Various points:
1) Early firearms were woefully innacurate. Until rifled barrels and quality mass production came about, a decent hunting rifle or duelling pistol was a hell of an expensive item as it had to be hand-made by a master craftsman. All other guns were woeful, pistols were literally used at ranges of 10 feet and the like, the user having several to pull out and dispatch foes and throw away after each shot. Muskets had to be fired in volleys so the storm of lead would hit
something.
2) Guns are *not* "doomsday weapons", jeesh. The physical damage a sword or mace does is usually a hell of a lot worse than a gun does. There are exceptions to that though, like shotguns and .50 cal Browning etc which do immense damage, and autofire weapons can do awful damage due to number of hits.
In general (caveat!), edged weapons kill by blood loss or amputation (stab wounds are more lethal than gunshot wounds on average), blunt kills by shock and destroyed organs, bullets by shock and slower blood loss.
Bullets often
incapacitate you straight way, that useful ability, their range,
potential to pierce cover, and rate of fire is what makes them great.
3) Armour
can stop bullets! It's just not as effective against them though. Chain mail bullet proof vests were made and used up to the 1960s at least (relative-in-law of mine's father was in that business
). Bullets have a tendency to richochet off buttons, never mind plate steel.
However bullets are better at penetrating armour than an arrow. I wouldn't want to risk it, lol, but plate armour can deflect a bullet, kevlar though is a lot better at stopping bullets out-right.
4) Crossbows were still used by people long after firearms came out, as hunting weapons, as they were cheaper, more reliable and more accurate.
And until the advent of cordite bullets, there was always a risk of causing a fire as a risk (burning wadding or primer from matchlocks and flintlocks caused fires)
5) There is an enormous difference between a modern rifle, or even a rifled flintlock, and the truly woeful matchlocks of previous times.
6) Older fireams did have good knockdown potential because of their very large, slow, lead bullets, which are better man-stoppers than modern small, bronze coated, high velocity bullets.
The best manstopper there is (short of a .50 calibre machine gun) is the humble 12 gauge shotgun, because of its heavy load of slow, lead pellets. Such weapons dump their energy
into you, not into what's
behind you.
the old British .455 pistol was greatly better at stopping an attacker in their tracks than a modern 9mm as an example of this, but the modern 9mm can hold triple the amount of bullets and is a heck of a lot more accurate.
7) Yes firearms are easier to learn, but the limits of the quality of the weapon is a real problem. You may be a superb shot, but if you're musket is only accurate to a max of 40 yards, well...you'd be much better served by a crossbow.
8) Muzzle loaders are very slow to load! No two ways about it. Slower than a foot-stirrup crossbow (which is what most crossbows would be, not winched).
So I think Firearms should be, for 4th ed:
Simple weapons, (they are easy to learn)
+3 Prof (they do penetrate armour and cover better)
Muzzle loaders damage should be 2d4 damage for a pistol, and 3d4 for a musket. They hit extremely hard because of the big, slow lead bullets (massive things by today's standards, usually around .50 to .70 calibre!)
Muzzle loader's range sucked, however, pistol range should only be 5, and musket 5/10.
A masterwork muzzleloading pistol's range would be 5/10 and a masterwork rifle 10/20
Costs for a pistol would be 150 gp, and 350 gp for a rifle. Masterwork items would cost ten times that!
Modern weapons add in more complications: light vs heavy calibre, hollow point vs FMJ rounds, scopes, etc.
basically a modern target rifle, in hands of a marksman can hit PENNIES at 100 yards, I used ot shoot match heads at 25 yards with a .22 for fun, when talking about accuracy.
Suggested damage (but I have no idea how you'd want ot work out auto fire etc).
.50 calibre Browning and "elephant gun" cartidges should do about 3d6 damage. (.50 calibres do as much damage as a light ballista can, and it can fire hundreds of rounds per minute)
12 gauge shotgun should do 4d4 damage out to 6squares, and 2d4 out to 15 squares (up close, yeak, very nasty)
.45 ACP, .44 magnum, and .30 calibre/7.62 mm rifle bullets should do 1d12 damage
5.56 mm do 1d10 damage (that's actually a deer hunting rifle cartridge, FYI)
9mm and .38 do 1d8 damage
.22, .25 ACP do 1d6 damage (a hell of a lot of folk get killed by those tiny bullets!)
Giff RULE!!!
[sblock="Giff!"]
[/sblock]
ProfessorCirno,
agreed on crossbows to an extent!
Said for a long time crossbows, ballistae and catapults should be treated as having a Strength rating, because that's EXACTLY what mehcanical advantage gives you!
Crossbows should be a 1 round reload (or a Move action with a fast reloading feat), but add a Strength bonus to damage.
A weak wizard doens't have the strength to pull a longbow, but he can use
all his muscles, instead of arms/chest, to span a crossbow to give the same force to the bolt as to the lonbgbow's arrow. So there's no difference in impact damage of either the mighty archr or the weak wizard.
The archer CAN fire more shots though than the wizard...but bows are hell of a lot more innacurate than crossbows, and thus a novice with a bow is damn near useless but a novice with a crossbow is still useful.
For 4th ed, IMHO, a Crossbow should do 1d8 damage +4 Strength damage bonus, unless the user has a higher bonus, but as said, take 1 round to reload, if you don't have a fast relaod Feat.
Slings are very good weapons, far superior to their D&D rules, but they should not be simple, they should be Superior weapons as they are very difficult to learn to use!
Sling: Superior weapon +2 prof, damage 1d8, High Crit, range 10/20. Reload = move (or minor with rapid reload feat)
In reality, slings are not as accurate as a bow, and no where near as accurate as as a crossbow hence +2 hit bonus, not +3 as for most SUperior weapons. Slings have no sights, no aim marks, no arrow points to give a proper aim by, thus they are weapons of pure skill/feel and thus lack accuracy.
However for D&D rules Susperior wepaons must offer an advantage, thus, High Crit.
You couuld argue that's ok, because sling shot (lead slugs) don't need to pierce armour to cause severe injury, they are blunt weapons, and archaelogical evidence shows victims dead by shattered bones (and presumably organs), yet the slugs didn't pierce the armour...the impact energy was sufficient though to drive the armour into the victim or impact energy burst organs.
lead slugs are much better projectiles than stones, maybe rules need ot account for that?
IMHO, relaoding should NOT be free for a bow, it sure isn't free in real life! bows should reload "Minor".
