guns in my campaign

[jgbrowning]

hrm

if arrows were better than guns, and guns won the arms race just because they were easisier to use.

1. guns should be a weapon everyone has profeciency in.

2. guns should have realistic reload times (yes 15 rounds)

3. guns should be ranged touch attacks.


seems to deal with most of the difficulties discussed here.

just my .002$

joe b

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

Bug,

flintlock balls could be deflected by the leather bandoliers which soldiers used to carry their powder and shot. Chainmail would almost never have been penetrated. Until the advent of rifling and cased ammunition, the explosive force of gunpowder (the main source of a bullet's penetrating capacity) was not up to punching through most forms of armour. Lack of mobility drove armour off the battlefield, not the obvious superiority of the bullet.

Lannon,


your point about the wound efffect of bullets vs. arrows is well taken, but I think you're being unfair by implying that guns necessarily negate the heroic nature of combat. DnD's heroic AC and hit points could be used to reflect the heroism of the cowboy films. When cowboy heroes shoot at black hats (or indians) the bad guys die from one shot, but when the hero gets shot, its "a flesh wound." The fact that bullets are, in real life, unable to be dodged, doesn't mean that heroes don't dodge bullets in fiction every day of the week.

 

[Lannon]

Lannon,

your point about the wound efffect of bullets vs. arrows is well taken, but I think you're being unfair by implying that guns necessarily negate the heroic nature of combat. DnD's heroic AC and hit points could be used to reflect the heroism of the cowboy films. When cowboy heroes shoot at black hats (or indians) the bad guys die from one shot, but when the hero gets shot, its "a flesh wound." The fact that bullets are, in real life, unable to be dodged, doesn't mean that heroes don't dodge bullets in fiction every day of the week.

Fair enough, HP and AC are a couple things that always bothered me. I always liked the system but those two things have always bothered me. In any case, I think that you are right about the heroic nature od D&D potentially remaining in tact. The problem, for me, is that I just cant put it in my head. Its not that I cant visualize the fantastic elements of D&D or that I just "dont get it." Instead I simply cannot get into the game, into a D&D game, that uses weapons like these because DMing such a game and making up explanations that do not completely destroy immersion for me is almost impossible.

For instance, one fellow meantioned, in another forum, that arrows do not actually stick into the target. Of course they dont, with the abstraction required by D&D we cant have our heroes being viciously spit by some orcs arrow. However, if that is the case how is it that we explain that the arrow that the orc just fired inflicted poison damage, or caused 1d6 additional fire damage. Its remarkable how much this system forces me to close my eyes and say "just believe it happened, just believe it happened." This becomes even more of a problem for me whne the hero is "shot" with a revolver. But of course, the hero wasnt really shot. He threw himself to the ground, it only grazed his arm, it zipped through his clothing, etc etc. The system is not, in my opinion, concrete enough to facilitate immersion in the story when such events occur. Everything falls apart when the pc gets excited about his great attack roll (17) and discovers that he did 1d10 damage to his opponents 100 hit points. He hit him, right? Well no you didnt really hit him...

Lannon

 

[Sidran]

One thing to remember here, one of the reasons guns became so popular with militaries is that it did not take them as long to learn how to fire a musket than it did to fire a longbow, Crossbow etc.

If you are going to introduce firearms into your campaign I would start at the begining.

Hand out the

Hand Gonne 1d8 5 lb range 60 all shots with this gun while it is not using its tripod to hold it steady are made at a -2 to hit

Blunderbuss 1d12 9lb range 45 piercing The blunderbuss is a loud short ranged musket with a large mouthed barrell. After the initial range increment the weapon recieves -2 for each increment added up to 95 (-10)

Matchlock Musket
Matchlock Pistol

Flintlock Rifle
Flintlock Pistol

Gunblade ( the little snipit from The three Muskateers)

I have heard that Freeport has some really good gun rules

 

[Dragongirl]

Ok to reduce AC a little. But armor does coutn. The king of Sweden was kill in the 30 years war by gunshot the day he didn't wear his full plate...

Hehe, have you seen his skull? He was shot in the eye and from the size of the hold I think it was more than just a musket...

 

[Lannon]

Hehe, have you seen his skull? He was shot in the eye and from the size of the hold I think it was more than just a musket...

Actually it could easily have been "just a musket" most people seem to forget that a musket was a .50 to .60 caliber weapon. The holes produced by a high speed lead ball of that size can be truly enormous. I would not expect much of ones head to remain.

Lannon

 

[Creamsteak]

Gnomeworks Psionicle in the IC forum is working on Firearms under a very interesting concept light. Check it out sometime maybe (though I don't think the rules are posted). One aspect that supports piercing, without the ranged touch attack is to actually add a new cocept called piercing.

For instance, a weapon with Piercing 3 would easily go through studded leather armor, but is actually blocked by scale male. What it does, is reduce armor and natural armor bonuses by whatever piercing level you use. Piercing 3 is the standard I think, which supports that it can easily shred studded leather, and does a good deal of going through a chain shirt, but isn't going to just go right through it.

It's a good concept IMO. Also, if you increase the damage of guns (which is very fine IMO), then you should probably increase the affect of a malfunction. When a bow misses, it's probably user error, unless the string or shaft broke. However, when a gun malfunctions (a natural 1) it probably is screwed for the rest of the encounter.

 

[00durrin]

if the king of sweden got shot in the head what does it matter that he was or wasn't wearing his armor that day?

 

[NoOneofConsequence]

if the king of sweden got shot in the head what does it matter that he was or wasn't wearing his armor that day?

Perhaps his armour included a helmet? Many suits of armour did, apparently.