D&D 4E Firearms in 4E

AngeltheTechrat · Feb 7, 2009

I like the rationale with the cantrip-powered mystech firearms, but I still hope I never see fighters carrying jacketed rounds in my D&D fantasy.

If we ever really get firearms back in the game, I wonder if we'll get the Final Fantasy style Gunblades like we got in that 3E dragon article.

Pbartender · Feb 7, 2009

Sabathius42 said:
I don't really see the issue in letting someone do that.

The trouble is that powers that target Reflex, for example, give up something else to make up for that benefit, because Reflex is almost always easier to hit than AC. If you allow all powers to target Reflex instead of AC, then the powers that are designed to target Reflex to begin with fall behind the curve.

Consider the Rogue at-wills by way of example...

All of them deal 1[W] + Dexterity damage. All of them use Dexterity for the attack roll. Some of them can only be used with melee attacks and thereby already prohibit their use with firearms, but for the purposes of this example, let's please ignore that for the moment. All of them grant an additional benefit, like so:

Deft Strike gives two squares of movement.
Piercing Strike targets Reflex defense instead of AC.
Riposte Strike effectively allows you to make a basic melee attack, if your target attacks you.
Sly Flourish allows you to add your Charisma modifier to damage in addition to your Dexterity modifier.

So if Deft Strike, Riposte Strike, and Sly Flourish can now target Reflex Defense as well as any other benefits they grant just by picking the right weapon, then Piercing Strike becomes all but useless. All the other powers become better than Piercing Strike. Or, to look at it another way, Piercing Strike becomes worse than all the other powers.

I still don't like it... All it does it complicate things, without "really giving anyone a great benefit", to use your own words.

That said, if you are intent on having a weapon work this way, I'd look to the wording used for Flaming, Frost and Lightning Weapons in the Magic Item section of the PHB... Something like, "Power (At-Will): Free Action. All attack rolls by this weapon target Reflex defense. Another free action returns the attacks to normal."

Pbartender · Feb 7, 2009

AngeltheTechrat said:
I like the rationale with the cantrip-powered mystech firearms, but I still hope I never see fighters carrying jacketed rounds in my D&D fantasy.

I can hardly argue with that... You've got to draw a line somewhere.

Felon · Feb 7, 2009

Sabathius42 said:
I don't really see the issue in letting someone do that.

Theoretically the +0 proficiency and targetting Reflex behaves exactly like a +2 or +3 proficiency weapon that targets AC. Both should hit around the same number of times.

Powers which target Reflex are generally only special specifically because they target Reflex. Otherwise, they're sub-par. That's the issue.

You are therefore aren't really giving anyone a great benefit by letting them have firearms.

Right, so it's a rather pointless property.

Krensky · Feb 7, 2009

ProfessorCirno said:
All of that misses one rather important point: accuracy.

The english longbowman wasn't shooting at targets 30 feet away. The english longbowman was shooting at targets that they couldn't see, because they weren't aiming, they were firing a volley. They weren't pointing out one specific target and hitting it in the neck, they were in groups of many other longbowmen, shooting at other large groups of footsoldiers, where accuracy doesn't really matter due to reasons of "One of these is bound to hit something."

You seem to be confusing my fiddling to get feasible numbers with supporting the fast bow thing you're ranting about. Also, three rounds a minute wasn't aimed fire either. That was the standard for a man to maintain volley fire with his company. Especially as you don't aim a land pattern musket (or any smooth bore of comparable barrel length) as point it at the French and fire when the sergeant yells at you.

Felon · Feb 7, 2009

Clearly, how a weapon was historically used in massed combat doesn't paint a perfect picture of how it's used in a small skirmish. And it certainly doesn't help much as far as D&D is concerned, because 4e has a very gamist design. The designers were, for instance, content to make loading a crossbow a minor action--windlasses and cranequins be damned--simply because, from the standpoint of gamist economics, anything more would be "overpriced".

Bearing that in mind, it's easy to see that the bow is indeed set up to be the end-all-be-all ranged weapon. I could live with adding firearms to D&D as an alternative. They were in Fable II (along with crossbows, but NOT bows) and the game still had a good fantasy feel to it. But as far as special properties? I'd be content to see them get something like brutal added.

ProfessorCirno · Feb 7, 2009

Felon said:
Bearing that in mind, it's easy to see that the bow is indeed set up to be the end-all-be-all ranged weapon.

Herein lies the entirety of my problem.

I know muskets weren't accurate. That's my point. None of them were. But the only time "realism" is demanded is when the topic of "Everything but bows should suck, how do we justify this?" comes up. So in previous editions, crossbows were just bows with no extra strength damage and stupid reloading times with no extra bonus until later when Crossbow Sniper came out - they were literally "Bows that just suck a lot more, oh and wizards can use them." And even with crossbow sniper, they were still mostly just "bows that suck, but I guess you can make one build that isn't completely crap with them."

I'm not saying bows should suck, and that firearms should be the only ranged weapon used ever. I'm saying that no weapon should be the "USE THIS AND ONLY THIS FOREVER" weapon. Give crossbows, bows, and firearms each a different advantage so players can go "Oh man, crossbows are awesome, I want to use one!" instead of "Oh man, crossbows are awesome...thematically! But my god do they suck too much to use it!"

Derren · Feb 7, 2009

ProfessorCirno said:
I'm not saying bows should suck, and that firearms should be the only ranged weapon used ever.

Well, technically bows should be the weakest of those three weapons.

SpydersWebbing · Feb 7, 2009

I was thinking of just sticking in more modern-ist weapons, medieval fantasy be damned.

Handgun (Simple Melee)
1H
+3
1d8
Ranged 20/40
Off-hand, Single Fire
5 Uses, Reload Standard

Shotgun (Military Melee)
2H
+2
2d6
Ranged 5
Melee 1, Single Fire
5 Uses, Reload Standard

Melee: This weapon uses Constitution instead of Dexterity for the attack modifier, and does not provoke oppurtunity attacks when using it against an adjacent target. When attacking an adjacent target this weapon is treated as having Brutal x (see number). Brutal and Melee properties do stack

Frostmarrow · Feb 7, 2009

Since D&D is supposed to be approved for all ages and gory details left out (for the most part) I don't think firearms should focus on a bullet hitting a target.

Indeed hit points are just a measure of luck in combat. There are no actual hits in the game. There are just characters attacking and hit points disappearing. The rules does never explicitly state what happens when a weapon connects. There are no critical hit tables, for instance. You never count the number of arrows sticking out from your chest.

So the rules for firearms should reflect this too. You just blast away with your guns and hit point dwindle. Think of it as bullets never fly. Naturally players are free to describe their attacks, as always, but the rules don't.

When I think of guns in fantasy I turn to Last of the Mohicans movie with Daniel Day Lewis. The characters carry guns and as they fire them smoke is emitted from the barrel. Sometimes they reload in battle and sometimes they steal guns from their enemies to fire. A dropped loaded weapon is something the characters go for. Most of the time they rely on melee weapons, though.

I'm leaning towards guns doing thunder damage the same way a torch does fire damage. The thunder keyword also reminds everyone of the noise being made.

These are just my thoughts and no real attempt at game design.