's just not part of my lexicon. What I did grow up watching however were Western's. The Good the Bad and the Ugly, True Grit, etc... These form what I consider my standard for what a "Gunslinger" is. And the names of the feats reinforce that connection.
Black Powder weapons just aren't as romanticized as the Six Shooter. Their wielders just aren't as eponymous as the desperado, the lone gunman, or brave Sherriff.
As to other fantasy sources using black powder weapons, sure. They make sense in their world. Warhammer has always been a style over substance world. Their dwarves use portable cannons because that looks cool. And there's nothing saying that Golarion couldn't go that route as well. I just don't personally like it, so I'm going to argue against it in the same way that you argue in favor of it.
To each their own.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Pepperboxes are a good idea. The question to address is "how many actions to reload an n-barrel pepperbox?"
I could see this either as a "one action per barrel, your advantage is that you didn't have to reload after the first few shots" or as a "you get an action discount if you spend your whole round reloading all the barrels."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Pepperboxes are a good idea. The question to address is "how many actions to reload an n-barrel pepperbox?"
I could see this either as a "one action per barrel, your advantage is that you didn't have to reload after the first few shots" or as a "you get an action discount if you spend your whole round reloading all the barrels."
Maybe a variable action activity that gets more efficient with more actions. 1 action 1 barrel. 2 actions 3 barrels. 3 actions 5 barrels.
I don't think that's how Two Weapon Flurry and Paired Shots interact. Paired Shots doesn't state that both shots count as 1 shot, they are individual strikes. So using Paired Shots with Two Weapon flurry would give you 4 shots at -0, -0, -10, -10. Basically you skip straight to full MAP on your flurry shots. A slight difference, but important to note.
Yep, that definitely was a mistake on my part.
I will point out that most ranged weapons used currently can put up similar numbers in many situations. Double shot gives a fighter 2 shots at -2 to hit each starting at level 4 for one example. And there's always the ever popular Flurry Ranger with Hunted shot to compare to as well. -0, -3, -6, -6 is a pretty standard turn for an archer Ranger at level 1. Adjust that to -2, -5, -8, -8 to account for the innate accuracy advantage that the Gunslinger enjoys.With this comparison in mind, the Gunslinger does still seem to be the overall winner by a considerable margin, simply because they get 2 shots at no MAP in any any case. But maybe that isn't the Rangers fault. Maybe that is Paired Shots being designed with single shot weapons in mind. Why not adjust Paired shots to instead operate as the Fighters Double Shot, 2 shots at -2 both counting against your MAP normally?
That is again the capacity vs no capacity problem. Single-shot weapons require a reload for every time you shoot, which means a significant drop in damage due to making fewer attacks. Paired Shots combined with not requiring a free hand to reload is about the optimum you can do right now, by a very significant margin. Even then you start slowing down to the 1 shot/2 shots cycle at round 3. Single weapons have two shots at 0 and then -5 every two rounds and just a single possible shot for every other round. A pistol brace user has 3 shots per round, following the regular MAP, but doesn't benefit from Firearm Ace, can't use special attacks, and will round out after probably two rounds.
Compare that with an easy three shots every round at reduced MAP for Flurry Ranger and easy two shots for Fighter. Option 1 is actually pretty competitive even with the slowdown after round 2, it's "only" 1 less shot per round and two shots every two rounds vs ranger after all. Or even better 1 less shot every two rounds vs the Fighter starting at round 3, so realistically 1 or 2 shots total. And you get compensated with having no MAP, ever. And considering that most combats don't last 6 rounds and high accuracy is even more important due to fatal, that is not a bad trade at all.
Option 2 falls way behind starting at round 2, but without any real compensation, not even more shots at 0 MAP compared to Ranger. Simply by pure volume of fire. Option 3 falls off after round 2 or 3 (shots at -10 are not really worth the reload), though it is fairly good at those first rounds.
While I would say that Paired Shots works mostly well in this context, you are definitely correct that this only really works with single-shot guns in mind. Adding that to my feedback list. I'm not positive that Paired Shots should be nerfed in that case, though, considering that there is currently no way you can make up for the fewer shots overall except being very lucky and critting your heart out. Which is very unreliable when faced with enemies that aren't mooks. It is also a level 8 feat, not a level 4 one. But considering I am too bad at mathematics to properly calculate a situation this complex, I'm probably far underestimating the potential of fatal in this combo.
Simple: That is my opinion. Black Powder weapons are, to me, part of an era where "fantasy" was largely being pushed aside in favor of industrialism. I really don't see too many examples of heroic fantasies that involve characters who live in the time of black powder and flint locks, Zorro aside.
And Zorro was arguably more about his skill with a sword, and his dashing nature, rather than the prevalence of flint locks. Then again, I'm not too familiar with Zorro beyond the Antonio Banderas movie. It's just not part of my lexicon. What I did grow up watching however were Western's. The Good the Bad and the Ugly, True Grit, etc... These form what I consider my standard for what a "Gunslinger" is. And the names of the feats reinforce that connection.
Black Powder weapons just aren't as romanticized as the Six Shooter. Their wielders just aren't as eponymous as the desperado, the lone gunman, or brave Sherriff.
As to other fantasy sources using black powder weapons, sure. They make sense in their world. Warhammer has always been a style over substance world. Their dwarves use portable cannons because that looks cool. And there's nothing saying that Golarion couldn't go that route as well. I just don't personally like it, so I'm going to argue against it in the same way that you argue in favor of it.
To each their own.
there's a whole generation that grew up on pirates of the Caribbean and similar, that mixed the mystical and flint locks with all the fanfare. Wet powder, shots going nowhere, having 4+ guns equipped, shooting skeletons,... I get your point and I hope they add something to accommodate your fantasy of the class however.
|
|
there's a whole generation that grew up on pirates of the Caribbean and similar, that mixed the mystical and flint locks with all the fanfare. Wet powder, shots going nowhere, having 4+ guns equipped, shooting skeletons,... I get your point and I hope they add something to accommodate your fantasy of the class however.Simple: That is my opinion. Black Powder weapons are, to me, part of an era where "fantasy" was largely being pushed aside in favor of industrialism. I really don't see too many examples of heroic fantasies that involve characters who live in the time of black powder and flint locks, Zorro aside.
And Zorro was arguably more about his skill with a sword, and his dashing nature, rather than the prevalence of flint locks. Then again, I'm not too familiar with Zorro beyond the Antonio Banderas movie. It's just not part of my lexicon. What I did grow up watching however were Western's. The Good the Bad and the Ugly, True Grit, etc... These form what I consider my standard for what a "Gunslinger" is. And the names of the feats reinforce that connection.
Black Powder weapons just aren't as romanticized as the Six Shooter. Their wielders just aren't as eponymous as the desperado, the lone gunman, or brave Sherriff.
As to other fantasy sources using black powder weapons, sure. They make sense in their world. Warhammer has always been a style over substance world. Their dwarves use portable cannons because that looks cool. And there's nothing saying that Golarion couldn't go that route as well. I just don't personally like it, so I'm going to argue against it in the same way that you argue in favor of it.
To each their own.
We also have the rise of "Flintlock Fantasy" like the Powdermage Trilogy where traditional magic works alongside Gunpowder, Shamanism, Gods, and Swordplay. The fantasy genre has expanded a lot in the past decade or two.
I think that's why we should be REALLY sure what type of fantasy we're targeting and why. I actually wasn't aware of any "Flintlock Fantasy" stuff outside of pirate adventures. I'd be keenly interested in how the demographics and preferences break down.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think we should have any system where we reward you to spend your entire turn reloading.
It wouldn't be all that bad if we gave people more things they can combine with "reloading" a la running reload.
For example:
- Recall Knowledge Checks
- Take Cover
- Intimidation
- Feint to create flat-footed for your allies
etc.
Basically anything that's not "an attack" is fair to combine with "full round reloading" and "rounds in which you don't attack anything" aren't that uncommon as is.
Why not go the magic item route and have a gun that works like a revolver or better due to magic reasons.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why not go the magic item route and have a gun that works like a revolver or better due to magic reasons.
Because some of the places that innovate firearms technology exist in an antimagic zone. That and it kind of sucks to have to wait until you level enough to afford whatever magic gizmo lets your class function right. Plus it you're going to just magic it up, you might as well get rid of blackpowder all together and just magic the bullets.
I was thinking kind of a natural progression thing like from what I understand from people running the math the damage is pretty well about the same for guns and crossbows at low level (I think crossbows come ahead but not by much and that is without the gunslinger class the numbers I saw that is). So it would be just like getting a magic sword as a fighter. but yeah switching over to a gun that didn't need black powder with a magic substitute would make sense as well. kind of blurs the line between a regular bullet and a magic bullet. I would think about mid level though is when you would swap from black powder.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about no. Why do you people insist on stuffing high levels of tech into a fantasy game?
There is no sense in doing this. The moment you introduce higher tech Firearms, you basically say to everyone else "your weapons are obsolete". There is a huge reason why these kinds of developed firearms obsoleted armour and weapons in the modern world.
The only way this doesn't happen is if you don't make the developed firearms as good. But that will immediately bring us back to this conversation.
You're already basically talking about making Crossbows irrelevant.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about no. Why do you people insist on stuffing high levels of tech into a fantasy game?
There is no sense in doing this. The moment you introduce higher tech Firearms, you basically say to everyone else "your weapons are obsolete". There is a huge reason why these kinds of developed firearms obsoleted armour and weapons in the modern world.
The only way this doesn't happen is if you don't make the developed firearms as good. But that will immediately bring us back to this conversation.
You're already basically talking about making Crossbows irrelevant.
Crossbows are already irrelevant for everyone except for one specific ranger build. We're talking about making guns actually work for the one class that is supposed to use guns. If you don't like high levels of tech in a fantasy game, then I somehow doubt that this supplement is going to please you, considering the subject matter that we already know about (i.e. clockwork ancestry, steampunk/mad scientist inventor class/loads of guns).
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
To quote James Jacobs himself from This thread circa 2009:
Alkenstar certainly has a unique feel to it; but it's also one of the more polarizing and more "out of context" areas in the entire campaign setting. The preponderance of guns and technology and the strange characteristics of the Mana Wastes make it a somewhat difficult region to reconcile in many minds (including mine) with the nature of the surrounding regions of Golarion.
Guns in fantasy settings tend to have this polarizing effect. In my opinion, when you put guns into a fantasy setting, you should go all-out with them, and they should be common and well-known. Final Fantasy does this very well, as does the Iron Kingdoms (created by Privateer Press).
Golarion is, for the most part, not a "guns in fantasy" world. Yet it IS supposed to be a world where everyone can find at least one corner of the world that they really enjoy. Thus, we have a gun/tech region with Alkenstar (along with vikings, science fiction/fantasy, pirates, and other specific "D&D" traditions elsewhere).
But still, Alkenstar is a particularly strange fit for the rest of Golarion, and as a result we're very unlikely to do much more with it in the future. If there's an upsurge of interest, of course, that might change, but for now, Alkenstar is perhaps the most likely place in the Inner Sea region that we'll never do much more with and thus leave it safe for GMs to develop as they wish without much fear of us coming along later to create "official canon" for the place that might disrupt or conflict with homebrew development.
I hope that Paizo has decided to go "all-out" with Alkenstar now that they are on 2nd Ed. I want to see more support for a steampunk shot in the arm to the standard fantasy setting we currently have.
Does that mean that there isn't room for both Black Powder fantasy as well as Old West six shooters? No, certainly not. But I don't want to see Only one or the other.
Imo, the best answer to this is to make Black Powder weapons Simple, and put more advanced firearms into the Martial category. Balance them with straight cost, or even Leveled access. Perhaps a Revolver starts out as a 6th level weapon, meaning you have to begin your slingin' with a cheaper flintlock and save up to buy a heavy iron.
Either way, I just don't want to see Gunslingers limited to Black Powder. There is room for both fantasies imo.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about no. Why do you people insist on stuffing high levels of tech into a fantasy game?
While I agree in general, lets not forget that incredibly advanced technology has been baked into Golarion for a long time, namely in Numeria.
It's a land of crashed starships, Androids and laser-toting barbarians.
In the specific setting of Golarion, its possible that the corpse of a Technic League Gearman has been transported down to Alkenstar for study, wherein some of the less high-tech but otherwise more advanced designs and techniques have been reversed engineered for general use.
Gearmen seem to have internal magazine fed weapons, which another step more advanced than the move from muzzleloader to chamberloader, so it might even make sense for Golarion to even "skip" the chamber step.
Either way, within the bounds of Golarion, it's far from impossible. Its a lot easier to replicate something which you know is possible and can see applications of, rather than invent it wholesale.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd just like to point out that there are a ton of in-world reasons already why a gun wouldn't necessarily be better or worse than other weapons.
1. Peasants line up with guns? Too expensive, and the big threats have DR that negates it, and you already have similar issues with crossbows and slings.
2. Guns aren't better at killing? Why would they be? At higher levels, magic makes differences between small fast balls of lead and arrows pretty much moot. Is dragon hide supposed to be impressed by either? Adamantine armor? Mithral armor enchanted to deflect spear thrusts from 100 ton giants? And at lower levels, they're up against the equivalent of some of the strongest people in the real world, who may already have some level of in-born magical enhancement.
3. Guns aren't super easy to use? Well, some are already. Simple weapons are pretty easy to pick up. The rest is mechanical abstraction, similar to how a machete is martial despite being a bushcraft tool commoners would likely use, or a shield bash being literally a punch with the edge of your shield but still requiring martial proficiency.
4. Guns aren't constantly evolving and taking over the world? That's already a problem with Golarion, since those weapons are present. But think about how weapons are being used by PCs, in close quarters, at the drop of a hat, in cramped dungeons, in soggy environments... there are plenty of reasons why a PC might not prefer grabbing a gun before we even mention that they're fighting ghosts, oozes, earth elementals, swarms, and mountain sized dragons. Guns start to look like a tool in the toolbox rather than the obvious solution in any given situation. Maybe guns are spreading, but it doesn't really matter as much to the PCs average experience. Also what if gun advancement is being deliberately slowed by secret hoarding, wizards, or gods? What if the physics of this setting make it harder to perfect?
So, in short, if someone's fantasy of guns is that they're "inevitably and forever the best weapon that the easiest to use" then of course it shouldn't be allowed in a setting. I hold that that's an inflexible and frankly dumb fantasy to have about a type of weapon that we have no real world experience with how it fairs against magic, monsters, and gods.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Plus, I think we all tend to forget just how damn old firearms actually are.
They don't "fit" into a lot of people's conception of fantasy, largely based of a few genre-defining authors techno-anachronism. Matchlock pistols pre-date Rapiers and (what we now call) Longswords by almost a century, black powder weapons have been in existence for almost 1000 years now, Europeans first documented use of canons was in 1346, so on and so forth.
There is a big difference between black powder firearms and revolvers. This is what this thread is about.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
According to Wikipedia, there were "revolving three-barrelled matchlock pistols in Venice ... dated from at least 1548" making them contemporaries of the rapier. So it's not so outlandish.
But that's besides the point, and why I go back to my earlier point of Golarian having FUBAR tech levels.
In real life we had to make incremental changes based on a number of factors and most of all time. All it takes is for a few trinkets from Numeria to make their way to Alkenstar over the course of the last 2 hundred years, and we could have tech advancements in leaps.
|
I do not want easy to reload firearms widely available. I think having the reload action tax is useful for having more tactical options when I play a character with firearms. But I also want the Class that excels at reload weapons (aka the Gunslinger) to have abilities that give action economy advantage when reloading. And double-barrel guns so that you can at least shoot twice before having to reload.
Basically, I too want more diversity in the reload weapons, but I do not want specific weapons to be the means to do away with the reload action tax. That belongs to the Gunslinger and its MC dedication IMO.
BTW all of the above is true for reload weapons other than firearms too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do not want easy to reload firearms widely available. I think having the reload action tax is useful for having more tactical options when I play a character with firearms. But I also want the Class that excels at reload weapons (aka the Gunslinger) to have abilities that give action economy advantage when reloading. And double-barrel guns so that you can at least shoot twice before having to reload.
Basically, I too want more diversity in the reload weapons, but I do not want specific weapons to be the means to do away with the reload action tax. That belongs to the Gunslinger and its MC dedication IMO.
BTW all of the above is true for reload weapons other than firearms too.
I wouldn't mind Specific items (note the capital S) to circumvent reloading for classes without as much reload support, but who also want to use guns. Magic guns that don't need to be reloaded, for example. Those should come at some significant cost, so a reloading master wouldn't even bother with them. They should also be designed with a non-gunslinger aesthetic.
I think I'd want to go as high as 3 shots per reload action as the peak "reload efficiency" achievable by a gunslinger if they get the right weapon for it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Stuff like a six-shooter with Reload 3 to fully reload seems like a good starting point.
It's effectively Reload 0.5.
Personally, I don't mind if the default tech level (at least for martial firearms) is a bit newer. I'd certainly like for late-nineteenth-century firearms to be reasonably accessible (uncommon rather than rare). Stuff like revolvers and lever action rifles.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
How about no. Why do you people insist on stuffing high levels of tech into a fantasy game?
I do just want to touch on this a bit: Simple answer, a lot of us enjoy it. One of my first ever TTRPG characters was a goblin warlock with a cowboy patron with his own Dread Domain. She wielded her patron's old revolver. For me, guns, even advanced ones, fit into fantasy as easily as dragons and elves.
And that said, I still want them to be balanced with other weapons. I can suspend my disbelief about bullets not piercing a warrior's armor if I can do the same about a 20-ton lizard not doing it either.