D&D 5E (2014) Let's Talk About Guns in 5E

Remathilis · Tuesday at 2:32 PM

Laurefindel said:
Officially? 1454 or 1492, depending what you consider the beginning of the renaissance. I’ll let the scholars argue. Obviously it varied a lot geographically, and it’s not exactly clear when the era became aware of its own existence.

“Medieval Fantasy” sits comfortably over periods of the renaissance however. The “ren” part of ren fairs stands for renaissance, so not even medieval historically speaking. “Renaissance Fantasy” would likely be more accurate, but it’s the term “Medieval Fantasy” that stuck. Don’t ask me why. A mix or ignorance and willful anachronism probably.

I see. Medieval actually has nothing to do with the medieval period but a vaguely medieval aesthetic. That's what I wasn't understanding.

I'm still going to quibble a bit about the exactness of the term, but I think I get the vibe. A lot of the confusion I would gather comes from the one-two punch of all better understanding of what the medieval world was like (we simply know more and a lot of Dark Age misconceptions have been dispelled) and the fact that as we go further into the future, the more of the past moves from "recent" to "ancient" and thus becomes part of the lump of history that fantasy draws on. (That is to say, while knights in full plate would have no reason to encounter carribean era pirates, they both feel sufficiently far enough in the past that the two meeting doesn't feel odd). We've reached the point where even cowboys no longer feel completely alien to a world where a pirate, samurai, druid and spiritualist could adventure together.

GrimCo · Tuesday at 2:49 PM

Remathilis said:
That is to say, while knights in full plate would have no reason to encounter carribean era pirates, they both feel sufficiently far enough in the past that the two meeting doesn't feel odd)

There is only about 220 year gap between knight in maximilian style full plate and pirates of carribean. In contrast, there is about 430 year gap between Battle of Hastings and knights in maximilian style armor.

What we call medieval period is long stretch of time. 1000 years. Knights, as portrayed in popular media, appear at tail end of medieval period, in the last 70ih years. They have their peak in renaissance era, which is early modern. It's closer to today's time then it is to fall of Western Roman Empire.

CleverNickName · Tuesday at 3:42 PM

I run a high fantasy, high-magic D&D (5e 2014) campaign, set in a world that has a culture and technology similar to our real-world Renaissance Italy (c. 1500 AD). So yeah, we have firearms...flintlocks, matchlocks, doglocks, that sort of thing.

The biggest issue that we've had with guns in the campaign was player expectations. At 1st level, my players expected guns to compete directly with magic, and outpace every other ranged weapon. They were pretty sad to learn that firearms were essentially just loud, expensive crossbows that took a full minute to reload.

The grumbling eventually died down as they discovered magical propellants and weapons. Black powder wasn't the only thing that exploded in this campaign, and an alchemist could make a variety of propellant that mimicked spell effects like Burning Hands, Thunderwave, and Glitterdust (these were just reskinned spell scrolls that were "cast" when the weapon fired.) As for magic guns, one player was especially fond of his eldritch pistol that didn't use bullets (while attuned to the pistol, he could use it to cast the Eldritch Blast cantrip). They also found a Dwarven rifle that never missed its target (it was a reskinned Wand of Magic Missiles).

Cross-pollinating guns and magic allowed me to meet the players' expectations, while preserving (more or less) the flavor of the campaign setting. I highly recommend it. But at 1st level, right off the shelf, guns aren't all that impressive in 5e.

SkidAce · Tuesday at 4:32 PM

For the convo...

Mephista · Tuesday at 4:58 PM

My only problem with firearms in 5.5e is that the artillerist or a Rogue multi-class (or by burning a feat) is the only ways that can make effective use of them.

The rules for using them are badly made.

Reynard · Tuesday at 5:03 PM

SkidAce said:
For the convo...

View attachment 435110

I feel like 1d4 additional damage is a little low for giving up your bonus action every round.

SkidAce · Tuesday at 5:04 PM

Reynard said:
I feel like 1d4 additional damage is a little low for giving up your bonus action every round.

Thats fair, just trying to give it an opportunity/choice cost.

Reynard · Tuesday at 5:12 PM

SkidAce said:
Thats fair, just trying to give it an opportunity/choice cost.

I might be inclined to have it always give the 1d4 damage bonus, but if the player uses a bonus action they can load special ammo or change a dial or something that allows them to change the damage type of their eldricht blast.

CreamCloud0 · Tuesday at 5:15 PM

SkidAce said:
Thats fair, just trying to give it an opportunity/choice cost.

i think instead of the 1d4 it auto-maxing EB's damage rolls might be a better reward, trading your bonus action for a certain 10 damage per shot.

Reynard · Tuesday at 5:22 PM

CreamCloud0 said:
i think instead of the 1d4 it auto-maxing EB's damage rolls might be a better reward, trading your bonus action for a certain 10 damage per shot.

Now that is too good.