Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Guns and D&D - are we doing it wrong? An alternative
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 9284466" data-attributes="member: 53980"><p>Some of these objections seem a bit overstated to me.</p><p></p><p>Of course the monsters can have guns. If you design the guns properly, this isn't an issue.</p><p></p><p>For example, using my rules, why would the players care if the Drow Elite Warrior (MM-128) is shooting them with a flintlock pistol for 7 DMG (2d6 no mod) vs a hand crossbow for 7.5 DMG (1d6+4)? The players are actually better off against the flintlock, even assuming the DM allows the Drow to apply their poison to the shot (half point less damage on average).</p><p></p><p>If using the OP's rules, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Monsters can have encounter powers too. Might make encounters more dangerous in the opening round, but that's part of the design choice to have guns work as encounter powers.</p><p></p><p>As for guns as magical items, sure. Bows can be magical items too, and could have basically any enchantment a gun could have. As long as you're not designing guns to be 150% superior in every way to other ranged weapons, this isn't likely to be an issue IMO.</p><p></p><p>Regarding players wanting "modern" firearms, I actually allow this, but they're cutting-edge technology that are the domain of mad-scientist types. Basically, unless your class is either Craftsman or Gunslinger, you need to spend a feat to be able to use revolvers and the like. The "modern" firearms don't really do more damage than their simpler counterparts, but do have advantages like ammo capacity. Even if some goblins robbed an inventor carrying a few of these, they'd be fairly pitiful with them as they wouldn't gain their proficiency bonus to hit.</p><p></p><p>If a player wants their character to have an assault rifle or bazooka, they can play the inventor class and if they can figure out a way to design those within the rules, they can have them. Otherwise, no dice. I've had players that wanted their PC to have the unfettered powers of a god. Sometimes it's the DM's responsibility to say no, for the good of the campaign (that player did gain some great abilities, but I told him that if he wanted full access he needed to ascend, which would make his character an NPC).</p><p></p><p>No one IMC has the capability of fielding armies with "modern" firearms at this time, nor will it happen within the span of my campaign; there simply aren't sufficient inventors who understand their production nor is there a means for mass production. An army with flintlocks would be possible, and might give that army an edge in some circumstances, but isn't really more powerful than equivalent longbowmen (aside from being generally easier to field).</p><p></p><p>Just my 2 cents.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Fanaelialae, post: 9284466, member: 53980"] Some of these objections seem a bit overstated to me. Of course the monsters can have guns. If you design the guns properly, this isn't an issue. For example, using my rules, why would the players care if the Drow Elite Warrior (MM-128) is shooting them with a flintlock pistol for 7 DMG (2d6 no mod) vs a hand crossbow for 7.5 DMG (1d6+4)? The players are actually better off against the flintlock, even assuming the DM allows the Drow to apply their poison to the shot (half point less damage on average). If using the OP's rules, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. Monsters can have encounter powers too. Might make encounters more dangerous in the opening round, but that's part of the design choice to have guns work as encounter powers. As for guns as magical items, sure. Bows can be magical items too, and could have basically any enchantment a gun could have. As long as you're not designing guns to be 150% superior in every way to other ranged weapons, this isn't likely to be an issue IMO. Regarding players wanting "modern" firearms, I actually allow this, but they're cutting-edge technology that are the domain of mad-scientist types. Basically, unless your class is either Craftsman or Gunslinger, you need to spend a feat to be able to use revolvers and the like. The "modern" firearms don't really do more damage than their simpler counterparts, but do have advantages like ammo capacity. Even if some goblins robbed an inventor carrying a few of these, they'd be fairly pitiful with them as they wouldn't gain their proficiency bonus to hit. If a player wants their character to have an assault rifle or bazooka, they can play the inventor class and if they can figure out a way to design those within the rules, they can have them. Otherwise, no dice. I've had players that wanted their PC to have the unfettered powers of a god. Sometimes it's the DM's responsibility to say no, for the good of the campaign (that player did gain some great abilities, but I told him that if he wanted full access he needed to ascend, which would make his character an NPC). No one IMC has the capability of fielding armies with "modern" firearms at this time, nor will it happen within the span of my campaign; there simply aren't sufficient inventors who understand their production nor is there a means for mass production. An army with flintlocks would be possible, and might give that army an edge in some circumstances, but isn't really more powerful than equivalent longbowmen (aside from being generally easier to field). Just my 2 cents. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Guns and D&D - are we doing it wrong? An alternative
Top