Firearms- Ranged touch attack perhaps?

[clark411]

I was considering the penetration power of firearms, and was wondering if the title was a realistic representation of this. I'm looking for a simple mechanic that makes pistols and muskets appealing without being overly deadly.

If possible, could people point out why this is something I don't want to do? Or alternatively, what mechanics could be created to counterbalance the difficulties of this. I don't want anything overly complex please.

Also, thinking of Natural Armor as DR for firearms (while musket shot might slice through a Knight's armor, I can't see it going through dragon scales with such ease).

 

[Geoff Watson]

Historically, longbows had better armour penetration than guns for a long time.
Guns do more damage than other missile weapons. Isn't that enough?

Geoff.

 

[Ratama]

Historically, longbows had better armour penetration than guns for a long time.

???

Please ignore Geoff's little boo-boo there.

Even the most primitive firearm had much better armor penetration than any bow or crossbow; a ranged touch attack would be a bit overpowered, though. Maybe have firearms ignore the first 10 points of armor, or something like that (so dragons would still be hard for a farmer armed with a flintlock pistol to damage).

 

[El_Ergo]

I use a similar rule, with a caveat. I allow firearms to act as ranged touch attacks against any target not wearing magic armor. If your target has an enhancement bonus to AC or a supernatural power, then its a normal ranged attack.

I didn't want to add all kinds of crazy penetration ratings or make firarms do huge damage. I like things simple. The +10 to hit everything isn't a bad idea, though.

 

[Geoff Watson]

???

Please ignore Geoff's little boo-boo there.

Even the most primitive firearm had much better armor penetration than any bow or crossbow; a ranged touch attack would be a bit overpowered, though. Maybe have firearms ignore the first 10 points of armor, or something like that (so dragons would still be hard for a farmer armed with a flintlock pistol to damage).

What boo-boo?

You are mistaken.

Geoff.

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

???

Please ignore Geoff's little boo-boo there.

Even the most primitive firearm had much better armor penetration than any bow or crossbow; a ranged touch attack would be a bit overpowered, though. Maybe have firearms ignore the first 10 points of armor, or something like that (so dragons would still be hard for a farmer armed with a flintlock pistol to damage).

I'm with Geoff, I'm afraid. You are mistaken. There are reports of Revolutionary War musket balls which bounced off heavy leather bandoliers; and these were rifled bore weapons. The Japanese had armour that comfortably prevented musket-ball penetration. Tokugawa Ieyasu once walked uninjured from the battlefield and didn't even realise that he'd been shot during the battle. Only when he removed his armour did two musket balls fall to the floor from where they'd become lodged.

A hard driven yard arrow on the other hand could comfortable punch through plate armour.

Ease of use, not penetrating power, is what made the early firearm superior to the bow and x-bow.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Ease of use, not penetrating power, is what made the early firearm superior to the bow and x-bow.

And thats just single projectile weapons. My instinct would be that a shotgun spray/blast could be buffered by armor that an arrow would punch right through. (feel free to correct with actual knowlege but not your own assumptions.)

Kahuna Burger

 

[Aaron2]

I give different guns an "armor piercing" value which lest them ignore certain points of armor (for ex: pistols ignore 2 points of armor, in effect a +2 to hit for people with more then +2 armor bonus).

Its a little more work but its better than the all-or-nothing touch attack.


aaron

 

[med stud]

Just a note on musket balls bouncing of armor: at long range, a breast plate could protect from a musket ball, but at short range a musket could penetrate almost all armor.

The same is true for the long bow, and according to a big book named something like "Arms and armor" written by some US/UK military guy (I think, anyway), a long bow arrow had greater force than a fire weapon bullet until the 19th century.

The problem with the bow, though, is that it is much harder to train someone to be a good archer than to train a musketman. Besides, it's easier to make ammunition for fire arms than for bows.

 

[shivamuffin]

Too much complexity and too much simplicity kills firearms!

I explored ranged touch attack...It's reasonable if you stick with the other rules concerning firearms in 3E.

Now....Here's my solution:

Rate of Fire increased for realism. 1 round = 6 seconds
untrained rof = 1/10 ( 60 seconds, and that's being generous )
trained rof = 1/5 ( 30 seconds )

Increase damage:

pistol 1d10
musket 2d10
blunderbus 3d10

Add a fort save for crits DC 15. Failure indicates a knockdown.


And....Visit this guys site for excellent firearm rules..His rules will cover everything else!I spend more time promoting this guys site than my own.

http://www.catspawcomics.com/sept/sept.html