Gunpowder in D&D

[TheAuldGrump]

I have some issues still with fire arms in the game, while I like the idea I hate the balance issues. To me early weapons only had one range to be effective and that was blank range (which is very short) and no skill. I just don't think a person using a early fire arm gets better with it.

The effectiveness and reliability of guns differs wildly depending on time period, and to a lesser extent location.

Personally I like the 1600s, some early snapaunce firearms are making their first appearance, wheel locks are fairly common (and very expensive. But who can resist a gun you have to wind up?), and even rifles are beginning to appear. (you want to talk about slow, you literally had to hammer the ball down the barrel of the rifle.) And granulated powder is also making its presence known.

And the Spanish are demonstrating how not to use guns. (Forty ranks deep, forty columns wide. Many gunners never got to fire their guns in any given battles. And don't get me started on the caricole...)

The Auld Grump, haaka paal!

 

[Vaxalon]

The REAL problem with gunpowder, to my mind, is the effect on architecture.

I want to see soaring castles. The DnD rules in 3.0 have gone a long way to making castles useful, by making worked stone immune to many of the spells that used to make castles unworkable. Cannons make castles worthless, and fortresses slink down onto the ground and are more like stone-lined trenches. Bleah.

 

[CaptainCalico]

I'm using the Freeport rules from Dragon Anual 2002, nothing larger than a swivel gun. In my homebrew large cannons are not practical because of a) the cost of manufacturing large amounts of gunpowder and b) the danger of stockpiling large amounts of gunpowder when Wizards, Sorcerers Clerics, Druids, Psions et al can all create fire pretty quickly. The big test, i.e. a war between forces using gunpowder and forces using "traditional" methods, has not happened yet, and there is no foregone conclusion.

 

[Radiating Gnome]

In my ongoing greyhawk game, I've used a couple of different rulesets for the PC halfling that wanted to use firearms.

I start with the Privateer press rules -- but she could only use the smallest of the pistols they offered because of her size, which helped with the balance a bit. But ammunition was expensive, and she had only one source for it, the gnomish inventor who had given her the guns, so there were some serious limits on what she could do.

Then, a bit later, the party was transported by an old enemy to WWII poland, and she returned with a matched set of Walther PPK's. I was using the Weird Wars rules from Pinnacle (I think, the Deadlands folks) for the Poland setting, so those were the rules I used for the PPK.

And that might seem like a threat to game balance, but the serious limitations that she has with the guns -- they can't be enchanted (because they are not masterwork), her ammunition supply is limited and irreplaceable, and the general level of the rest of the part (13th level now) means that even shooting John Woo style )two handed) she's not more effective in combat that the other characters.

I know it's a little out there, but so is my campaign these days. When you get right down to it, she like the guns, but they aren't much help against the stuff they run into these days. A Greater magic weapon spell may help her get past big damage resistance, but that makes her dependent upon spellcasters, and she's still not as deadly as the party archer. It's all about flavor, for her, though -- and who really minds the idea of a pint-sized laura croft in their game, anyway?

-rg

 

[FraserRonald]

My campaign setting had technology that corresponded to early 17th century Europe, but firearms didn't rule the game. If anything, the one character who had a bracer of pistols would fire off a volley then tuck in with his trusty sabre and main-gauche.

Of course, I was playing Grim-N-Gritty rules, which meant you could be lightly armoured and hard to hit or heavily armoured and have a high damage reduction. Of course, then the firearms' penetration came into play.

Kind of far from regular DnD rules, but there you go.

 

[Vaxalon]

In my homebrew large cannons are not practical because of a) the cost of manufacturing large amounts of gunpowder and b) the danger of stockpiling large amounts of gunpowder when Wizards, Sorcerers Clerics, Druids, Psions et al can all create fire pretty quickly.

You know that makes no sense, right? It's a nifty handwave but it doesn't work.

a) if manufacturing small amounts of gunpowder is cheaper than making large amounts, then you can manufacture small amounts many times and then combine them together to get a large amount.

b) If wizards can make fire, then wizards can make something fireproof.

 

[LoneWolf23]

I'm building a campaign that's intended to be a Renaissance world. Thus far, I haven't introduced gunpowder weapons to my players, since I'm yet undecided as to what rulesystem to use. I'm rationalizing it by the fact that even the original Renaissance didn't occur overnight.