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

[W'rkncacnter]

Isn't scale often leather?

...the backing can be. which i said.

And don't get me started on longsword/greatsword/bastard sword/arming sword...

my understanding is that a longsword is a one-and-a-half or two handed sword that can be used as a sidearm, a greatsword is a sword that is long enough to be classifiable as a polearm, a bastard sword originally meant a sword whose maker was unknown but now often refers to one-and-a-half hilted swords, and arming swords are one-handed doubled edged swords that eventually split into broadswords and longswords, but that each category is also sort of malleable because history is weird

 

[Azzy]

Why would mages attempt to tightly control access to magic?

Because our history has shown that those with power tend to tightly control that power—whether it's the wealthy, religious elite, temporal powers like royalty and nobility, etc. It just follows from what we see in reality.

Why would the rulers of the country (unless every country everywhere is run by mages) not want as many soldiers casting cantrips as possible?

Because, if the ruler is or became unpopular, revolution became so much easier for the masses.

 

[AlViking]

That wasn't the case! The given firearm of a historical period didn't ever just, flatly conquer the contemporary armour! Bar anything short of point blank and straight on!

Point blank straight on with a long gun not a pistol. The reason people stopped wearing high quality plate armor because it was expensive and only the wealthy could afford it. When they stopped fighting in battles only lower quality armor was produced. Until modern times anyway when armor made a comeback for soldiers in many armies.

On a related note, Kevlar armor is great against bullets (up to a certain caliber) but does little to stop damage from edged weapons, plate armor or or even chain mail is better for that.

 

[Rocker26a]

Because our history has shown that those with power tend to tightly control that power—whether it's the wealthy, religious elite, temporal powers like royalty and nobility, etc. It just follows from what we see in reality.

I feel slightly insane that this has to be mentioned at all. Like, "pulling the ladder up behind you" is just. Everywhere today.

 

[Parmandur]

That point is magic. Because you cannot even remotely adjudicate hit point damage of meat vs luck when magic missile auto hits and a rogue can stand at ground zero of a 40 foot diameter blast of fire and take no damage on a successful save while never displacing his current location. There is nothing game-breaking that gunpowder can do that magic has done several time before breakfast.

Right, that is why magic was handled the way it was in OD&D and AD&D: lots of difficulties and limitations. Like large artillery pieces in late Medieval times.

That's part of why I say it probably does not matter for modern D&D much, with how much easier magic is to access and use.

 

[AlViking]

...the backing can be. which i said.

my understanding is that a longsword is a one-and-a-half or two handed sword that can be used as a sidearm, a greatsword is a sword that is long enough to be classifiable as a polearm, a bastard sword originally meant a sword whose maker was unknown but now often refers to one-and-a-half hilted swords, and arming swords are one-handed doubled edged swords that eventually split into broadswords and longswords, but that each category is also sort of malleable because history is weird

Longswords were swords that were longer than average. It's only in modern times that we've tried to create consistent categories.

I view longsword as hand and a half, usable 1 handed or two as reflected by the rules. There were plenty of claymor type sword that could only be used two handed, those were greatswords but to me a pole arm has a pole as part of it with some kind of blade or hammer on the end.

Arming swords are lighter, only used 1 handed - as far as D&D rules go I'd call them rapiers.

But over the course of history there have been many, many different styles an it's not worth the effort to have a specific rule for each one.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Longswords were swords that were longer than average. It's only in modern times that we've tried to create consistent categories.

yeah i don't care all too much about how things used to be classified. i only brought up bastard swords because of how wildly different the categories are nowadays.

There were plenty of claymor type sword that could only be used two handed, those were greatswords but to me a pole arm has a pole as part of it with some kind of blade or hammer on the end.

there's a reason i was mainly comparing length.

Arming swords are lighter, only used 1 handed - as far as D&D rules go I'd call them rapiers.

you can technically two-hand an arming sword but it's an odd sort of stance and it's clearly not how it's meant to be used. that said, arming swords are too slashing oriented for me to consider them rapiers. shortswords are MORE comparable, i guess.

But over the course of history there have been many, many different styles an it's not worth the effort to have a specific rule for each one.

eh, there could be a few more though.

 

[AlViking]

yeah i don't care all too much about how things used to be classified. i only brought up bastard swords because of how wildly different the categories are nowadays.

there's a reason i was mainly comparing length.

you can technically two-hand an arming sword but it's an odd sort of stance and it's clearly not how it's meant to be used. that said, arming swords are too slashing oriented for me to consider them rapiers. shortswords are MORE comparable, i guess.

eh, there could be a few more though.

There are many variations of arming swords, the kind I was referring to would be an XVIIId which is primarily used for thrusting if we use this site's definitions 13 Types of Arming Swords and Their Historical Evolution

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Fair point, but firearms do change the way warfare and fighting are conducted on a fundamental level: it is a singularity event, and it isn't possible to have a quick and dirty system that keeps sword and plate on the same plane as musketeers.

It absolutely is: At the the current point in 5.5.

As long as firearms and bullets are martial weapons and many times the cost of shortbows and arrows, musketeers are going to be very rare, elite units, and work fine being fielded in the same armies as swords and plate.

D&D firearms aren't cheap or simple enough to be adopted en masse and change the way armies work.

 

[CreamCloud0]

I mentioned AoE and saving throw attacks upthread but guns could also be used for giving martials more energy damage attacks, ice shells, acid rounds, lightning shot, although i guess there’s no reason (other than DnD is afraid to give martials consistent elemental damage) that we couldn’t of just had elemental arrows and bolts BotW Zelda style for a good while now.