Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Laurefindel" data-source="post: 9825564" data-attributes="member: 67296">Thanks everyone for all your replies, these are very helpful.Indeed the feel I’m going for is early matchlock technology (technological advancements just graduated from hand-cannons fired with a match). Bullets are inaccurate and the outcome is uncertain, not by fault of the attacker. We’re not at Napoleonian or American Independence War level of technology yet, so the concept of a gunslinger feels out of context here. Typical users can expect to gain 1 attack per combat per loaded firearm; they are meant as flashy, one-off big boom side-weapons for PCs rather than main usage weapons, unless they specialize in them. Still uncertain about how effective a dedicated pistolier or arquebusier should be.I’m now aiming to make reloading 1 minute or 1 round with the feat (which then can be fired as a BA). As such, I want firearms to have more punch than cantrips. As soon as reloading is more than 1 round anyway, you might as well say « not in combat », but 1 hour seems indeed unnecessary long.Firearms will only have one range, with no damage on successful save for pistol, and 1/2 damage on save for musket (which I will likely rename arquebus). That will be the ability of the arquebus. Not sure about adding a rider to the pistol damage anymore. I like the idea of allowing still greater range with advantage on saving throws.I’m having a hard time rationalizing upgraded damage à la cantrip other than having firearms stay relevant at higher level (which I can live with). I might have them deal an extra damage die per extra attack feature instead (which comes up to be the same for fighters), but I need to see how that will impact rogues, paladins, and rangers (and monks for a Chinese’s fire lances feel). I need to see how all of this fits with rogue sneak attack, and paladin and ranger features that boost damage anyway. The spell angle had that advantage of explicitly bypassing all weapon features.[edit] 5e24 is a bit more precise it it’s wording and uses « when you hit with an attack roll » pretty consistently, rather than « when you make a weapon attack » of 5e14. Only the ranger has a few abilities left wording « attacks with a weapon », which makes me wonder if these are deliberate or involuntary omissions. At any case, I can easily rationalize why an imprecise weapon is not compatible with sneak attack and such, but it does open up the possibility of homebrewed subclasses that bend the rules in favor of firearms-wielding rogues and rangers.</blockquote>

Verification