D&D 5E Modern Weapons

[Imaculata]

But if for simplicity you want to keep the armor math then even 9mm should start at 3d6 damage. As it is impossible to dodge the projectile and no medieval armor or shield is going to hold the bullet.

I'm not sure if your assessment of the penetrative powers of a 9mm bullet versus a medieval suit of armor is accurate.

 

[Horwath]

I'm not sure if your assessment of the penetrative powers of a 9mm bullet versus a medieval suit of armor is accurate.

Breastplate(thickest part of the plate armour) was ineffective vs muskets and early flintlock pistols at close range. that is why armor faded out of use.

It was too heavy and too expensive to only protect vs longrange fire.

And that was with smooth barrel weapons. Modern firearms will go through any medieval armor no problem. Maybe hollow point bullet at long range will deform enough at the plate so it will to go through, but that is borderline case.

 

[Imaculata]

Breastplate(thickest part of the plate armour) was ineffective vs muskets and early flintlock pistols at close range.

Oh, no doubt. But that is not the type of bullet we're talking about here.

And that was with smooth barrel weapons. Modern firearms will go through any medieval armor no problem. Maybe hollow point bullet at long range will deform enough at the plate so it will to go through, but that is borderline case.

You are making the mistake here of presuming that modern fire power is more powerful than classic firepower, simply because it has the word 'modern' in front of it. But a musket bullet could easily sever your arm at the shoulder. A 9mm bullet will not do that.

Likewise, a musket bullet would probably go through a suit of armor with ease. But a 9mm bullet is a lot smaller, and not fired with classic gunpowder. It is not designed with armor penetration in mind.

 

[Horwath]

Oh, no doubt. But that is not the type of bullet we're talking about here.





You are making the mistake here of presuming that modern fire power is more powerful than classic firepower, simply because it has the word 'modern' in front of it. But a musket bullet could easily sever your arm at the shoulder. A 9mm bullet will not do that.

Likewise, a musket bullet would probably go through a suit of armor with ease. But a 9mm bullet is a lot smaller, and not fired with classic gunpowder. It is not designed with armor penetration in mind.

Musket would be more powerfull at close range, that is sure. But as it is smoothbore and round lead bullet it will lose speed very fast across distance.

Also if we compare size an caliber of the weapon, then musket must be compared to Barret .50Cal

And that will kill a guy in plate, then the next guy behind, then the next behind him.

 

[Imaculata]

Musket would be more powerfull at close range, that is sure. But as it is smoothbore and round lead bullet it will lose speed very fast across distance.

But we're not discussing effectiveness over distance.

Also if we compare size an caliber of the weapon, then musket must be compared to Barret .50Cal

If you want to compare it to a .50Cal as well, you're welcome to do that... but you specifically mentioned the 9mm. And that is where I disagree.

 

[Horwath]

But we're not discussing effectiveness over distance.



If you want to compare it to a .50Cal as well, you're welcome to do that... but you specifically mentioned the 9mm. And that is where I disagree.

We were discusing armor penetration of medieval armor. I think that every firearm, except maybe low cal "lady pistols" would penetrate plate armor.

Plate armor was 1,5-2,5mm thick. depending on the body part. Military vehicles have 4-5mm steel plates. That is for small arms only protection(9mm). Maybe 5,56 at longer range. Or 7,62mm at extreme range.

If you would wear 5mm full plate, it would be well over 100kg.

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

Note that if you've got modern firearms being used, you're likely to have modern armours in use as well.

Breastplates were quite capable of stopping musket balls: the armour of that period was 'proofed' by firing a ball at it. As with arrows, range and angle of impact are important factors. Firearms were already pushing armour out of use due to economic and logistical reasons even before they became powerful enough to make it impractical.

A discussion of "how much damage should a firearm deal" isn't going to be resolved because people treat hit points as representing different things.

I would suggest that you decide what you want fights involving guns to look like in your game and design their rules to support that accordingly.

 

[Imaculata]

We were discusing armor penetration of medieval armor. I think that every firearm, except maybe low cal "lady pistols" would penetrate plate armor.

[video=youtube;ygaSMeTh-f0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygaSMeTh-f0[/video]

It would seem that anything less than a .50 caliber has great difficulty piercing plate armor.

 

[Horwath]

[video=youtube;ygaSMeTh-f0]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygaSMeTh-f0[/video]

It would seem that anything less than a .50 caliber has great difficulty piercing plate armor.

Wow, it held better than I would expect.

But, helmet was the thickest piece of armor. Also as head is much smaller than the torso, helm has greater curvature than breastplate. It would be harder to get a glancing blow on someones chest.