Zilfer wrote:Wow i think that's the most responces i've gotten while not looking. This site IS ALIVE!!!! XD
Anyways, i see most people agree with my assessment of Ravenloft and guns fitting the atmosphere. What Humanbeing said there makes me wonder if i should up the damage a bit more, though I don't want to make them too powerful either so I guess i'll have to think about it and make the ruling when I get in game and someone finally shoots a firearm.
Thanks for all the responces!
P.S. I currently play 3.5 and i'm not sure i have the money to go looking into pathfinder even though i've heard it's nick named "3.75"
Personally, I am not sold on the idea that the gun is any more lethal than a blade, that subject derserves it's own thread of discussion, perhaps.
And as Gonzoron of the FOS states - you technically don't have to spend a dime to play Pathfinder. The Paizo site features the PRD, however more user friendly is d20pfsrd.com with internal hypertext links (which the PRD is not) has all the rules of PF on it's site as well.
While I am sure you'll eventually want the books at table, so you'll eventually buy PF books if you like it. You don't need it to explore it's possibilities.
Indeed, well we were playing very basic for the longest time, we just got into the whole flanking, grapple, overrun, five foot step things you can do in 3.5 but yeah i'll definately check it out. I have a lot of the 3.5 books PDF'd though i always perfer a book in hand so i've bought 10 or so books since then because i like reading the book in my hands and not off a computer.
Also consider in total Paizo only has the Core Rule Book, Game Mastery Guide, Advanced Players Guide, Ultimate Magic and Ultimate Combat (plus 3 Bestiaries - 'monster manuals') - that's it, though the CRB is really the PH and the DMG as one book. Being that you're a Ravenloft gamer, it's probably unnecessary to use their Golarian setting, though Ustalev is kind of the pocket Ravenloft/Cthulhu lands of Golarian for inspiration if nothing else.
Plus if you look at my custom haunts thread in the Role Playing forum, there are lots of cool new mechanics that are ideal for use in Ravenloft. Haunts from the GMG is a cross between a magical trap and undead - I love them myself. IMO, the new classes from the APG, UM and UC are only matched by the concept of archetypes (changing up some class features in any given base class to tweak it for flavor, or a specific schtick not present in existing classes) that allow you to convert any normal class into anything you want - without 3x's near requirement to go to Prestige Classes. In PF, PrC, aren't as necessary - none of my players have used a PrC in 2 years. Most play single class characters only, one guy is multiclass only.
I really enjoyed 3x, while it was current, but once I saw and started using Pathfinder - I no longer need 3.5, that edition just lacks the options and better balance of Pathfinder, IMO.
Also I am a developer/designer and pro cartographer for Rite Publishing, one of the top 3pp's creating Pathfinder (and other systems) content. I never wanted to do this professionally until I saw PF. On January 12th, I'll be releasing my 9th product for my Asian horror Kaidan setting, adventures and supplements. Just now I'm looking to create a gothic old west (similar to Deadlands) for Rite's soon to be introduced Adventure Quarterly magazine (digital) to compliment it's 1 year old Pathways free PF content magazine. Now I'm friends with and regularly communicate with many former D&D authors, such as Wolfgang Baur.
Pathfinder sucked me into wanting to do this as a side career - and it's working!
I'm definately glad for you being that writing is a hobby of mine and eventually i will find time to work more on my book that has about 60 pages in word now. XD
I'm looking at the site of Pathfinder and seeing a lot of the same stuff, what caught my interest however, was since i play a rogue, i saw every other level there was a rogue skill which allows you to form your rogue into almost anything, and fighter's having something like a wider range of usable feats. a Rogue familiar! I can almost immagine a ferret companion or some sort for my rogue. XD
I also took a look at wizard and liked the bonded item but for the most part it looks like an update to what I already have. kinda like I have 3.0 and 3.5 books. Well at first i saw they nerfed a lot of spells in 3.5 and i was trying to stick with both of the books and use the better of both worlds but then i began to realize that it was changed for a reason. Bull Str for 1hr/per lvl, what would be the reason someone wouldn't just memorize it every day and cast it in the morning it'd be almost like they had a permanent str increase was one of the things that got me thinking so i'm trying to go by 3.5 now.
Regardless, I'm not seeing a huge difference between them. (and i think i'll stick to my Ravenloft, and Faerun campaign setting. I have far too many plot lines out there that I think i'd die before getting through all them even if DM'd Faerun every week. XD)
Yeah I kinda said that because i'm a bit resistant into changing things. XD I mean I'm not sure if the group usually cares about the changes i've made because I've went from a more custom house rules that looking back made DnD nights a 3.xyz thing. I'm sure our original DM might scratch his head at how closer we are playing with the books now, but the group as a whole that still plays keeps chuggin along no matter how many changes I make.
In my mind i'm going over the possibility of pathfinder, but i'm wondering if it would be better to stay with what i have and borrow things from pathfinder instead. I'm probably going to give a wizard a ring similiar to the bonded objects here coming up in my Faerun campaign now. ^.^
HA! Perfect, i got it. It will be a reward for joining the wizard's guild of Raven's Bluff.
(i can't tell you how many times i qoute the wrong thing. Are we playing Raven**** tonight?) No I thought we were doing Ravenloft. (Isn't that what I said?) No you said Raven's Bluff. xD
Its the many, many little things in each class, alterations of feats and spells to be more balanced - that make the huge difference.
Sorcerers choose a bloodline, and gain bloodline powers, feats and a single arcana power. Wizard specialists get 3 extra abilities beyond their spells and arcane bond. Fighters get Fighter and Weapon training in addition to feats every level. All PF classes gain feats every odd level (there no longer are any dead levels). You mentioned differences in spells, PF got rid of most of the Save or Die spells altering them to Save or take lots of damage, which may kill, but not like 3.5 where you don't have the option to live. Some spells have increased in power - Deathknell, Lightening Bolt, etc. As you noticed many spells that once lasted for a number of rounds per stat modifier, are now lasting minutes, not rounds. Rogues gain rogue talents. Paladin got way beefed up with extra class features and something called Mercies. When a paladin lays on hands, he can remove conditions like staggered, blinded, nauseated for free - with more and a better conditions removal at higher levels. Rangers are d10 and not d8. Monks got a boost. All the base classes are enhanced to better match 3.5 content that was coming out at the end of 3x that was more powerful than 3x base classes.
The APG classes like Witch aren't conversions of 3x classes, but completely new classes with new mechanics. Ultimate Magic introduced the Magus class - your standard 'gish' class, part fighter and part spell caster. Ultimate Combat introduced the Gunslinger (with new gun rules), Ninja and Samurai.
The more you read and the more you play, you'll see the differences between 3x and Pathfinder.
In my first year of playing PF, I was doing lots of use this PF mechanic in my 3x game, or use convert this 3x concept to Pathfinder. I don't do that anymore, I'm purely PF at this time, as are my players. Despite Pathfinder's backwards compatibility to 3x, I don't need 3x to shore up PF, as PF is solid, well designed and balanced in ways that 3x never was.
Systems and editions are preference only, and you may find that you do not prefer PF, but give it a chance. I don't see PF as 3.75, I see 3x as a wannabe Pathfinder, almost good enough, but coming up short. I can't possibly describe all that I know that is different between the two systems - while they seem close, in play, the difference is definitely there.
OK - I'll try to stop 'selling' PF, but 3.75 implies we're looking to 3x for grounding, when the opposite is true.
Don't worry about trying to "sell it" because those are the things i look at when comparing. I'm probably going to go home and talk to 2 of the Dnder's that are at my house and have them check out the pathfinder site i was just sent, and see if they like the idea if they do great. I've seen a few Pathfinder books at my local gaming store that I may break down and get over the past few months just like I did for Shadowrun.
Shadowrun I had mostly PDF's and I don't know the rules of this site so i'll avoid mentioning how my friend obtained them . Regardless I broke down and started buying the books because a book is so much more preferable than PDF's which i'm starting to dispise with a passion when it comes to DMing, the only thing i tend to like is the ability to Ctr+F to find something in it. XD
I find myself curious now about the sorcerer which i've considered mostly superior to the wizard class even though i refuse to play a sorcerer and have only played wizards. XD The "bloodlines" makes me curious.
Feel free to yammer on a little more about the differences, i'm guesing most of the base rules are the same, i saw a few new things like Reposite, and a trick or something (pull down someone's pants? lol)
Anyways as a Rogue, I know how it is about "dead levels", and i also know how it feels to be under played. The DM i started out with kind of doesn't believe too much in sneak attacks once combat has started. Most qouted thing i can remember is "He knows your there." when i'm attacking him from behind sure i hit him good once, but he still can't defend against both. Needless to say I had to break down and describe how exactly i thought it would work which is pretty much why you get a flanking bonus most likely two.
If you have to focus between two people, and it was my character Zilfer (Rogue7) + Artemis Entreri vs Drizzt. If we were on either side of him (funny we are all duel wielders) and I attack being probably the weaker of them but regardless Drizzt has to focus against my two blades and at the same moment Drizzt goes to defend Artemis decides to go down and dirty and hit Drizzt from behind or the side or whatever. XD Anyways I digress, enough of my own table problems that are in the past. XD
Zilfer wrote:What Humanbeing said there makes me wonder if i should up the damage a bit more, though I don't want to make them too powerful either so I guess i'll have to think about it and make the ruling when I get in game and someone finally shoots a firearm.
I prefer combat to be very risky and dangerous, so the players are generally looking for other ways to circumvent it. However, this may not be the case for your gaming group - and in fact the DnD tradition actively builds combat as a fairly low-consequence, highly-cinematic activity.
There is nothing wrong with this!
Go with any ruling that makes the game fun for your players. If they want guns to do roughly equal damage to swords, let them. That is a time honored tradition in Star Wars and Dune. Or you can even make guns do less damage than swords, reflecting the ease of shooting at somebody from afar vs.the hard work of getting in close.
Realism shouldn't interfere with fun. Remember, a truly realistic game wouldn't have magic, monsters, or even gender equality in pre-industrial societies, and it probably wouldn't be much fun to play.
In my Ravenloft games, guns are rare and finicky to use. They're not subtle, and each shot is so expensive it's probably the equivalent of a laborers weekly wage. Based on these limiting factors, I bump up the damage so that the PCs don't feel cheated when they finally get their hands on some firearms and use them.
Likewise, giving firearms to important NPCs makes those NPCs more able to give dramatic speeches without fearing that a psychopathic PC will attempt to shortcut the entire adventure arc by attacking them in Act 1 of the first meeting
OK, I didn't want to come off as some edition warrior - as my edition is better than yours, kind of thing. Remember I did play and enjoy 3x, so I see PF as the extension to the D&D system upgraded, just as D&D went from 2e to 3x.
Archetypes is one of the things that make PF a different animal than 3x, which came with the Advanced Players Guide. If you played 2e (I'm guessing you did), do you remember kits? One of my favorite kits was the Ranger Justifier - kind of a ranger of the army with some proficiencies that allowed some variety from the base ranger. Archetypes are very similar but the changes are in replacing certain core class features, not just a feat/proficiency change.
The Battle Scout Ranger is one of the many archetypes that are intriguing. Replacing Favored Enemy 2, 3 and 4 (you still get your first Favored Enemy and the last one) is replaced with Advantageous Terrain, Infiltration, Superior Tactics.
Advantageous Terrain
At 5th level, when a battle scout is within one of his favorite terrains, he can spend up to 3 consecutive rounds studying an area of terrain to gain the benefits below. Each round of studying terrain is a standard action. During the first round of studying terrain, the battle scout designates a 60-foot-radius-burst area from a single square within line of sight. Depending on how many rounds the battle scout spends studying the area, he or his allies gain the following benefits for 10 minutes per ranger level he possesses. (For example, if he spends 2 rounds, he or his allies gain the first two benefits.)
1st Round: Allies within line of sight and that can hear the battle scout gain a +2 bonus on initiative checks while within the advantageous terrain area.
2nd Round: Allies within line of sight and that can hear the battle scout gain a +2 on Perception, Stealth, and Survival checks while within the advantageous terrain area.
3rd Round: The battle scout’s movement is not hampered by difficult terrain while within the advantageous terrain area. Furthermore, the battle scout can take 10 on Climb and Swim checks and checks to jump while within the area, even when in immediate danger or distracted.
This ability replaces the ranger’s second favored enemy.
Infiltration (Ex)
At 10th level, once per day, a battle scout can choose a single terrain type that is not his favored terrain. For the next hour per ranger level, he treats that terrain as if it were one of his favored terrains.
This ability replaces the ranger’s third favored enemy.
Superior Tactics (Ex)
At 15th level, once per day, after a battle scout and his allies roll initiative, the battle scout can arrange his and his allies’ initiative rolls any way he wishes. If he has already taken 3 rounds to scout out the terrain with his advantageous terrain ability and both he and his allies are within the effect area, they gain a +2 bonus to initiative checks. Using this ability is not an action.
This ability replaces the ranger’s fourth favored enemy.
And finally the this archetype and really all the classes gain a capstone power, that is something really cool that you can only get if you remain single class to achieve at 20th level.
Perfect Advantage (Ex)
At 20th level, when using his advantageous terrain ability, a battle scout needs only to study the terrain as a standard action to gain all of the benefits. Furthermore, the area of his advantageous terrain increases to a 1-mile-radius spread from the single square within line of sight.
This ability replaces master hunter.
Master Hunter of the base ranger allows you to...
A ranger of 20th level becomes a master hunter. He can always move at full speed while using Survival to follow tracks without penalty. He can, as a standard action, make a single attack against a favored enemy at his full attack bonus. If the attack hits, the target takes damage normally and must make a Fortitude save or die. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 the ranger's level + the ranger's Wisdom modifier. A ranger can choose instead to deal an amount of nonlethal damage equal to the creature's current hit points. A successful save negates this damage. A ranger can use this ability once per day against each favored enemy type he possesses, but not against the same creature more than once in a 24-hour period.
All the classes get capstones, and all of them are truly powerful. If you multiclass you'll never get a capstone power.
The archetype system allows you to build any flavor of your favorite class without having to look outside the class for more options. I think archetypes was the first step Pathfinder took to really differentiate itself from 3x directly.
Last edited by MichaelTumey on Thu Jan 05, 2012 2:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
MichaelTumey wrote:The archetype system allows you to build any flavor of your favorite class without having to look outside the class for more options. I think archetypes was the first step Pathfinder took to really differentiate itself from 3x directly.
Yes and no. I do love archetypes too, but 3.0 did them first. Not with the same name, but in Unearthed Arcana there were Variant classes, and Variant class and race features, which let you swap out some abilities for others to make a differently flavored class. Pretty much the same thing. PF just took that and ran with it far further.
Anyway... this is drifting off of the topic. If we want to (calmly and without any bashing) discuss the pros and cons of various editions, let's start a thread in the RPG forum section. Now, back to "Guns?" please.
"We're realistic heroes. We're not here to save the world, just nudge the world into a better place."
In a knife fight, there's lots of non-vital wounds created from arms and legs blocking mortal blows - you could still die from blood loss, but it's not the same as having a vital organ with a sword stabbed through. In this way the survivability to blades vs. bullets is greater, if only slightly. Bullets can't be effectively blocked, so defensive wounds are a non-issue. In this way only are guns more lethal than a blade. It's not that it's causing more damage, its just that a fired weapon goes directly to your vitals.
Pathfinder's choice of making the initial range increments equivalent to ranged touch attacks subscribes to what I just said above. Bullets don't do more damage, they just get by defenses more easily, which in my mind is closer to reality, than a bullet causing massive damage by itself.
The way PF balances the gun to other types of weapons is in it's cost. A pistol costs 1000 gp, a musket costs 5000 gp - which fits (sort of) a time period before guns takeover, when they can equate to a magic item in cost. It's just too expensive to be proliferated to all classes and fighting styles. Ammo ain't cheap either using black powder alchemical mixture, that's expensive too. PF does include rules for a more modern setting where guns and cartridge ammo being affordable - something like the Gothic Old West setting I'm building.
Last point, when someone compares the lethality of guns in the real world versus the game world, one has to consider that the average non D&D human is equivalent to a 1st level character or less, so 8 hit points of damage is a killing blow. The bullet's lethality needn't increase with class levels. D&D adventurers are supposed to be tougher than a normal human...
Yeah, I believe it was like 500 g for a pistol from Van Richten's Arsenal, but more expensive if the domain usually doesn't have it which the only one that did was rating 9 which the only one i found was Mordent which I think I want my PC's to visit after wandering around Barovia, they went from opposing Strahd to becoming his marshal's to weed out some of the "nuisences" around his land while he doesn't have to lift a finger.
One of them was like... "wow he's clever." xD
Anyways, i think it only does like 1d10 for the pistol and 1d12 for the rifle.
Another way of increasing the danger of firearms is to remove any possibility of active defenses, if your game has any. GURPS has block (with shields or cloaks), parry (with your own weapon or your fists), and dodge as active defenses - against firearms, the only valid defense is a dodge. GMs who like their gun combat even more realistic can optionally require a PC to do nothing except watch an enemy gunman for the turn immediately before a dodge attempt. This models the PC carefully judging the enemy's aimed direction, so they're dodging the pointed gun rather than the bullet (which is generally not a feasible option anyway, unlike arrows or bolts or throwing knives).
And in GURPS an unseen attack permits no active defenses at all, making ambushes that much more deadly.
While I've thankfully never been shot at, I would imagine the speed at which a bullet is traveling would be so great as to be practically invisible, and so quite literally an unseen attack. Ignoring armor goes without saying, and I'd say even dodge is a bit far fetched. Dex bonus is enough as far as I'm concerned. 3d4 dmg and a lot of bleeding seems fair to make firearms the equalizer they were historically.
I find a lot of the firearm rules assume a late middle ages time period, so it makes sense that things like misfires and low damage and alchemical ingredients are included. In a place like Paridon, however, or even Mordent/Dementlieu/Lamordia, I think guns are more commonplace and could almost be considered a step below wild west frequency. Depending on your campaign.
I'd say supernatural creatures should be particularly resistant. Vampires' speed, ghostly intangibility, zombie resilience, werecreature immunity--all of these things make guns a good weapon against humanity, but could require more traditional slaying methods for the more terrifying residents of a campaign world. Though I don't love the idea, fudging die rolls to create the sense that a supernatural opponent has the PCs overmatched may be a good choice in this instance.
Not huge differences, just a lot of fixing things up and patching what didn't work.
. Regardless I broke down and started buying the books because a book is so much more preferable than PDF's which i'm starting to dispise with a passion when it comes to DMing, the only thing i tend to like is the ability to Ctr+F to find something in it. XD
