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

[MGibster]

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

That makes sense. Someone who contributed to the PHB wanted to make firearms impractically expensive for lower level characters.

 

[DrJawaPhD]

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

Great question and I'm not the most useful there - I'm pretty good at assessing how a proposed homebrew option would be judged versus existing options from a powergaming perspective, but not that great at coming up with my own homebrew ideas. I've actually tried to homebrew my own additional gun options like you're doing here but never came up with anything I liked enough to justify adding it.

Looking at the existing Musket and Pistol, they're basically Heavy Crossbow and Longbow with damage die scaled up by d2 (i.e. d8 to d10) at the expense of much shorter range. There isn't much more design space here though.

• If you put Light on the Caviler then it's a Hand Crossbow with more damage / shorter range, at the expense of not qualifying for CBE feat.
• Then if you put Nick on the Starwheel Pistol that's basically a ranged Scimitar, at the expense of not qualifying the dual wielder feat. This could be really interesting if you are ok with the "realism" of dual wielding Caviler + Starwheel Pistol (I'm not familiar enough with these weapons to know if this makes fantasy-sense or not)
• For the Arquebus I'm not sure, to bump the damage dice you'd need to be at 2d8 and that just feels out of place since nothing else goes that high. Another option might be to up the damage dice even more to 2d12 but give no damage benefit from Dexterity modifier. If Arquebus was 2d12+0 at short range vs Musket's 1d12+5 (or less) at longer range then that might be a balanced trade-off? Hard to say

Another route you can take is just have them be underpowered weapons by comparison, but have players find them as magical weapons which then tips the scales but only when you're ready to introduce them.

 

[James Gasik]

Why martial weapons?

Firearms should be simple weapons. That's their whole shtick. They are dead simple to use. Unlike bow that takes years to master, old black powder guns were dead simple. Point and pull the trigger. Also, because they take long to reload, they are in pure damage output, inferior to bows.

During the Napoleonic Wars, the mark of a trained rifleman was not the ability to fire with accuracy so much as the ability to fire and reload six times in a minute. I figure that justifies them being martial weapons.

 

[MGibster]

During the Napoleonic Wars, the mark of a trained rifleman was not the ability to fire with accuracy so much as the ability to fire and reload six times in a minute. I figure that justifies them being martial weapons.

Riflemen were relatively rare in Napoleon's day with the rank and file troops using muskets instead. Being able to fire rapidly with a rifle might be better suited to something you accomplish with a Feat. I don't it's D&D, and martial and simple weapons don't really make a lot of sense, but given the cost of a firearm in D&D why should they be martial? It's not for any balancing purposes.

 

[GrimCo]

Also, with their cost, they are out of reach at low levels. With loading properties, they become useless for range weapon focused martials who get extra attack. They also have short range, which makes them worse at distances than bows. TBH, firearms are novelty items in 5e. At least in older editions, they ignored armor and had big crit modifier. Now, they are worse and more expensive version of crossbow.

IMHO, putting them in anything other than simple weapons is mistake from designers.

 

[Mecheon]

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

I will argue against this and point out there are quite a few popular fantasies with guns. Warhammer and Warcraft are the obvious two, with Warhammer having both the Empire and Cathay using pleny of firearms, and Warcraft just making guns interchangeable with bows and crossbows (except for the days of vanilla and the thorium bullets not having an arrow counterpart until a few patches in)

 

[Stormonu]

Way back in 2e, the PHB included the arquebus (an ancestor of the musket) and the Forgotten Realms Adventures book added in a few more. Now that the 24 PHB includes a pistol and a musket, I thought I’d try my hand converting the personal firearms from FRA (no Bombard and Ribald for now) to 5e. The goal here is to keep with the design space of the other firearms of the 14 DMG and the 24 PHB, not the 2e’s firearm mechanics.

So, I submit to you my first draft. I’m very much open to suggestions to make these weapons worthwhile as options, but not too good.

Firearms​

Name	Damage	Properties	Mastery	Weight​	Cost​
Martial Ranged Weapons
Blunderbuss	2d6 Piercing	Ammunition (Range 10/30; Bullet), Loading, Two-Handed	Topple	8 lb.​	450 GP​
Caviler	1d8 Piercing	Ammunition (Range 30/90; Bullet), Loading	Graze	6 lb.​	200 GP​
Starwheel Pistol	1d6 Piercing	Ammunition (Range 30/90; Bullet), Light, Loading	Sap	1 lb.​	100 GP​

Blunderbuss: A variation of the arquebus with a wide bore and a trumpetlike barrel, the blunderbuss is also called the Gondgun derisively. It has very poor range, but has the advantage that it can fire stones, pellets, iron shot, or anything else that fits down its gullet.

Caviler: A lighter form of musket which inflicts less damage but is more accurate (it has a better chance to inflict additional damage). The caviler takes two hands to fire, but can be fired from horseback at no penalty. Most cavilers (except cheap copies) are made by the priests of Gond in Lantan and are marked with the symbol of the god on their metal stock.

Starwheel Pistol: Not of Gond manufacture, and perhaps not made anywhere in the Realms, the starwheel is a one-handed weapon which inflicts little damage

I'd probably put the Pistol at 150 myself.

Didn't see it here, but how much is a bullet (and powder)? That will have the biggest effect on their adoption.

If powder can be bought separate, might want to consider adding a sort of grenade (y'now, the old burning fuse baseball-shaped type).

Spoiler

 

[Hriston]

Here's my homebrew write-up for medieval period gunpowder weapons. Feel free to mine for ideas:

Gunpowder Weapons​

​

Simple Melee Weapon​

Fire lance, cost: 2 gp, damage: 1d6 fire, weight: 6 lb., properties: Two-handed, smoke cloud, special.​

​

Simple Ranged Weapon​

Hand cannon, cost: 25 gp, damage: 1d6 piercing, weight: 6 lb., properties: Ammunition (range 30/120), loading, two-handed, armor-piercing, smoke cloud.​

​

Martial Ranged Weapon​

Arquebus, cost: 50 gp, damage: 1d8 piercing, weight: 11 lb., properties: Ammunition (range 80/320), loading, two-handed, armor-piercing, smoke cloud, supportable.​

​

Weapon Properties​

​

Armor-piercing. When making an attack with this weapon, the target's AC is effectively reduced for the purposes of this attack by up to 3 points deriving from the target's armor and/or a shield it is wearing. Also, the weapon emits a thunderous boom audible out to 300 feet.​

​

Smoke cloud. When used, this weapon creates a 5-foot-radius sphere of smoke centered on the attacker. The sphere's area is heavily obscured. It lasts for one hour or until a wind of moderate or greater speed (at least 10 miles per hour) disperses it.​

​

Supportable. Attacks made with this weapon gain advantage while the weapon is resting on a strong support (wall, prop, etc.)​

​

Special Weapon Properties​

​

Fire lance. When ignited as an action, this weapon emits a 10-foot cone of flame. All creatures in the area must make a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 fire damage. The fire ignites any flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.​

​

Ammunition​

Fire arrows (20), cost: 2 gp, weight: 1 lb.​

​

Fire arrows. When fired from a bow or crossbow, this ammunition not only deals the weapon's damage to the target on a hit, but, whether the attack hits or misses, all creatures within a 10-foot radius of the target must make a DC 10 Dexterity saving throw or take 1d6 fire damage. The fire ignites any flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried.​

 

[GnomeWorks]

If my opponent is armed with three feet of steel he's got to get within three feet of me to do any harm.

You've apparently not heard of the 21 foot rule.

If I've got a wheellock pistol I can blow his head off before he gets that close.

Sure, that's possible. But this statement makes me think you haven't spent any time at a range.

And while a crossbow wouldn't be as graphically deadly, it could achieve the same end.

There's a reason Europeans and others adopted the firearm as their primary weapon of choice.

Guns were adopted because they are the least-demanding weapon to use with no training. Crossbows require a good deal of strength or specialized tools to arm; let's not even talk about the years of training required for a longbowman. Almost literally anyone can pick up a gun and become a meaningful threat. That's why firearms were adopted: in D&D terms, they are simple weapons that take at most a week to gain proficiency in, and anyone can pick one up and aim it.

Of course we're talking about a fantasy game so realism be damned.

The reality is that Renaissance-era guns aren't more dangerous than most other weapons used in D&D. I specify Renaissance-era because obviously once you get into modern firearms the ROF does make them more dangerous, and calibers like .50 BMG probably are literally more deadly; but flintlocks and wheellocks? Any kind of single-action (and possibly double-action) firearm is totally fine and comparable to swords and bec de corbins.

If you are hardcore enough, you absolutely can bring a knife to a gunfight and win. Conversely, bringing a gun to a knifefight is not a guaranteed win.

 

[MGibster]

You've apparently not heard of the 21 foot rule.

I have. Despite the 21 foot rule, infantry units throughout the world use firearms.

Sure, that's possible. But this statement makes me think you haven't spent any time at a range.

I don't know why you'd make that assumption. Admittedly I've never fired a shot in anger, but unless I'm caught flat footed, if I've got a flintlock in my hands I'm confident I can shoot that goliath before he gets close enough to hit me with his sword.

Almost literally anyone can pick up a gun and become a meaningful threat. That's why firearms were adopted: in D&D terms, they are simple weapons that take at most a week to gain proficiency in, and anyone can pick one up and aim it.

That makes them more deadly than swords or daggers. They're more deadly because they're easier to use. It's easier to shoot someone than it is to stab them.

If you are hardcore enough, you absolutely can bring a knife to a gunfight and win. Conversely, bringing a gun to a knifefight is not a guaranteed win.

Sure. It's possible. Odds are the guy with the gun is going to win though.