Guns in a fantasy setting

[Elf Witch]

I think that part of the issue for me is this. Yes people don't always die of a gunshot. Just like they don't always die from an arrow.

But there is an aspect of DnD HP system that does bug me a little and that is the idea of heroes being surrounded by the town guard with more than a dozen crossbow bolts or say rifles pointed at them and they don't surrender because they know that even if every crossbow bolt or bullet hits them and they take maximum damage they are not going down.

Maybe if I do this I should also do an E6 style game.

 

[mmadsen]

The two mechanics yield different distributions of results, even if both have the same expected value of ten hits to take the target out.

No, a gun that kills once every 10 shots has a 50/50 chance of killing someone in 7 shots.

A geometric distribution can have a median of 7 and a mean, or expected value, of 10.

The geometric distribution is not clustered around a single median-mean-mode.

If you have ten hit dice, and you're facing two different attacks, which is more lethal, the one that does one die of damage, or the one that forces a saving throw that you'll only fail on a natural 1?

The second. Way more lethal.

Play out a fight between 20 guys with the first weapon and 20 with the second.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But there is an aspect of DnD HP system that does bug me a little and that is the idea of heroes being surrounded by the town guard with more than a dozen crossbow bolts or say rifles pointed at them and they don't surrender because they know that even if every crossbow bolt or bullet hits them and they take maximum damage they are not going down.

Oddly enough, Kevin Sembieda- of RIFTS fame- first articulated in his game something I've seen other GMs do: 100% suicidal acts get rewarded by death.

To put it in context, he had heard stories about PCs in his game doing things like putting guns in their mouths and pulling the trigger to impress/intimidate someone because they knew the damage wouldn't kill them.

He said "No- this is wrong- the PC should be dead." he then talked about the abstract nature of HP, and how being THAT meta should be penalized by he death your PC courted.

Similarly, in a current 3.5Ed campaign, the DM has a little house rule: if a foe "has the drop on you", he will be able to act before you, and if he hits, it will be treated as a maxed-out crit. So far, I'm the only one this has happened to- I rolled a 1 for my stealth check and a modified 7 for my listen... Never heard the guy 'till the crossbow was inches away from the back of my head.

I opted to be taken prisoner.

 

[prosfilaes]

Play out a fight between 20 guys with the first weapon and 20 with the second.

Okay, the ones with the save or die weapons won. Whenever they got hit, they ran away. When they came back, they were healed back to full.

But there is an aspect of DnD HP system that does bug me a little and that is the idea of heroes being surrounded by the town guard with more than a dozen crossbow bolts or say rifles pointed at them and they don't surrender because they know that even if every crossbow bolt or bullet hits them and they take maximum damage they are not going down.

I just see that as part and parcel of the D&D HP system. I'm not always okay with the system as a whole, but don't see this as standing out. By tenth level, PCs can handle an obscene amount of damage. They do stand in the middle of fireballs that would leave 1st level characters piles of ashes on the floor and are mildly scorched. When those crossbow bolts fly, I guess the rogue is doing his Matrix thing, the wizard has time-space warped around his body, and the fighter just has muscles so thick that the bolts get stuck going in. However it works, it does work.

To put it in context, he had heard stories about PCs in his game doing things like putting guns in their mouths and pulling the trigger to impress/intimidate someone because they knew the damage wouldn't kill them.

See, I would distinguish this. Part of HP is the ability to evade the damage. If they're pointing the gun at you, you can still evade; if you've put it in your mouth, you're not trying to avoid damage. It's like a self-inflicted coup de grace action.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

I would distinguish this. Part of HP is the ability to evade the damage. If they're pointing the gun at you, you can still evade; if you've put it in your mouth, you're not trying to avoid damage. It's like a self-inflicted coup de grace action.

It is not the same, true, but it is a close cousin. If you knew a DM were using this HR, and told you that 10 foes had "the drop on you," you'd at least pause before saying..."Ehhhh, I'm goin' for it!!!"

 

[Eric Tolle]

If though, you want guns to behave like guns, then D&D's hit point system models that poorly.

I think I found a typo in the sentence above. Try this:

"If though, you want weapons to behave like weapons, then D&D's hit point system models that poorly. "

Hit point systems inherently model damage poorly. That's why consider hit points to really be luck points.

It's an imperfect, if workable, system for other weapons, but its flaws stand out when dealing with single-shot weapons that are supposed to be deadly.

It doesn't work well with any weapons that are supposed to be deadly. It doesn't model the final fight in Big Trouble in Little China, the single sword strike kills in Yojimbo, or the effects of damage in real life.

With D&D's hit point system, you can't hunt with a gun, you can't have a pistol duel, no one (experienced) ever falls in the initial volley of fire, etc.

You also can't have someone experienced killed with a thrown knife, killed by a baseball bat to the skull, or taken down by a single stop-thrust to the chest. And honestly, if you're expecting those things to happen, shouldn't a ball of fire that can melt the armor off a fighter be absolutely lethal?

The ability to take down a high-hp character with one shot is not, by definition, an increase in lethality

It is, because out should apply to any weapon and spell, and it means that any one shot, even the first could be lethal. Hit points will matter far less than getting that lucky crit (and getting feats that increase the chance of that crit). All very well you say, until your Big Bad that you intended to last through the game gets punked by a lucky shot the first time he appears. And all the characters start carrying guns, and taking feats that let them get off as many shots as possible, because again, getting that crit will be more important than damage, or even accuracy.

And frankly, that's getting away from the D&D style of play, where a 10th level character shouldn't be panicked by a single kobold with a knife Honestly, I think you really want a different game than D&D. You want at the least a game with a damage save mechanic like True 20, and more likely a high lethality game like Warhammer Fantasy or Runequest. Those are good games for the PCs to be afraid of everything.

If, in a Western game, a .22 pistol has a 1-in-10 chance of taking someone out, it's not particularly lethal or effective -- it takes roughly 10 shots to take the target out -- but it's a threat from the very first shot. You wouldn't sit across the poker table from somebody with a tiny pistol and say, "That can't hurt me!"

Point of reality fact; the .22 automatic lost a lot of it's popularity when a homeowner shot a burglar 8 times at point-blank range, and then the burglar proceeded too beat the homeowner to death.

Of course you'd probably still want to model this in a different system- Traveler 2300 has nice location-based damage save system, where any weapon is potentially lethal.

 

[ValhallaGH]

But there is an aspect of DnD HP system that does bug me a little and that is the idea of heroes being surrounded by the town guard with more than a dozen crossbow bolts or say rifles pointed at them and they don't surrender because they know that even if every crossbow bolt or bullet hits them and they take maximum damage they are not going down.

I kind of like the idea of treating "The Drop" as a free Coup de Grace. Regardless of how awesome you are, sometimes they will get in a fatal shot.

So while the six gaurdsmen per hero may not have enough juice to remove all their HP, any hits that land are automatic critical hits and force a fortitude save versus death.

 

[Desdichado]

If you want to play out hunting with a Kentucky long rifle, dueling with a brace of pistols, or boarding a merchant ship with guns blazing, the first combat system gives jarring results: the single-shot guns cause zero casualties (against two-HD animals and characters).

To be fair, it's no less jarring when you look at the results of any other weapons either. We're just arguably more familiar with firearms these days. This isn't a problem with firearms, it's a problem (assuming that you don't like that result, that is) with hit points. Trying to fix hit points with regards to firearms, while ignoring the problem with other weapons, leads to bizarre, skewed results.

Which, for whatever reason, RPGiana is rife with.

 

[AWizardInDallas]

TPK Firearms Discussion

The issue of firearms for me has more to do with history than anything else. I find this topic of some interest so started a thread on our forums for further discussion, rather than derail or highjack this thread. TPK On Firearms.

 

[mmadsen]

The issue of firearms for me has more to do with history than anything else. I find this topic of some interest so started a thread on our forums for further discussion, rather than derail or highjack this thread. TPK On Firearms.

I don't think I'd consider it derailing. Your point:

The main reason I've avoided allowing firearms altogether in my games, is simply because the lessons of history. Historically, advancements in firearms pretty much ended the effectiveness of metal armor. [...] Firearms also ended the middle ages, so I feel that any campaign using firearms is at least pre-victorian if not renaissance.​

It wasn't firearms per se that ended the Middle Ages; it was cannons, capable of bringing down castles. In a D&D fantasy world, it's not clear that cannons would play that role.

Also, the late Middle Ages, when knights wore head-to-toe plate armor, had plenty of early guns, which eventually pushed armor toward much thicker (heavier) plates covering less of the body. D&D's combat system may not model this well, but there are hundreds of years of guns overlapping with swords and armor.