D&D 5E Guns in your world, and in mine!

[Chaosmancer]

I had an entire thread about this before The Crash ... hm. Saddening that all that discussion was lost. Anyway, I'm going to merrily plop myself in here because I could use some community opinion.

Now, I'm not going to get involved in any realism vs. mechanics and all that, but I would like some opinions.

I'm going to try running a game with a very Renaissance bent where Wheelocks are definitely a thing, though like their historical counterparts are going to be pretty rare and expensive compared to a simple(r) sword or crossbow.

My mechanical idea behind them factors in everything from 5E, just to keep it simple, but I still want to make them a little unique. The big difference would be the "Inaccurate" quality: Firearms cannot add Dex to damage.

All firearms are Simple Weapons.

The current concept is:

Wheelock Pistol
3d6 Bludgeoning/Piercing
3 lbs.
Ammunition (range 30/90), Inaccurate, Loading, Reload (1 Action)
Costs 1,000 GP

Wheelock Musket
4d4 Bludgeoning/Piercing
8 lbs.
Ammunition (range 50/100), Inaccurate, Heavy, Loading, Two-Handed, Reload (1 Action)
Costs 1,200 GP

Ammunition
Firearm Cartridges (20) - 5 GP


For Crafting both firearms and ammunition, the crafter must be proficient in Tinker Tools and Alchemist's Supplies.

Firearms can never lose the Loading or Reload properties. The Sharpshooter Feat affects them normally.


The idea was to make these be pretty potent, scary, 1-shot weapons (at lower levels), but then making them relatively useless unless you really want to sacrifice your turn reloading it (during which time someone with a Bow or a Crossbow + The Feat can get off a series of shots and add their Dex to each).

My first thought is why do you have the musket weaker than the pistol. Typically, rifles and muskets are portrayed as more deadly than the smaller and easier to carry pistol.

 

[Umbran]

Good riddance.

Good riddance indeed!

Rhetorical question: Do either of you think that you sound... mature or reasonable here?

Next time, have a little decorum, please. If you feel it is time to disengage (I agree with both of you there, it is time) just quietly walk away. Don't make a big public deal of it. If your discussion has gotten to this point, it isn't like the announcement is going to make the other guy think you're right, you know. Nor is it apt to make you look like the reasonable party to anyone else reading.

Remember, you don't get Internet Success Points for having the last word.

 

[Jago]

My first thought is why do you have the musket weaker than the pistol. Typically, rifles and muskets are portrayed as more deadly than the smaller and easier to carry pistol.

Ah! Good catch: That was to be 5d4, I will edit the original post.

I honestly figured that there should not really be all too much variance, though, between the pistol and the musket. This is not a time or setting of standardized powder charges and calibers, after all, and I'd actually enjoy the idea of having weapons of these that add or subtract a die (or greatly vary by increasing or lowering the die size). The Musket has a slightly higher range of minimum and maximum damage ... but nothing too crazy. These are, after all, not really "main weapons", but more a sudden salvo at the onset of combat or something kept prepared in reserved to end a fight quickly.


Further Edit: I figured I would remove the "Heavy" property from the Musket as well. No reason Gnomes and Halflings cannot become Musketeers (although I'd imagine they'd need the weapons appropriately sized to their stature).

 

[Derren]

My first thought is why do you have the musket weaker than the pistol. Typically, rifles and muskets are portrayed as more deadly than the smaller and easier to carry pistol.

Did muskets have a higher calibre than pistols?

 

[KahlessNestor]

I believe they used the same ball. Muskets just had range. There wasn't really anything like caliber. Both were willdly inaccurate.

Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

 

[Chaosmancer]

Did muskets have a higher calibre than pistols?

I honestly have no idea, it is just how I see them typically portrayed in games.

 

[Imaculata]

I believe they used the same ball. Muskets just had range. There wasn't really anything like caliber. Both were willdly inaccurate.

They fired about the same ammo, but the power, accuracy and range of the musket were much greater than that of a normal flintlock pistol.

That is why in my home brew rules, I gave flintlock pistols 1d10, and muskets 1d12 damage. I also made sure that flintlock pistols had a really poor range (up to 50ft.), while muskets are accurate up to 200ft.



And then you also have crazy weapons such as the Duckfoot pistol, which has only a range of 10ft, and does 1d10 damage to everything within a 10ft. wide arc in front of the user. It's basically only good for one shot in extreme close combat, and then you switch to something else. Since I'm playing 3rd edition, everything also gets a reflex save to avoid damage from the Duckfoot pistol, to further reflect its inaccuracy. You don't even make an attack roll with it, everyone just saves if they are inside the arc.

 

[AnimeSniper]

Somewhere I have a small softcover splatbook that had listed such weapons as early medieval firearms and others like the ballista from various eras and regions of the world.

I'll see if I can find the box I have it stored in and relay the title for you

 

[SkidAce]

 

[SkidAce]