D&D 5E Why do guns do so much damage?

[Steampunkette]

I believe the record is being shot 21 times and surviving.

WARMINGTON: Miracle Man survives 30 bullet wounds

This young man is hard to kill.

torontosun.com

30. New record set in 2018!

Poor guy must be beside himself surviving all those bullets when the first one -clearly- would have killed him.

Shattered bones, destroyed veins, perforated organs... Fortunately there was a hospital within walking distance because he walked to the hospital and showed them his health insurance card in order to receive treatment.

 

[jgsugden]

D&D is abstraction. Not simulation.

Clearly, inarguably, undeniably, inevitably and uncontroversially, the gunpowder components in our fantasy D&D worlds is just different than the real world such that the damage stated in the books, whatever it is, is appropriate.

 

[Sithlord]

WARMINGTON: Miracle Man survives 30 bullet wounds

This young man is hard to kill.

torontosun.com

30. New record set in 2018!

Poor guy must be beside himself surviving all those bullets when the first one -clearly- would have killed him.

Clearly he had stone skin cast on him for half damage

 

[Oofta]

WARMINGTON: Miracle Man survives 30 bullet wounds

This young man is hard to kill.

torontosun.com

30. New record set in 2018!

Poor guy must be beside himself surviving all those bullets when the first one -clearly- would have killed him.

Don't you know that every bullet is fired from a military grade long gun by a professional shooter that pierces the heart?

Obviously, here's what every bullet does:

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I think the damage for firearms is basically fine. I think were it seems wonky is in making early firearms reasonably accurate within range, when compared to basically all other weapons they were not. Personally I think we'd get a more "realistic" comparative modeling if players couldn't add their Dex mod to the to hit for a musket or what have you.

Fifty Cent took nine rounds at close range. Including one in the chest and one in the head. Dude must've died that night and someone else is -pretending- to be him on stage.

I'm pretty sure the version of him who had to rely on pre-industrial medicine died.

Meanwhile the version of him who was a D&D character was brought back by healing magic immediately.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

I think the damage for firearms is basically fine. I think were it seems wonky is in making early firearms reasonably accurate within range, when compared to basically all other weapons they were not.

You could model that by giving them really short short ranges compared to their long ranges. Currently they have short ranges that are 1/3 of their long ranges whereas most other weapons have short ranges that are 1/4 of their long ranges. This seems like it should be other way around...

 

[Cadence]

Also worth noting: A wheellock pistol within arm's reach of a person with a sword and lethal intent would be useless.

I thought I had heard in general that a melee weapon was better than gun when close, with the smaller melee weapon becoming better as you force inside the comfortable range of the larger melee one. All of the top google links I got were just anecdotes though.

Are the shotgun and blunderbuss exceptions to a lot of the rules on the damage caused? (Or have all of the westerns lied to me about that too). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/ful...pz4FbthDwmWco74RToGWwK44UDweJZgC7Ge2HDJ8OSrJA

 

[Stalker0]

The other thing we have to consider is the rate of attacks. Dnd has long given 1 attack to a longsword even though its quite possible to get 2 or even 3 attacks in the same space....we just use 1 attack for simplicity, saying that its the most "effective" of the attacks made.

But with early guns, it would be hard to argue that the gun fires more than once....its just once at round at absolute best, and realistically should only be possible if you have multiple weapons already loaded.

So even if we say firearms do more damage than a sword....considering that a sword can cut several times in the same space of a single musket fire....I think the sword is clearly going to do more damage.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Also worth noting: A wheellock pistol within arm's reach of a person with a sword and lethal intent would be useless.

I mean, that hasn't changed. An individual with a holstered gun being surprised by someone within 20 feet with a knife is almost certainly going to be mortally wounded before drawing their gun. Training videos for police tell you that if an attacker is closer than 10 feet you will be wounded before you have drawn your weapon even if you're on guard. Melee range is a lot further than you'd think. People are fast, reactions are slow.

Back to the original point, I think the problem is back to the design of the weapon table:

A dagger deals 1d4 damage. So does a throwing knife or dart.
Shortbows are a two-handed weapon, so they need to be better than daggers and darts somehow. They deal 1d6 damage.
Longbows are martial, so they need to be better than shortbows somehow. They deal 1d8.
Light crossbows have the loading property, so they need to be better than shortbows somehow. They deal 1d8 damage.
Heavy crossbows are martial, have the loading property, and are heavy, so they need to be better than everything above. They do 1d10 damage.

Guns are exotic, and they require rare and exotic ammunition (gunpowder) that as a rule can't easily be produced. They should outclass everything above. Pistols do 1d10, muskets do 1d12.

In short, can we please have class-based weapon damage rolls?

 

[Steampunkette]

I thought I had heard in general that a melee weapon was better than gun when close, with the smaller melee weapon becoming better as you force inside the comfortable range of the larger melee one. All of the top google links I got were just anecdotes though.

Are the shotgun and blunderbuss exceptions to a lot of the rules on the damage caused? (Or have all of the westerns lied to me about that too). https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17416124.2020.1727630?casa_token=6WxPNO8c5lkAAAAA:TJVj2T4pE-TxDzVAdt_MtJpCecnQHL5nhpz4FbthDwmWco74RToGWwK44UDweJZgC7Ge2HDJ8OSrJA

In the case of the Wheellock Pistol it all has to do with the firing time. How long it takes for the gun to go off after you pull the trigger.

-MOST- early firearms had similar delays, or issues like having to keep the weapon almost perfectly level to keep powder resting in a steel tray so the smoldering wick could press down into it, or the flint could strike the steel to light it. And then that fire would ignite the powder deeper in the weapon and -then- the gun would go off.

As to Blunderbusses and Shotguns: They'll still -devastate- an unarmored person at short range.

Someone who is appropriately armored, though, facing a blunderbuss full of small round pellets is better off than he would be if he was facing off a musket, which keeps all of it's force in a single projectile. But the pellets that ricochet are still more likely to pass through joints in the armor, under the chin into the helmet, and things of that nature.

I mean, that hasn't changed. An individual with a holstered gun being surprised by someone within 20 feet with a knife is almost certainly going to be mortally wounded before drawing their gun. Training videos for police tell you that if an attacker is closer than 10 feet you will be wounded before you have drawn your weapon even if you're on guard. Melee range is a lot further than you'd think. People are fast, reactions are slow.

Back to the original point, I think the problem is back to the design of the weapon table:

A dagger deals 1d4 damage. So does a throwing knife or dart.
Shortbows are a two-handed weapon, so they need to be better than daggers and darts somehow. They deal 1d6 damage.
Longbows are martial, so they need to be better than shortbows somehow. They deal 1d8.
Light crossbows have the loading property, so they need to be better than shortbows somehow. They deal 1d8 damage.
Heavy crossbows are martial, have the loading property, and are heavy, so they need to be better than everything above. They do 1d10 damage.

Guns are exotic, and they require rare and exotic ammunition (gunpowder) that as a rule can't easily be produced. They should outclass everything above. Pistols do 1d10, muskets do 1d12.

In short, can we please have class-based weapon damage rolls?

13th Age style..? That's far from the worst idea, yeah... I could definitely see that.