W'rkncacnter
Hero
i--wait, WHAT? HUH??? gambeson is like...the most basic form of armor you can wear. it's what dnd thinks is padded except far better. what do you mean "exotic"?
D&D (2024) Make firearms "magic items"
Because D&D doesn't have gambeson. Somehow no one in any setting thought to make thich cloth armor except some crazy exotic hermit.
W'rkncacnter
Hero
dnd moment.
Tonguez
A suffusion of yellow
I was always fascinated that Egypt continued to use bronze even while its numbers developed iron smelting tech. Its interesting how cultural preference can throughout the linear ‘development index’
Cadence once made this excellent post that i refer to often when I get into debates with people about what level of technology "feels like D&D". You'll note, looking at it, that several things we take for granted, like bastard swords and full plate armor, were not so far removed from early firearms as one might suppose.
Most arguments against firearms either ignore the issues of using early firearms, conflating them with weapons made in the 20th century, or expect firearms to be more realistic than the abstract weapons and armor already. "Guns can punch through armor, thus guns would ruin D&D", ignoring the fact that certain medieval weapons already would be very effective against armor
It's a game where stabbing a guy with a sword only depletes your "luck/stamina/morale" points and leaves you with a minor wound, at best. Guns don't have any reason to be more lethal than a magic missile spell. And lots of reasons to be worse; Napoleonic-era riflemen were damn good to get off 8-10 shots per minute. Contrast and compare a high-level 5e Fighter who can eventually fire a bow 8 times in 6 seconds if they darn well need to.
Most arguments against firearms either ignore the issues of using early firearms, conflating them with weapons made in the 20th century, or expect firearms to be more realistic than the abstract weapons and armor already. "Guns can punch through armor, thus guns would ruin D&D", ignoring the fact that certain medieval weapons already would be very effective against armor
It's a game where stabbing a guy with a sword only depletes your "luck/stamina/morale" points and leaves you with a minor wound, at best. Guns don't have any reason to be more lethal than a magic missile spell. And lots of reasons to be worse; Napoleonic-era riflemen were damn good to get off 8-10 shots per minute. Contrast and compare a high-level 5e Fighter who can eventually fire a bow 8 times in 6 seconds if they darn well need to.
Incenjucar
Legend
I do not enjoy guns in my fantasy, and I'd not like for it to become prominent in the existing settings, but there should be enough support for those who do like it.
This is similar to my own opinion that items, weapons, and armor need a technology level, which helps explain why some are just better/worse than others. Crappy weapons like clubs and bottom tier armors could be found in the most primitive cultures, but almost nobody would use them outside of that unless they had no choice. On the other end of the spectrum, firearms, rapiers, and top tier armors should only be found in the most technologically advanced cultures, explaining why they're better than most other options. This allows the DM to easily limit what's available for purchase to PCs.
Kobold Avenger
Legend
Italian armoursmiths used to grade armour against early firearms. Like shooting a fullplate to prove that it could protect against bullets. These were probably from back when barrels were smoothbore.
Yaarel
He Mage
There is high quality iron during the Bronze Age, albeit scarce. For example, in northern Turkey there are certains towns whose metallurgists know the technology to produce iron, but keep it a closely guarded secret. At the same time, iron from meteorites is often high quality iron. Most Bronze Age iron implements are from meteors.
Those towns whose metallurgy is sufficiently advanced can recognize the remarkable properties of the occasional iron from meteors and trade routes. They can forge it into weapons and tools, even if they dont yet know how to produce this iron themselves. For example, in Late Bronze Age Egypt (Dynasty 18), the pharaoh Tutankhamen has a dagger with a high quality iron blade. The Egyptians are the most technologically advanced civilization of the ancient world. They recognize it as a valuable sacred treasure, supply it with a handle of gold and so on.
From the perspective of the Bronze Age, high quality iron is a magic item, whether sent down from the heavens or produced by esoteric magics.
Yaarel
He Mage
In principle, there is not much difference in the amount of damage between a bullet thru the gut, an arrow thru the gut, or a sword thrust thru the gut. The piercings are comparable. Roughly 1d8 damage.
What makes the gun differ is the attack, not the damage. A bullet is more likely to hit.
The gun is a simple weapon that most people can use.
The bullet is more likely to pierce − thus ignore − armor.
The biggest change that firearms introduce into gameplay is, combat typically becomes ranged, and cover becomes more useful than armor. This distancing of combat reduces the visceral quality that makes melee combat more exciting and more entertaining. To introduce firearms dramatically changes the nature of the D&D game. Guns have their own kind of entertainment, such as suspense because a bullet can come from anywhere at any moment. But it disresembles melee combat.
Maybe the best way to handle firearm mechanics is, instead of rolling an attack d20, the target rolls a Dexterity (Reflex) save. The armor is less relevant. Mechanics can assume the shooter has general competence to aim the gun in the direction of the target. It is up to the target to become less easy to hit, by moving around and taking cover.
For modernesque heavy firearms that do extraordinary amounts of damage, these are more expensive. To put these heavy weapons in the magic item category or its technological marvel equivalent can gatekeep these well enough.
But in all cases, having firearms use the Dex save mechanic rather than the attack mechanic seems to work realistically enough and within gaming balance. In other words, firearms are more like a magic cantrip or magic spell or consumable magic item, even tho they are Martial technology.
What makes the gun differ is the attack, not the damage. A bullet is more likely to hit.
The gun is a simple weapon that most people can use.
The bullet is more likely to pierce − thus ignore − armor.
The biggest change that firearms introduce into gameplay is, combat typically becomes ranged, and cover becomes more useful than armor. This distancing of combat reduces the visceral quality that makes melee combat more exciting and more entertaining. To introduce firearms dramatically changes the nature of the D&D game. Guns have their own kind of entertainment, such as suspense because a bullet can come from anywhere at any moment. But it disresembles melee combat.
Maybe the best way to handle firearm mechanics is, instead of rolling an attack d20, the target rolls a Dexterity (Reflex) save. The armor is less relevant. Mechanics can assume the shooter has general competence to aim the gun in the direction of the target. It is up to the target to become less easy to hit, by moving around and taking cover.
For modernesque heavy firearms that do extraordinary amounts of damage, these are more expensive. To put these heavy weapons in the magic item category or its technological marvel equivalent can gatekeep these well enough.
But in all cases, having firearms use the Dex save mechanic rather than the attack mechanic seems to work realistically enough and within gaming balance. In other words, firearms are more like a magic cantrip or magic spell or consumable magic item, even tho they are Martial technology.
