Guns in a fantasy setting

prosfilaes

Adventurer
I'm much happier if there is willing suspension of disbelief, where the characters act as if a gun (or the city guard's crossbows at point-blank range) is potentially lethal, even though the players know this not to be the case.

I'm not even sure that's realistic. You expect people who walk up to a dragon and whack it on the snout with a sword to cower when someone points a crossbow in their face? "You call that a knife? This is a knife!"

I also have more sympathy for this at low levels then at high levels. A low-level character with 10 HP is metagaming a bit if they're not worried about a 1d8 crossbow. But a high-level character with 90 HPs? Call it whatever you want, but they're learned that no non-magical weapon in the hand of a mook is potentially lethal.

(And humans are good, even too good, at learning that. They can quickly learn that a gun isn't dangerous if it's unloaded, or that they can drive home drunk from the bar safely, or that they can hold the fireworks in hand if they're careful to drop it just before it goes off. "Lessons" that got people killed. If everyday mortals can learn that dangerous things "aren't", then how do you expect heroes to not learn that things that aren't in fact dangerous aren't?)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I also have more sympathy for this at low levels then at high levels. A low-level character with 10 HP is metagaming a bit if they're not worried about a 1d8 crossbow. But a high-level character with 90 HPs? Call it whatever you want, but they're learned that no non-magical weapon in the hand of a mook is potentially lethal.
Well, they've learned that no non-magical weapon in the hand of a seemingly ordinary soldier has *yet* been fatal. In most movies that I think of, the heroes act as if the enemy weapons (even from mooks) are at least potentially lethal, no matter how many times they have been shot at and missed/grazed/etc. When they go up against enemy soldiers, they act as if it is a real risk, and if successful they bring the audience along in that sense of danger. Conan in the first movie, Farscape, B5, etc. In things other than deconstructionist works (such as Austin Powers or Last Action Hero), protagonists are just not aware of their plot protection, no matter how often it has saved their life. You can run D&D as fantasy supers, maybe with the PCs aware of divine favor of some sort, but I think it's also valid to run a game in which the players make their PCs ignorant of their plot armor.

I think I would most prefer a low-powered D&D with either a WP/VP system, or "exploding damage" crits. The latter lets the players have their PCs act as if any hit can be lethal, while making it in practice very unlikely.

Anyway, I recognize that the HP system does make it difficult to give guns the dramatic effect they have in genre fiction (such as Seven Samurai). A WP/VP system allows guns to be potentially instantly lethal to humans, while allowing humans to be slowly worn down in extended melee, and also allowing some monsters to need a ton of firepower to drop.
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
Well, they've learned that no non-magical weapon in the hand of a seemingly ordinary soldier has *yet* been fatal.

As my last paragraph pointed out, that's frequently good enough.

In most movies that I think of, the heroes act as if the enemy weapons (even from mooks) are at least potentially lethal, no matter how many times they have been shot at and missed/grazed/etc. When they go up against enemy soldiers, they act as if it is a real risk, and if successful they bring the audience along in that sense of danger.

Enemy weapons in most movies can hurt the heroes. If anyone shoots a hero, the hero gets hurt. In D&D, random mooks can't hurt the PCs. The biggest mundane weapon in D&D, in the hands of a mook, does 2d6. That's nothing to a high-hitpoint character.

For me, and a lot of others, the HP=plot protection thing just doesn't work. If you want to give me plot protection, give me drama points or something else, completely disentangled from damage.
 

Enemy weapons in most movies can hurt the heroes. If anyone shoots a hero, the hero gets hurt. In D&D, random mooks can't hurt the PCs. The biggest mundane weapon in D&D, in the hands of a mook, does 2d6. That's nothing to a high-hitpoint character.
True for 3E, certainly, barring crits and various optional WP/VP systems. But what in the game rules reflects the in-world situation of a hero actually taking a greatsword through his gut? That's when the 2d6 comes up against a remaining HP within that range, after the hero has been worn down from max-HP. Within the reality of the world, the hero is just skilled and lucky enough that most blows are only glancing ones. It's not like he's been run through a dozen times and shrugged it off.

For me, and a lot of others, the HP=plot protection thing just doesn't work. If you want to give me plot protection, give me drama points or something else, completely disentangled from damage.
Understood. What do you think of WP/VP systems?
 

KiloGex

First Post
My problem with the guns in Iron Kingdoms wasn't the rules - it was the cost per shot....

Gunpowder is cheap! But that funky alchemical crap they use in IK would price the gun right out of the army....

The Auld Grump

I've run into the same problem in terms of the cost, which is what has scared the majority of my players from choosing firearms as their primary weapon. However, the couple of players who have decided to go along with firearms have found that the best way to get around this cost hike is crafting your own ammunition. 34 silver per shot appears much more affordable than your regular 1 gold. Especially if you're going a little more low-tech in terms of your technology, this technique makes much more sense seeing how bullets need to be specially created for each firearm; it makes sense for its owner to know how to create his own ammunitions.
 

Meatboy

First Post
In terms of cost I created a gun like device for use in a 4e game I ran a few years ago. They were magic guns called war-wands and the rifle like war-staves. The didn't use consumable things like shot and gun powder, or magical equivalents, instead they used engraved metal slugs with a magic charge that once fired had to be allowed to "rest" so they could collect ambient magic to be used again. I also had a ritual that you could use to "reload" the slugs. There were also better slugs that allowed for multiple shots or which added different elemental damages and what not to the guns. It was a fun concept and one of the parties rogues took great delight in becoming a duel pistol wielding bandito.
 


mmadsen

First Post
The original poster (you all remember Elf Witch) was looking for firearms to run a Western. Sure there will still a few muzzle-loaders around, but the six-shot revolvers, breach-loading shotguns, and lever-action rifles were a heck of a lot more common.

Simply add a wizard and a cleric to this [scene from a Hollywood Western]
Naturally, the shoot-out at the OK Corral was exactly the kind of thing Boothill was made for.

I never owned the game, but it defined characters through five characteristics appropriate to the genre: Speed, Accuracy, Strength, Bravery, and Experience.

Bravery stands out to me as (a) lacking in D&D, for the most part, and (b) profoundly important in both real and fictional combat. In a gun-fight, the difference between the "high-level" and "low-level" characters is that the true gun-fighters can and will keep their nerve enough to hold their gun steady, to focus on the front sight, and to smoothly control the trigger, rather than jerk the trigger with the gun poking out from behind cover.

"You need to take your time in a hurry," Wyatt Earp said.

In fact, a big part of both real and fictional fights is the stand-off that may or may not lead to weapons drawn and shots fired. Tales of the Old West often come down to who credibly could and would fight without turnin' yella:
Wyatt Earp is one of the few men I personally knew in the West in the early days, whom I regarded as absolutely destitute of physical fear. I have often remarked, and I am not alone in my conclustions, that what goes for courage in a man is generally the fear of what others will think of him-- in other words, personal bravery is largely made up of self-respect, egotism, and an apprehension of the opinions of others. Wyatt Earp's daring and apparent recklessness in time of danger is wholly characteristic; personal fear doesn't enter into the equation, and when everything is said and done, I believe he values his own opinion of himself more than that of others, and it is his own good report that he seeks to preserve. . . . He never at any time in his career resorted to the pistol excepting in cases where such a course was absolutely necessary. Wyatt could scrap with his fists, and had often taken all the fight out of bad men, as they were called, with no other weapons than those provided by nature. -Bat Masterson

[Wyatt] Earp is a man who never smiled or laughed. He was the most fearless man I ever saw. . . . He is an honest man. All officers here who were associated with him declare that he is honest, and would have decided according to his belief in the face of an arsenal. -Dick Cogdell

Wyatt Earp was a wonderful officer. He was game to the last ditch and apparently afraid of nothing. The cowmen all respected him and seemed to recognize his superiority and authority at such times as he had to use it. -Jimmy Cairns​
I don't think D&D is a great model of Western action, realistic or cinematic.

In a Western, plot-protection means spotting the glint off an ambusher's rifle in the glass window, not getting hit, maybe taking a shot to the shoulder rather than the heart, etc.; it does not mean taking six or seven gun-shots to go down. (That may make a good Last Stand, though.)
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
True for 3E, certainly, barring crits and various optional WP/VP systems. But what in the game rules reflects the in-world situation of a hero actually taking a greatsword through his gut?

But when the character has a gun or crossbow to the face, the system basically assume that the character can get out of the direct way of the weapon. Which is not completely unbelievable.

Understood. What do you think of WP/VP systems?

I don't know; I've never got a chance to play one.
 

ValhallaGH

Explorer
Whether or not we think D&D (or any other scaling-hit point system) is a good fit for Westerns is rather immaterial. That's what Elf Witch is looking to use. If she decides to use something else then we can all provide various suggestions.
 

Remove ads

Top