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.
Zorro, The Three Musketeers, swashbukler stories such as many of the pirate genre (I can't recall if Princess Bride had them, but certainly Pirates of Caribbean has the feel) all have very definite acceptance of guns in their fantasy genre, even if many have less of the magic from fantasy ingrained in them.
Groups strongly against such inclusion of firearms and steampunk like stories can likely avoid the areas of Golarion that are known for them, or replace those areas with alternate content. I think in first edition they strongly catered to this. I think the inclusion of crossbow gunslinger (and uncommon trait on the classes) was their 2nd edition version catering to this. However, we have seen the inclusion of some other early firearms in an adventures and plenty of cannon artwork.
I personally prefer that the standard type of gun in Golarion is generally the more early firearms. It sounds like in second edition it may be leaning towards more of a presence of the breach-loading flintlocks to allow faster reloads, for game mechanics and balancing reasons. (based on the developer comment see Michael Sayre) Based on this information, I'm willing to see how it looks/works as it seems to have potential.
Revolvers in the more modern sense seem like you either have to make them weaker than they should be (or feel like they should) to make them available at low levels or you need to simply make them higher level items. Having a level 4 5-shooter that you can reload 2 chambers per round and while rounds are in chambers, you can treat the weapon as reload 0.
Honestly, I'd be inclined to say that something about the nature/level of their technology prevents striking runes from functioning on them unless they are made with a more expensive alloy (which makes it a higher level object and cost). This can prevent mixing magic levels and technology levels from creating weapons doing double damage and shooting twice as often, until such an advantage is not necessarily that overbalanced any longer since a newer level of striking runes has come out. Then you can choose to get more damage per shot with a little bit of reload, or you can get a less boosted damage with a boosted rate of fire.
I am not sure if we'll see such rules for any more modern weapons in the final book or not. I'm curious if it will stay in the steampunk realm, or if its scope will include Numerian scavenged technologies in it as well? (I guess it will include things that people of Numeria have learned to regularly piece together from Numerian scraps of technology, but I get the impression that the Technic League probably doesn't know how to produce laser pistols, even if they have some quantity of them.
Zorro, The Three Musketeers, swashbukler stories such as many of the pirate genre (I can't recall if Princess Bride had them, but certainly Pirates of Caribbean has the feel) all have very definite acceptance of guns in their fantasy genre, even if many have less of the magic from fantasy ingrained in them.
I don't recall any firearms in the Princess Bride, but then again, it's been a while since I've watched it.
I will say that so far as "fantasy" goes, those examples are exactly what I'm talking about. Instead of traditional fantasy elements, they lean into a changing world, where Swordsmen sing their swan song in an age where anyone with a rifle has a fair shake at taking them out. Firearms in these examples are hardly ever the focus, or even a strong character trait of those characters. They are just a tool they use from time to time.
In Westerns however, the firearm is a defining characteristic of the character. A stagecoach driver clutches his coachgun in terror as outlaws bear down on him on horseback. The Sherriff will have a lever-action resting on his shoulder as he saunters onto the street. The outlaw flexes his fingers as he hovers over his trusty six shooter at high noon. The desperado fans the hammer to dispatch his foes with nearly inhuman speed.
These are all iconic character moments for the archetypical "Gunslinger", and black powder weapons largely make them impossible. For instance, you don't really holster a flintlock pistol the same way as a Revolver. You wouldn't want to drop the paper cartridge (since that's what we're going with) out of the barrel. So they are slung crosswise to keep the barrel roughly level, or even pointed upward. Hard to have a high noon duel when you can't "quickdraw" your weapon.
Unless someone awkwardly cross drawing a pistol from a chest Bandolier is what you expect to see during a duel. There is a reason that dueling pistols of the powder era were already in hand when they decided to have a duel. Drawing just wasn't as refined, holsters weren't as ergonomic.
Revolvers in the more modern sense seem like you either have to make them weaker than they should be (or feel like they should) to make them available at low levels or you need to simply make them higher level items. Having a level 4 5-shooter that you can reload 2 chambers per round and while rounds are in chambers, you can treat the weapon as reload 0.
I'm not too against a Revolver appearing as a higher level weapon if that's where Paizo determines they need to be. But I do want to see them included, even if they end up feeling a bit less powerful than one would expect. There is a game to balance after all.
I am not sure if we'll see such rules for any more modern weapons in the final book or not. I'm curious if it will stay in the steampunk realm, or if its scope will include Numerian scavenged technologies in it as well? (I guess it will include things that people of Numeria have learned to regularly piece together from Numerian scraps of technology, but I get the impression that the Technic League probably doesn't know how to produce laser pistols, even if they have some quantity of them.
I'd imagine that anything Numerian will have to wait for a further expansion of the game world at large. We'll probably see some examples of advanced tech in various AP's, then maybe get expanded rules down the line. But there is a lot of material to cover between now and then imo.
Revolvers, repeaters and maybe the odd magazine fed weapon are the most I expect tech level wise. But that remains to be seen.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Colt Walker...an 1846 developed gun had 6 cylinders that fired blackpowder charged bullets.
These types of gun existed but only in that weirdly short era before cased ammunition become popular.
However, multibarrel was WAY more likely. There were six barrel/chamber style blackpowered weapons going back to the late 1600s and early 1700. The Chamber's flintlock 'machine gun' was a VERY advanced weapon for it's time.
In Pathfinder terms it would be reasonable to make multi-chamber firearms a form of 'magical' advanced kit that only higher level characters could afford. Just use the rules for making magic items and describe the tech behind hit as rare and unusual. (ie. Crib the magic item rules.)
beowulf99 - there WERE quickdraw holsters for flintlocks but they were A:rare as hell, and B: prone to causing accidental discharge. So you are correct. Funny thing was, these holsters were primarily used by either horse cavalry or someone would have multiple pistoles ready in a belt. Just not primed. And it wouldn't speed up the draw/fire. But fixed the reloading issue. *shrugs*
For those who are hesitant about the idea of repeating or revolver/magazine type weapons, maybe a bit of actual gameplay involving such might help.
In my current Age of Ashes campaign, as a Wizard, the GM actually let me create a 6-shot Revolver gun that shoots pure Sonic energy at a target. It is a +2 Greater Striking weapon that I am proficient in, doing 3D8+Int+Specialization in all Sonic damage, with a range of 60 feet. No fatal or anything, as the Sonic trait is more than strong enough. (Though there is talk of Misfire chances occurring in the future.) And yes, it does cost ammunition, in the form of special energy bullets that cost 1g a piece to make, which only I can make.
At 14th level, with Expert proficiency, that's not very strong, and after my 6 shots, I have to spend an action to load each chamber, not including actions to get the ammunition out, clear/adjust the chambers, and actions to reset the gun back into being able to fire. In fact, there were a couple fights where my gun was effective in providing help and conserving spell power (or doing something else when my spells are useless or not worth casting).
Considering that, as a Wizard, I generally have better things to do with my actions besides Strike enemies, such as cast spells, it's nice to not have to waste actions reloading, but also gives me solid counterplay for determining both when to shoot, and what to shoot, or if I want to plan around something else. Plus, if I come across golem types, I'm not completely helpless to the party besides the typical Mass Haste, which is the primary purpose of the gun.
Of course, this would be atypical, as Wizards can't use guns in-class (proficiencies be damned), or have a gun this well tailored, but even if it did physical damage and didn't add Intelligence to damage, I'd appreciate this approach in gameplay much more, tactics-wise, than tedious repetition of load->fire->load->fire, as a class that already has their actions tied up with something else, and wants a nice 3rd (or Hasted) action that isn't Shield or Striding.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think Gunslingers should not be good only with guns (and thus dependent on firearms' characteristics) lest they have no place in no-guns campaigns. I'd rather they be good with all reload weapons (and maybe thrown weapons too, as I see similarities there). And I agree that being better at reloading whatever the weapon comes with the territory.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see no reason they couldn't introduce repeating crossbows with this book as well. Even just a crossbow that you could load two bolts into would be a huge benefit...
We had a repeating hand crossbow homebrewed in the original PF2 playtest that held 5 bolts at a time (same as PF1), it's really not all that broken because MAP balances it out considerably to not be more powerful than bows, it still doesn't get a benefit from attributes for damage, and it takes an additional action to load the crossbow to draw out the "magazine" to insert into the bolt holder.
Even with a heavy crossbow, having to spend an entire round to reload is a fair trade for having a powerful front load to work with. It turns the weapon from a "fire and forget/constantly reload" playstyle to a "manage my limited attacks wisely" playstyle, one that I would find more entertaining and engaging than something that needs reloading all the time. It turns from a tedious nagging mechanic into a cautionary calculating mechanic, and I think that would help the overall feel of the class.
I don't know why you are afraid of the revolver and their 6 shots before reloading. As already beowulf99 said currently we already have bows with no reload time. We already have a Flurry Ranger with a MAP of "-0, -3, -6, -6" per round without reload. In particular, I don't see any balance issues with the 6 chamber revolver and cartridge ammo. After unloading, it will probably take some time before it is fully reloaded.
The only main advantage over bows is that's a one-handed long-range weapon. As compensation they has complex and expensive ammo and I don't imagine that anyone without master crafting skills to make complex ammunition like cartridges.
I don't really understand why you also afraid to put such firearms in the lore of the Golarion scenario, they're already in 1e and it's too late to complain about it. Removing it would be ever stranger.
Crafting techniques are still very concentrated in Alkenstar. For the most other parts of the Golarion all firearms, even such repeating one still are exotic and too expensive. Outside of Mana Wastes most people prefer to rely on bows / crossbows, and even magical cantrips, rather than using such expensive, complex and dangerous weapons.
MAP really does solve the issues with a lot of shots, might even be time to consider removing the Reload trait entirely.
Or make it to where a weapon with Reload 1+, when reloaded, resets the MAP for that weapon.
So if I have a Reload 1 Crossbow that's loaded on Round 1, I make shot 1 at full bonus, reload, and then make shot 2 also at full bonus, as all 3 of my actions. But, if I shoot with a Crossbow, reload it, release grip, draw a sword and swing with it, that sword strike is still at -5. Plus, if you are Hasted, you could actually manage to get two full MAP strikes off in a round with a Reload 2 weapon. Spooky stuff, that.
Whereas Bows can reload for free and have just as much mobility as the Crossbow user (who has to invest feats into doing so), while also having access to Deadly and Propulsive traits, since they are able to make more actual strikes per round, even with reload factored in.
I think this would really help close the gap difference between Bows and Crossbows considerably, and give both of them clear identities for application. Crossbows will still be weaker than Bows sans investment, but it makes those who invest in Crossbows less bad compared to investing in bows outright.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't know why you are afraid of the revolver and their 6 shots before reloading. As already beowulf99 said currently we already have bows with no reload time. We already have a Flurry Ranger with a MAP of "-0, -3, -6, -6" per round without reload. In particular, I don't see any balance issues with the 6 chamber revolver and cartridge ammo. After unloading, it will probably take some time before it is fully reloaded.
The only main advantage over bows is that's a one-handed long-range weapon. As compensation they has complex and expensive ammo and I don't imagine that anyone without master crafting skills to make complex ammunition like cartridges.
I don't really understand why you also afraid to put such firearms in the lore of the Golarion scenario, they're already in 1e and it's too late to complain about it. Removing it would be ever stranger.
Crafting techniques are still very concentrated in Alkenstar. For the most other parts of the Golarion all firearms, even such repeating one still are exotic and too expensive. Outside of Mana Wastes most people prefer to rely on bows / crossbows, and even magical cantrips, rather than using such expensive, complex and dangerous weapons.
Agreed with the 6 round chamber thing. If bows are already being able to handwave that kind of restriction while being a superior weapon, I don't see why crossbows and firearms can't be treated similar, other than flavor/identity reasons, especially when they are already a weaker weapon anyway, even with feat investments.
Bows aren't necessarily one-handed, though. They are 1+, which means you can hold them in one hand, and as long as your other hand isn't occupied, can be used with it to properly wield the weapon. It's designed that way because if it was an outright 2 handed weapon, you couldn't technically load/knock arrows with it, as both hands are occupied with the weapon, leaving you no hands available to draw arrows from to use with your bow. It's a subtle, but important distinction to make. (I believe this same distinction is made with Crossbows as well. Maybe Firearms should be too?)
As for them removing the high-end firearms, there's plenty of reason. With PF2 and the resulting Return of the Runelords AP, which was supposed to have lore-altering consequences to explain the changes behind PF2, it's possible that one of those very consequences was the near destruction of all firearms, making finding and developing firearms both more difficult and much rarer to acquire as a result. After all, it's the reason why weapon enhancements are now tied to Runes and Runestones, Ioun Stones becoming Aeon Stones (probably from the Shattering Star AP), Goblins becoming a "normal" ancestry for people to interact with (compared to Rise of the Runelords Book 1 especially), and so on. The fact that the setting still has any firearms at all is a miracle in and of itself, especially with how uncommon/rare these things are, being limited only to a couple areas at best.
I still think the effort to balance crossbows against bows is going to have to wait for "what do martial crossbows look like". Since right now all crossbows are simple weapons, and bows are martial weapons and simple weapons are supposed to be weaker than martial weapons.
Something that makes simple crossbows as good as martial bows kind of contradicts that design principle.
I still think the effort to balance crossbows against bows is going to have to wait for "what do martial crossbows look like". Since right now all crossbows are simple weapons, and bows are martial weapons and simple weapons are supposed to be weaker than martial weapons.
Something that makes simple crossbows as good as martial bows kind of contradicts that design principle.
You aren't ever going to get to that point, though. At least, without it being a completely different weapon.
Crossbows have always been simple. They've been Simple in PF1. They've been simple in D&D 3.X. They've been simple since 2nd Edition AD&D, and probably even before that too. There really isn't much that will make them more difficult to use comparable to a bow that isn't already simulated in a bow, nor are there really any attributes that would lend them to be more difficult in a different way.
At best, you might come across some special "Hand Trebuchet," which requires significant experience with aiming and reloading similar to a bow that isn't merely "point and the mechanical parts do the rest", and it becomes a "bludgeoning martial crossbow," but that seems to be dealing with a completely different animal, something that I suspect an Inventor character would do.
Don't get me wrong, a Hand Trebuchet weapon would be awesomesauce, and might be what puts the "martial crossbow" conversation into full gear, but I don't think it's a path that I suspect Paizo would be willing to take or even explore without it being tied to something like an Inventor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You aren't ever going to get to that point, though. At least, without it being a completely different weapon.I still think the effort to balance crossbows against bows is going to have to wait for "what do martial crossbows look like". Since right now all crossbows are simple weapons, and bows are martial weapons and simple weapons are supposed to be weaker than martial weapons.
Something that makes simple crossbows as good as martial bows kind of contradicts that design principle.
Why wouldn't we? Higher die size plus deadly d10/d12 and bam, martial crossbow. Distinct from bows and everything. Whacky stuff from our history, like composite crossbows and repeating crossbows. That is not even taking into account what Golarion's supernatural element can bring to the table.
Paizo will absolutely introduce martial crossbows with Guns and Gears, if only for the fact that they are pushing guns and crossbows to be comparable weapons.
Crossbows always being simple is a poor excuse and changing things for the better and interesting is the whole reason 2e exists.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Repeating crossbows are probably martial crossbows.
Diagetically you can justify this by "the mechanisms involved in the repeating, and the process of how you reload one requires more training than a standard one-shot-then-reload crossbow otherwise it's going to jam and break down."
There's lots of different kinds of crossbows in history other than "heavy", "hand", and "light". Not just the Zhuge Nu, but also Leonardo's model for a repeating crossbow that he never got around to building (people built one using historical techniques recently, and it works.) Rhodes supposedly developed ballista sized repeaters in the Polybolos, so someone could miniaturize that design too.