Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
16 New UA Feats: THE POLL!
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MostlyHarmless42" data-source="post: 8039159" data-attributes="member: 6845520"><p>This again gets back to the core problem I have with the feat in the first place: any setting involving firearms is by design going to require a conversation with the DM in the first place. It granting proficiency as part of the feat is basically just wasted ink because any DM who wants guns will likely grant said proficiencies or allow characters to train in them without feat investments, and any DM who doesn't want them will just outright ban the feat screaming "NOOO!!!" from the rafters. I don't actually begrudge the feat for granting the proficiency, but I want it treated as a thing that isn't a balancing factor of the feat itself, which I get sounds a bit odd in concept. </p><p></p><p>And again, I get why something like the crossbow expert feat granting a bonus action attack is way too powerful for the DMG firearms, but that's really the problem: I don't <em>like</em> the DMG firearm rules. Without wanting to hijack the thread by getting into the whole typical "how strong are guns compared to a longbow, crossbow, or taking a sword in the chest?" debate, I am firmly in the camp that thinks that flintlock weaponry should NOT be stronger than the PHB weapons. As such the DMG rules in effect forcing the gunner feat to be "boring, yet functional" is ...frustrating to me. I do want the feat to exist and thus do not begrudge it, but I kind of wish they would differentiate firearms from crossbows and bows not by eliminating the loading feature, but somehow do some other mechanics, like failure chances, being too loud (maybe letting the feat grant the ability to silence them slightly? or repair them quicker if they jam, etc.).</p><p></p><p>I myself as a DM will still likely just either:</p><p>a) Treat guns like magic items in rarity and ban the feat except for maybe artificers/gunslingers (I use it as a rogue, not a fighter subclass), </p><p>b) Let the player reskin crossbows as firearms and thus not really need the feat to exist, or</p><p>c) Homebrew some sort of firearm rules if the setting itself is commonplace enough for them to exist, and then just treat pistols/"weaker" guns as simple weapons and stronger rifles/firearms as martial weapons. If their class has proficiency they have it.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MostlyHarmless42, post: 8039159, member: 6845520"] This again gets back to the core problem I have with the feat in the first place: any setting involving firearms is by design going to require a conversation with the DM in the first place. It granting proficiency as part of the feat is basically just wasted ink because any DM who wants guns will likely grant said proficiencies or allow characters to train in them without feat investments, and any DM who doesn't want them will just outright ban the feat screaming "NOOO!!!" from the rafters. I don't actually begrudge the feat for granting the proficiency, but I want it treated as a thing that isn't a balancing factor of the feat itself, which I get sounds a bit odd in concept. And again, I get why something like the crossbow expert feat granting a bonus action attack is way too powerful for the DMG firearms, but that's really the problem: I don't [I]like[/I] the DMG firearm rules. Without wanting to hijack the thread by getting into the whole typical "how strong are guns compared to a longbow, crossbow, or taking a sword in the chest?" debate, I am firmly in the camp that thinks that flintlock weaponry should NOT be stronger than the PHB weapons. As such the DMG rules in effect forcing the gunner feat to be "boring, yet functional" is ...frustrating to me. I do want the feat to exist and thus do not begrudge it, but I kind of wish they would differentiate firearms from crossbows and bows not by eliminating the loading feature, but somehow do some other mechanics, like failure chances, being too loud (maybe letting the feat grant the ability to silence them slightly? or repair them quicker if they jam, etc.). I myself as a DM will still likely just either: a) Treat guns like magic items in rarity and ban the feat except for maybe artificers/gunslingers (I use it as a rogue, not a fighter subclass), b) Let the player reskin crossbows as firearms and thus not really need the feat to exist, or c) Homebrew some sort of firearm rules if the setting itself is commonplace enough for them to exist, and then just treat pistols/"weaker" guns as simple weapons and stronger rifles/firearms as martial weapons. If their class has proficiency they have it. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
16 New UA Feats: THE POLL!
Top