D&D (2024) Firearms in the Forgotten Realms (+)

[GnomeWorks]

I think part of the reason why it's hard to accept in D&D is less the fantasy setting and more hit points.

HP is kind of ridiculous whether guns are involved or not.

I can see why people might assume that guns are more dangerous than swords. I also think those people both overestimate the deadliness of guns -- there are plenty of real-world stories of people getting shot in ways that aren't life-threatening, or that keep standing even when shot several times -- and underestimate how dangerous a three-foot-long length of sharpened steel is.

 

[Zardnaar]

Is there something special about the 17th or 18th centuries that makes them a non-viable setting for a fantasy story?

I get that the majority of the fantasy genre has a vaguely-medieval feel to it. I would also argue that that isn't a requirement.

5Es very much ye old Renaissance Faire.

Older D&D d8d stretch things to 17th or 18th century pirates of the Caribbean is upper limit really tech wise for D&D.

Some Ravenloft product had Victorian vibes but didn't quite pull it off imho.

For ne personally I don't mind anachronisms in the world and upper limit is around 17th century maybe 18th for pirates.

Anachronisms would be full plate in Ancient Greece or a cartridge rifle in 5E. You can't buy them but might find one. Monk can enjoy their modern rifle with 5 shots.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I had another thread where someone suggested a Blunderbuss and other related firearms have a special property called "spread" where it does 2d6 damage in close range, and 1d6 damage at far range with no disadvantage to the attack. Though "spread" would generally have such weapons to doing 2 die of damage.

 

[Zardnaar]

I had another thread where someone suggested a Blunderbuss and other related firearms have a special property called "spread" where it does 2d6 damage in close range, and 1d6 damage at far range with no disadvantage to the attack. Though "spread" would generally have such weapons to doing 2 die of damage.

I would make them a cone effect and a saving throw. AoE to whatever range.

Cone to 15 feat then 15' maybe. DC12 or 13.

Auto fire for more advanced types something similar.

 

[SkidAce]

Uh, can't have muskets next to my chainmail bikinis!

Why not both?!

 

[MarkB]

This is a + thread, so I'm attempting to answer your question but I'm not arguing against firearms in D&D. The long and short of it is that I think firearms takes people out of the fantasy mileu. We can imagine people people getting into a swordfight, maybe getting nicked, punched in the face, etc., etc. but when it comes to firearms people typically get shot and just go straight down.

Not in any Hollywood action movie I've seen. Sure, the mook-level bad guys do, but they do to arrows and swords in fantasy movies too. The hero will take multiple grazed shots, one or two into muscle and at least one in the torso and still struggle through.

 

[Azzy]

Why martial weapons?

Simple, because in the new PHB, the pistol and musket are both martial weapons and I want these converted weapons to fit the same design ethos.

I don't see any particular issues with your designs but overall I'd say these weapons are on the weak side compared to what is already available, so you may find that players just ignore them unless they value the flavor over powerful game mechanics:

Unfortunately, there's rather little mechanical design space for firearms (and weapons in general). What would you suggest?

• Blunderbuss does gain 0.5 average damage over a Musket but wow that range is really limiting and hard to justify relying on. Without feats you would have to stand exactly 10 feet away to not have disadvantage on every attack (and if you use the weapon mastery then you give yourself disadvantage)

I want it have a shorter range than the musket, maybe 20/60?

• For Caviler why would anyone use this over a Pistol? Or a Longbow for that matter? Pistol does more damage with all else same, Longbow has way more range with all else same.
• For Starwheel Pistol, why use this over a Hand Crossbow? Same damage, less range, and arguably a worse weapon mastery (you could debate this though).

I'm open to suggestions.

 

[Azzy]

Why are they so expensive? I realize the economics in D&D is a bit wonky no matter how you read it, but 450 gp for a blunderbuss seems like a deliberate decision to make firearms unavailable to most people.

Simply because the new PHB makes pistols (250 gp) and muskets (500 gp), so I wanted these to keep with a similar pricing.

 

[Scribe]

-- and underestimate how dangerous a three-foot-long length of sharpened steel is.

I cut my finger on the plastic packaging for my salad. Almost nobody considers what it would really be like to be hit with intent with an actual sword.

 

[MGibster]

I can see why people might assume that guns are more dangerous than swords. I also think those people both overestimate the deadliness of guns -- there are plenty of real-world stories of people getting shot in ways that aren't life-threatening, or that keep standing even when shot several times -- and underestimate how dangerous a three-foot-long length of sharpened steel is.

It's not an assumption as firearms are far more effective at ending the lives of human beings than melee weapons. It's not that a shot to the gut is necessarily more damaging than being stabbed in the gut, but because it's a lot easier to shoot someone in the gut than it is to stab them. If my opponent is armed with three feet of steel he's got to get within three feet of me to do any harm. If I've got a wheellock pistol I can blow his head off before he gets that close. There's a reason Europeans and others adopted the firearm as their primary weapon of choice.

Of course we're talking about a fantasy game so realism be damned. But I think it's why a lot of people balk at firearms in their fantasy games. It just takes them out of the fantasy. Is it logical? Maybe not.