Guns in D&D - A Hot Take

[WhosDaDungeonMaster]

Re: guns ignoring armor: plate armor was invented specifically to stop bullets. It's even where the term bullet-proof comes from.

I'm curious what your source is for this statement? To my understanding, guns came a couple centuries after plate armor was first "popular" (but they were in China many years before, of course). Even so, crossbows and longbows had plenty of penetrating power to pierce plate armors. Oddly enough, layered armors were more effective at stopping penetrating attacks.

 

[apoapostolov]

In my upcoming campaign a player asked to play a Gunslinger subclass. I was always disappointed how D&D 5E handles firearms at par with any other weapon but I made a small change that statistically amounted to a significant improvement.

Velocity. Firearms shoot projectiles at higher velocity than all other ranged weapons. While causing less bleeding than arrows, bullets cause more trauma and are very effective at killing quickly. When rolling for damage, roll one additional weapon die then remove the die with the lowest result.

 

[Sacrosanct]

OK, there seems to be a quite a bit of misinformation going on here.

Plate armor: Not invented to stop bullets. In fact, the opposite. The first plated armor was in Mycenean-era Greece from around 1400 BC. So it's been around for a long time. It started to see less usage when heavy crossbows were able to penetrate it, and almost disappeared when gunpowder arrived on scene in the 16th century (the Ottomans used hand cannons for infantry in the late 15th century, but Europeans didn't see it until later). Full plate armor existed in the form we romanticize about in the early 15th century--well before firearms were on the common battlefield in Europe.

Bullets vs Swords/axes/etc: The actual weight and size of the bullet may seem small compared to melee weapons, but don't make the assumption that means more damage is inflicted by a melee weapon. The wound channel of a bullet is huge and devastating, especially for larger caliber and higher velocity rounds. Much greater than a sword thrust.

And to the OP's premise: people have survived dozens of knife wounds at a time, but I'm sure you wouldn't argue that a dagger should do 0.1-0.5 points of damage right?

My advice to anyone who is considering using firearms in their games to do some research and study into ballistics. That's a good starting point to get an idea of the destructive force of ammunition.

 

[Draegn]

I use smoothbore firearms rather than rifled. This causes a great deal of inaccuracy at longer ranges. Inaccuracy at longer ranges can be mitigated by greater skill, however, this is a player choice and potentially leads to not being able to do or not be as proficient at other activities.

Muskets have a low rate of fire. Depending on attributes the rate of fire for a bow may be two to three times higher than that of a musket. Average attribute scores versus high attribute scores.

Damage is on par with heavier melee weapons, however, the chance of a critical hit and lingering wound effects are greater. A marble sized lead ball entering, pancaking, and exiting the size of a grapefruit tends to cause limb loss.

Of course inclement weather limits musket use outside of defensible positions which is why most military adventures tend to take place during the summer.

 

[Sacrosanct]

In my upcoming campaign a player asked to play a Gunslinger subclass. I was always disappointed how D&D 5E handles firearms at par with any other weapon but I made a small change that statistically amounted to a significant improvement.

Velocity. Firearms shoot projectiles at higher velocity than all other ranged weapons. While causing less bleeding than arrows, bullets cause more trauma and are very effective at killing quickly. When rolling for damage, roll one additional weapon die then remove the die with the lowest result.

While you are correct about trauma, you are incorrect about bleeding. Arrows cause less bleeding because the shaft is largely blocking the wound. A bullet wound doesn't do that. Especially if there's an exit wound, which is devastating.

And in case anyone is curious about my credentials, I'm an ex-combat medic military veteran who has extensive experience around all kinds of firearms

 

[apoapostolov]

While you are correct about trauma, you are incorrect about bleeding. Arrows cause less bleeding because the shaft is largely blocking the wound. A bullet wound doesn't do that. Especially if there's an exit wound, which is devastating.

And in case anyone is curious about my credentials, I'm an ex-combat medic military veteran who has extensive experience around all kinds of firearms

Thanks. I will improve my text. What do you think about the simple rule to give weapons an advantage based probabilities curve?

 

[Sacrosanct]

OK, some reference material

This is a test I did several years back to illustrate velocity. Not steel tipped, just regular FMJ (full metal copper jacket lead bullets). As you can see, a medium cartridge round weighing no more than 60 grains went through a 1/4" sheet of hardened steel like it was nothing. Unless armor has been magically enhanced, it should offer no protection against high velocity weapons. In case you're curious the .223 has a velocity of over 3000 feet per second, and the 9mm is around 1,200fps



Comparison of wound channels

 

[Sacrosanct]

Thanks. I will improve my text. What do you think about the simple rule to give weapons an advantage based probabilities curve?

When talking about adding firearms into our games, I've found the biggest error we make is trying to over complicate things. I am super guilty of this myself (it's the data analyst in me, sorry not sorry). Ballistics is a very complicated thing. I've had spreadsheets, data table, etc all to consider the various factors (range, environment, grain weight, velocity, bullet composition, etc, etc). The reality is no one wants to try to factor all that in when playing a game. So while we tend to go as realistic as possible, the reality is we need to keep things simple for actual game play, even if it doesn't mirror in all these other factors.

My suggestion? Don't get crazy with all kinds of damage and variable and/or messing with criticals. Give the weapon a range, which is easy enough because looking up maximum effective ranges is super easy with Google. For instance, most pistol cartridges will only have a maximum effective range of 50 meters, while a medium rifle cartridge like a 5.56 is around 400 meters, and a heavier cartridge like a 7.62 can be 1000 meters or longer. Don't confuse maximum effective range with how far the bullet actually travels. Out past certain distances, bullet drop is massive and you'll never hit your target outside of a miracle. And of course, those extreme ranges would require something like a scope to even see your target. For comparison, at 300m, the average human sized target will appear as big as a pencil lead in your iron sights.

Just assign a basic damage roll. 1d6 for small caliber, 1d10 for medium, and 2d6 for large. Note, damage is not around pistol vs rifle, but actual size of the lead hitting you.

We know that for burst and automatic weapons, they fire more bullets, but each bullet has less chance to hit as the one prior. So my suggestion is to have: burst fire (3 bullets fired) = double damage dice. Automatic fire (5 bullets fired) = triple damage dice

The only special rule I'd have is to account for velocity. Pistol ammunition ignores light armor, and rifle ammunition ignores all armor (see my photo above as to why). I'd rule that only DEX and magical bonuses apply to AC when wearing armor.

That's about as complex I'd get with modern firearms.

As an aside, a sniper rifle is not more difficult to use than any other firearm. Often easier, since there are fewer moving parts. What makes a sniper rifle so deadly is its range combined with the skill of the shooter, not the complexity of the weapon. An AR15 is way more complex than a typical bolt action sniper rifle (unless that sniper rifle uses an AR platform of course)

 

[Draegn]

[MENTION=15700]Sacrosanct[/MENTION] It may be helpful to include that many modern bullets are designed to tumble in order to increase physical damage as they travel through a body. This explains the differences in the channel wounds chart.

 

[Sacrosanct]

For my above comment, an illustration of bullet drop