D&D 5E (2014) Let's Talk About Guns in 5E

[500 Toads]

it doesn't matter if it works like it does in our world unless players are going to be metagaming coming up with how to create stuff, so it doesn't need to be gunpowder it's 'dragon dust' or 'sparksoot', and it works enough like gunpowder for 99% of situations that matter and doesn't work like it in the 1% where it games the system.

Some consideration is still required; because once you allow the introduction of something gunpowder-like, players are probably going to try to see how much they can get and whether they can solve problems via blowing them up, whether by planting barrels of it or by trying to make primitive grenades... followed by somebody insisting that they can therefore use Minor Conjuration to create such grenades (see arguments from players insisting that it's totally legit that their 3rd-level conjurer could spam Catapult Munitions).

 

[Remathilis]

Without going all AK47, early firearms generally run into the problem that their historical rate of fire is nowhere near the number of attacks that D&D characters can have per round, especially considering fighters. So firearms in D&D either go the way of re-fluffed crossbows and hit a rate of fire unmatched until the 19th century, or go the way of "magical attacks" with single high-damage effects and become essentially non-weapons for the purpose of abilities, feats, etc. Expectations can be hard to reconcile with the rules and that turns some people off.

D&D's number of attacks per round is already incredibly abstract. The rate of fire on a crossbow is already far greater than you can do without mechanical assistance, let alone a sling. A high level fighter makes four shots per round with the crossbow expert. Reload. And. Fire. A. Crossbow. Four. Times. In. Six. Seconds. And they say martial abilities aren't superhuman!

Personally, I feel firearms end up in the same boat as katanas; weapon nerds grossly exaggerate their abilities. D&D weapons are so disassociated from reality that any Attempt to make them match their "real world" abilities (let alone mythology) is a failure waiting to happen.

So refluffed crossbow is fine. The rules for crossbows don't even reflect real crossbows, this can serve fine for firearms too.

 

[Rocker26a]

Some consideration is still required; because once you allow the introduction of something gunpowder-like, players are probably going to try to see how much they can get and whether they can solve problems via blowing them up, whether by planting barrels of it or by trying to make primitive grenades...

That's just BG3, you're describing BG3.

 

[Azzy]

Anyone who is going to be dedicated and intelligent enough to invent stuff is likely going to be able to master the basics of magic, at least we'll enough to cast cantrips.

You're assuming that any given smart alchemist (the occupation most likely to stumble upon a formula for gunpowder or its equivalent, given their proclivities) has also free access to and inclination towards magical education. But just a likely, there may be restrictions on who can access magical education in the setting. Perhaps it's restricted to a certain a social class, say, like the nobility might want to keep access away from the poors, otherwise the poors may get uppity). Even if the lower classes are otherwise allowed to study magic, it may be out of their reach if there's a serious tuition or if you don't live in an area with a a wizardry academy or even a lone master wizard that's taking apprentices.

Also goes without saying that there's no guarantee that chemistry works the same. Mundane gunpowder may not even be possible.

Nor is there any guarantee that it works differently. One generally tends to assume that a fantasy setting would hew fairly close to our own reality except as specifically noted otherwise. It's also irrelevant—if a setting has functional firearms, then it doesn't matter if we say it uses "gunpowder" or "pyritium powder" as both serve the same purpose.

 

[Marc17]

This all has reminded me of a campaign I started in high school in the mid 80's. My group liked The Morrow Project due to its constant appearance at a local con. I started a game but said I was using AD&D rules. As it turned out, I put them, a Morrow Project team in a D&D world. They had all the guns and while still needing to overcome AC, those guns did significant damage. IIRC, the .50 cal on their fusion powered off road jeep did 3d10 and was capable of full auto fire. Anyway, much like TMP, it wasn't the firepower that mattered, but if they can make friends with the locals to survive. Another thing being they needed their limited ammo to last till they got enough levels to get another weapon proficiency before they could go native. From there it was a quest for the Rod of Seven Parts (still decade before the official adventure) in world where a high magic battle between good and evil is being played out by the gods adding in agents from other worlds. There was a literal SS unit the party was going to have to take care of later. We got a few encounters done but playing only during school lunch was too rough to keep going.

 

[CreamCloud0]

Some consideration is still required; because once you allow the introduction of something gunpowder-like, players are probably going to try to see how much they can get and whether they can solve problems via blowing them up, whether by planting barrels of it or by trying to make primitive grenades... followed by somebody insisting that they can therefore use Minor Conjuration to create such grenades (see arguments from players insisting that it's totally legit that their 3rd-level conjurer could spam Catapult Munitions).

If the players want to explode the hell out of their campaign let them, but make them put enough squeeze in for the juice if they’re going to do that, also also, you’re the GM, you control the price, the availability, how difficult or dangerous it is to transport more than a small barrel of it at a time, if the player insists minor conjuration works like that, you get to insist that you’re the GM and no, it doesn’t.

 

[AlViking]

...and ease of training and logistics, but i don't see how that's related to my point anyway?

still doesn't mean they'll have access to the required knowledge/resources needed to start learning magic though, or they might have been dissuaded from pursuing it - 'your pa studied magic and all it got him was killed and his soul eaten, don't let me catch you studying any of that arcane rubbish arthur'

it doesn't matter if it works like it does in our world unless players are going to be metagaming coming up with how to create stuff, so it doesn't need to be gunpowder it's 'dragon dust' or 'sparksoot', and it works enough like gunpowder for 99% of situations that matter and doesn't work like it in the 1% where it games the system.

Early versions of firearms were kind of crap. But they were loud and belched smoke which would be terrifying ... except magic would already as or more terrifying.

We can't know how magic would affect development of technology so we have to make our best guess. The fiction we end up with can fit a wide variety of conclusions, I just don't assume that technology would advance in the same way it did in our world.

 

[AlViking]

You're assuming that any given smart alchemist (the occupation most likely to stumble upon a formula for gunpowder or its equivalent, given their proclivities) has also free access to and inclination towards magical education. But just a likely, there may be restrictions on who can access magical education in the setting. Perhaps it's restricted to a certain a social class, say, like the nobility might want to keep access away from the poors, otherwise the poors may get uppity). Even if the lower classes are otherwise allowed to study magic, it may be out of their reach if there's a serious tuition or if you don't live in an area with a a wizardry academy or even a lone master wizard that's taking apprentices.



Nor is there any guarantee that it works differently. One generally tends to assume that a fantasy setting would hew fairly close to our own reality except as specifically noted otherwise. It's also irrelevant—if a setting has functional firearms, then it doesn't matter if we say it uses "gunpowder" or "pyritium powder" as both serve the same purpose.

Nah. I'm just assuming that the fiction can be whatever fits the world we want to build. There are any number of reasons that technological advancement could be restricted - everything from physics and chemistry works a bit different to some outside source actively suppresses it to the best and brightest that would develop tech would instead be encouraged to invest in magic.

I want the world to be somewhat static over time because it works best for my campaign - I've had an ongoing campaign world that has spanned a few centuries now - so lack of advancement works best for me. Different campaigns are obviously going to have different approaches.

 

[Remathilis]

Some consideration is still required; because once you allow the introduction of something gunpowder-like, players are probably going to try to see how much they can get and whether they can solve problems via blowing them up, whether by planting barrels of it or by trying to make primitive grenades... followed by somebody insisting that they can therefore use Minor Conjuration to create such grenades (see arguments from players insisting that it's totally legit that their 3rd-level conjurer could spam Catapult Munitions).

DMs worry about this stuff when the necklace of fireballs exists...