Explosives in D&D - good, bad, or ugly?

CCamfield

First Post
AEG's Mercenaries book includes rules for "dracotechnics", explosives created from alchemist's fire, acid, and bat guano.

Ordinarily I would have said explosives don't have much place in fantasy, if I hadn't read Steven Erikson's series in which there are explosives created by a mysterious race called the Moranth from chemicals which detonate on exposure with air. The crack "Bridgeburner" engineers use explosive crossbow quarrels and in one extended sequence infiltrate a city and put explosive charges in strategic intersections to cause havoc when their army attacks.

Nevertheless the Mercenaries' explosives go perhaps a bit too far for me - not only are there grenades and explosive arrows, but even shaped charges for blowing down doors.

(Now that I think about it, a VERY old fantasy board game called Valkenburg castle had engineers with explosives, I think.)

What do you folks think? Do you like this idea, or is it - like cannon, perhaps - too modern for your tastes?

And for anyone who does have Mercenaries, do you think the values for the various bombs are balanced?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Is it better than a fireball?

Afterall a fireball is just a fancy explosive

however I personally don't have a problem with explosives per se and allow rogues with smoke grenades and dwarf engineers with Profession:demolitions to destroy bridges
 

Whether they are good, bad, or ugly really depends on how useful they are as compared to their price. It's a balance issue, really. If they are easy to get, and better than a fireball, I'd probably frown on them. If they are terribly rare and expensive, I'd have less problem with them.
 

I like to use the Freeport firearms rules and the Demolitions skill from d20 CoC in my fantasy games. Why isn't it fantasy, anyway? Sure, it's not Tolkienien fantasy (although Saruman certainly used weird "engines" that seem an awful lot like some kind of explosive to me) or run-of-the-mill D&D, but who wants run-of-the-mill anyway?
 

CCamfield said:
What do you folks think? Do you like this idea, or is it - like cannon, perhaps - too modern for your tastes?

What's wrong with the cannon? I think it's a perfectly fine addition to fantasy. I mean, what with fireballs and magic missiles, how would a cannon upset the "balance" any more than a level 5 wizard?

As for explosives, as long as the use is fairly "period," I'm fine. Charges for doors is a bit pushing it, I think. It's a rarely new innovation, isn't it? Leave the futuristic thinking to mages.

Ug. Magic. You've got to have a good explanation or a better suspension of disbelief to allow it in your campaign as-is. Good thing most DMs and players can have both, hm? ;)

[/semi-off-topic (yay for hyphens) rant on magic]
 

LOL! Interestingly enough, magic in d20 Modern is, in many ways, less "modern" than the effects of magic in D&D, so I see your point.

But yeah, there's another great example of firearms in "explosives" in a campaign setting: the Iron Kingdoms. By the way, when does that campaign book come out again?
 

Wheel of Time Spoiler!
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

The good old WoT series is coming to an interesting point, because one of the Illuminators (read: firework making people) is about to invent cannon. Or at least that's what we think is going to happen. Wonder how Robert Jordan is going to deal with this.
 



Explosives aren't that dangerous to the game, but they are hard to get.

In England's history, the making of gunpowder and the like was monoplized by the government. If you wanted to make the stuff and sell it, you had to work for them.

It was a good way to keep the stuff out of certain people hands, it allowed them to control the price and benefit the government's income.

When taken to the D&D extreme, you can see where you can go in many differant directions story and adventure wise.
 

Remove ads

Top