D&D General If you could put D&D into any other non middle ages genre, what would it be?

DammitVictor · Jun 16, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
No. That's precisely what it doesn't handle well.

When you have one or two "shots" per turn at say 5th level that deal 1d6 or 1d8 you're not simulating guns. I don't know what you're simulating, but it isn't bullets. Even a "crit" with a gun is so minimal damage as to make a mockery out of the lethality of firearms.

See, posts like this are why firearms rules are complete nonsense in most D&D-derived works. They're not magic death wands.

If you get a bullet in the brain, heart, or lungs you are probably going to die in a matter of seconds. If you get a bullet in the intestines, without medical attention, you are probably going to die within a matter of days. Take a hit anywhere else... well... you're just not going to die at all.

They're a lot like daggers, really.

Main difference between the two is that a non-lethal firearm attack is somewhat more likely to cause permanent, debilitating inuries-- the kind of realistic injuries that the D&D rules deliberately do not model.

There is no point at which D&D's modeling of weapons and injuries even approaches realism. Firearms only appear to be more unrealistic because we are more familiar with their portrayals in the media.

CapnZapp · Jun 16, 2019

The entire *point* of having hit points in fantasy RPGs is to enable mighty melee heroes.

In real life, entering a sword skirmish is incredibly risky, and the notion that "as long as you're skilled you'll do alright" is nonsense. The reason "name" characters survive medieval fights is because they're kept out of the worst fighting.

So level 1 D&D heroes are actually quite realistic, at least compared to higher levels: that d8 can come up a 1 and you shrug it off, and it can come up a 8 and end you, right there.

The reason firearms feel off is because you're changing the *genre*.

Change the genre and you need to change the damage model. In the Western genre it's important that each shot has a chance of killing you, however small (for the heroes). A game without levels or massive hit points, but with something like fate or drama points to separate the heroes from the mooks works better because you have changed the genre.

*That's* why firearms has never felt right in D&D.

Ancalagon · Jun 16, 2019

Satyrn said:
I'd totally recommend checking out Esper Genesis and Dark Matter, since they're both 5e in Spaaaace.

Dark Matter? Couldn't they take something else? Dark matter was an Alternity Setting and is the best RPG book I've ever read, with perhaps the exception of Yoon Suin.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark•Matter

Ancalagon · Jun 16, 2019

CapnZapp said:
The entire *point* of having hit points in fantasy RPGs is to enable mighty melee heroes.

In real life, entering a sword skirmish is incredibly risky, and the notion that "as long as you're skilled you'll do alright" is nonsense. The reason "name" characters survive medieval fights is because they're kept out of the worst fighting.

So level 1 D&D heroes are actually quite realistic, at least compared to higher levels: that d8 can come up a 1 and you shrug it off, and it can come up a 8 and end you, right there.

The reason firearms feel off is because you're changing the *genre*.

Change the genre and you need to change the damage model. In the Western genre it's important that each shot has a chance of killing you, however small (for the heroes). A game without levels or massive hit points, but with something like fate or drama points to separate the heroes from the mooks works better because you have changed the genre.

*That's* why firearms has never felt right in D&D.

Warhammer 2nd ed did it well with exploding dice - any attack could kill you. Even a stray dart from a goblin could be fatal.

Ancalagon · Jun 16, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
No. That's precisely what it doesn't handle well.

When you have one or two "shots" per turn at say 5th level that deal 1d6 or 1d8 you're not simulating guns. I don't know what you're simulating, but it isn't bullets. Even a "crit" with a gun is so minimal damage as to make a mockery out of the lethality of firearms.

I'm not sure why you think a hit from a longsword swung in anger is less lethal than, oh a 9mm parabellum? That can easily hack off a limb or pierce an organ.

Dannyalcatraz · Jun 16, 2019

If there’s a non-quasimedieval genre most editions of D&D should handle well, it’s Sword & Planet.

Maaaaybe you’d want to reskin magic as magitech; spells as gear. Whatever.

MarkB · Jun 16, 2019

Immortal Sun said:
No. That's precisely what it doesn't handle well.

When you have one or two "shots" per turn at say 5th level that deal 1d6 or 1d8 you're not simulating guns. I don't know what you're simulating, but it isn't bullets. Even a "crit" with a gun is so minimal damage as to make a mockery out of the lethality of firearms.

In which case it makes just as much of a mockery out of the lethality of swords, or axes, or bows, as any one of those will kill you in a single solid hit. Even in the real world far more people survive firearm wounds each year than are killed by them, and in heroic fiction such as action movies the protagonists will have huge volumes of lead fired in their direction through the course of the movie.

Using the same rules for guns as for any other lethal weapon in D&D doesn't alter the game's realism one bit.

CapnZapp · Jun 16, 2019

Ancalagon said:
Warhammer 2nd ed did it well with exploding dice - any attack could kill you. Even a stray dart from a goblin could be fatal.

Even more importantly, WFRP had Fate Points, which is something you need to separate the heroes from the mooks when you don't have Conan's 145 hit points.

So, yes, WFRP is a better framework to base a Old West game with gunplay on, than D&D.

Not because D&D is bad, or because it's worse than WFRP. It's not.

But because they support different genres.

D&D is built from the ground up to support fantastical heroes. Conan is one example, but really, he's at the lower end of the power spectrum. At higher levels, Vishnu the Avenger (medieval gore warning!) is a better example.

But very few Old West stories are about that, or even anything close to it. Even the most mythical of Clint Eastwood spaghetti Westerns don't have him kill more than a few dozen enemies, and he is seldom invincible to their attacks.

Conclusion: The Wild West is not the same genre and is best played using a different rules engine. Does that mean you aren't allowed to use D&D? Of course not, but don't tell me I didn't warn you when you feel your D&D firearms work wonky!

CapnZapp · Jun 16, 2019

Ancalagon said:
I'm not sure why you think a hit from a longsword swung in anger is less lethal than, oh a 9mm parabellum? That can easily hack off a limb or pierce an organ.

Why are you discussing real life here?

The entire point of D&D (=hit points and levels) is to ensure that longswords don't hack off limbs (off of heroes).

If you play a game where a rifle can kill you from 250 yards, yes, feel free to also allow a sword to cut your head off.

But comparing the D&D Longsword to the Old West Colt Peacemaker is a mistake, since now you're comparing apples (a genre that borders on superheroics) to oranges (a genre that's quasi-gritty). They're the same genre just like Conan and the Three Musketeers are the same genre, that is to say not at all. (Discussing genre as in rpg implementations now, not genre as in literary works)

If you want quasi-gritty swordplay you don't pick D&D (unless you're barred from leveling up

).

If you want legendary gunplay, D&D works alright I guess, but that is not what most Old West aficionados are looking for.

CapnZapp · Jun 16, 2019

MarkB said:
In which case it makes just as much of a mockery out of the lethality of swords, or axes, or bows, as any one of those will kill you in a single solid hit. Even in the real world far more people survive firearm wounds each year than are killed by them, and in heroic fiction such as action movies the protagonists will have huge volumes of lead fired in their direction through the course of the movie.

Using the same rules for guns as for any other lethal weapon in D&D doesn't alter the game's realism one bit.

Another post that doesn't seem to realize the genre shift.

In D&D, when a level 8 Fighter is attacked by a few goblins with shortswords, their effects are akin to being shot by nerf guns, that is to say, they're an inconvenience but hardly fatal.

Does anyone consider this a "mockery of shortswords"?

Of course not.

The reason D&D "mocks" firearms but not axes or bows is because the genre has shifted.

You expect a Wild West revolver to be (way) more lethal than a (D&D) shortsword.

This would suggest you would expect a Wild West longsword to be (way) more lethal than a (D&D) plasma rifle.

And that's exactly what you're getting.

So before you respond to posts discussing "illogical mockery" it pays to think about genres!