Rules for pistols and muskets

[mmadsen]

The Welsh longbow, in particular, was known for its ability to reduce armored calvary to nothing.

Horses aren't covered head to toe in armor of proof -- and if they are, they can't charge -- so a hail of arrows can soften a cavalry charge even without puncturing a single knight's armor.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

Unless you were a sharpshooting hunter or sniper, the trick to blackpowder firearms wasn't learning to aim... That's why you had ranks and files of infantry firing in volleys. All you had to do was teach your men to aim low, so the bullets didn't fly over the heads of the enemy. ...it was learning to reload quickly and properly.

The reason the British infantry was so successful in the late 1700's and early 1800's was that its infantry was drilled incessantly on reloading and firing. They used live ammo in their drills to get their troops used to the noise and smoke of battle. It was that trained discipline that allowed them to fire fast enough to simply put more lead into the enemy faster. Plus it allowed them to stand firm and advance even in the face of enemy fire, instead of retreating at the first casualities.

If you can find the numbers, go compare sometime the diffierence between the number of bullets fired in a typical musket battle to the number of actual casualites. Typically, it tool a LOT of bullets fired in volleys to kill even a few men.

English infantry were taught continually how to reload but they were never taught how to aim. To the English the bullet of the musket was of secondary importance. The true value of the musket was the noise and large clouds of smoke. The bullets would kill a few and possible break up ranks a bit, the noise and smoke though added cover which allowed the English to perform a bayonet charge which was the real way to kill the enemy in their eyes.

 

[mmadsen]

English infantry were taught continually how to reload but they were never taught how to aim.

I've read that early American manuals of arms changed "Ready, Present, Fire," to "Ready, Aim, Fire!"

Here's an excerpt from an article on massed infantry and musket inaccuracy:

In 1790 the Prussian Army conducted firing tests with its 1782 musket. The results were hardly impressive, given that the target, supposed to represent the front of an infantry company (32m by 1.8m) was actually a solid framework covering roughly 42% more surface area than would actually be occupied by the troops (30 sq m rather than 52 sq m). Moreover, the firing troops were performing under ideal conditions, with no one shooting back.

[Color=silver]Prussian Musketry Trials  
Range Hits 
300m  20% 
200   25 
140   40 
 70   70[/Color]

In a later test, in which the target surface was actually painted with the figures of troops in ranks about 25 percent of the rounds would entirely missed the "men" eevn at 70 meters. Moreover, rounds hitting the painted figures were not necessarily indicative of disabling wounds, since many struck hats, and coat tails, and accoutrements.

An analysis of combat statistics suggests that no more than 15 percentof the rounds fired seem to have hit anyone. And range was important to lethality. Beyond 100 meters serious casualties were relatively few, at 50 meters the slaughter could be terrific. It was these basic facts which molded tactics. Firepower could be lethal only if delivered in great volume at close range on a relatively narrow front. By forming troops up virtually shoulder to shoulder in two or three lines one could maximize their fire effectiveness.

 

[mmadsen]

In gaming terms I guess bullet proof is an add-on just like masterworked, that allows the wearer to benefit from the armor. Non-bullet proof armor would not protect from guns (ranged touch).

I'm not sure I'd make it a binary quality (bulletproof or not bulletproof) -- but maybe for simplicity's sake that's the best way to go. At any rate, armor of proof should weigh more than regular armor, with greater Armor Check penalties, slower movement rate, etc.

 

[Eben]

While I feel this is a very interesting discussion, i'dd be carefull of trying to make "realistic" rules for firearms in the d2O system/D&D. Gunpowder rules should be more about flavour and balance. That's how I look at D&D combat. If I want a realistic combat simulation, I'dd look elsewhere.
So I'dd make muskets and pistols similar to crossbows, with a full round action to load excxept when using a cartouche, perhaps expand the critical threat zone and with a misfire rule. Oh, and a % of failure eacht round for matchlock and flintlock for moisture. I'm not to sure what to do about armour. Perhaps just give a +1 to hit against all but masterwork heavy armour (thanks for the "bullet-proof" anecdote!)
Feel free to disagree of course.

 

[Frostmarrow]

I'm not sure I'd make it a binary quality (bulletproof or not bulletproof) -- but maybe for simplicity's sake that's the best way to go. At any rate, armor of proof should weigh more than regular armor, with greater Armor Check penalties, slower movement rate, etc.

Bullet-proof Breastplate 300 gp (200+100)
Masterworked Breastplate 350 gp (200+150)
Bullet-proof Masterworked Breastplate 450 gp (200+100+150)

It's complicated enough as it is.

 

[Desdichado]

While I feel this is a very interesting discussion, i'dd be carefull of trying to make "realistic" rules for firearms in the d2O system/D&D. Gunpowder rules should be more about flavour and balance. That's how I look at D&D combat. If I want a realistic combat simulation, I'dd look elsewhere.
So I'dd make muskets and pistols similar to crossbows, with a full round action to load excxept when using a cartouche, perhaps expand the critical threat zone and with a misfire rule. Oh, and a % of failure eacht round for matchlock and flintlock for moisture. I'm not to sure what to do about armour. Perhaps just give a +1 to hit against all but masterwork heavy armour (thanks for the "bullet-proof" anecdote!)
Feel free to disagree of course.

I agree 100%. Which is why I use the Freeport rules and don't worry about anything beyond that.

 

[mmadsen]

So I'dd make muskets and pistols similar to crossbows, with a full round action to load excxept when using a cartouche, perhaps expand the critical threat zone and with a misfire rule.

The rate of fire for trained soldiers with muskets was about three shots per minute -- two turns to load and one to fire, in D&D terms. With a rifle, the rate of fire was about one round per minute -- nine turns to drive the bullet down the barrel and one to fire.

Oh, and a % of failure eacht round for matchlock and flintlock for moisture.

This reminds me of a simple mechanic for inaccurate weapons like the musket: instead of -2 to-hit per range increment, make it a 10% miss chance.

 

[mmadsen]

While I feel this is a very interesting discussion, i'dd be carefull of trying to make "realistic" rules for firearms in the d2O system/D&D. Gunpowder rules should be more about flavour and balance.

I agree, but a huge part of the flavor of firearms is that they pierce armor (so swashbucklers don't wear much armor), and they often kill (or disable) with a single shot.

If bullets bounce off armor and can't kill people with less than a dozen shots, then firearms don't feel right -- even if other weapons feel right under the same rules.

 

[buzzard]

Absolutely. For the most part, earlier weapons fired much larger rounds and used a larger powder charge than modern weapons do. Accurate or not, if they hit you, you were in deep ****.

Well actually they used large powder charges because the powder was generally of low quality. Also black powder is extremely weak compared to modern smokeless powder. Comparing the size of the powder charges is not useful. Even today, the type of smokeless powder used can vary the charge size substancially. Muzzle velocity, or muzzle energy would be a much more useful measure. Hence, it is what is used to measure firepower these days.

The bullets, however, did tend to be quite large. Even travelling slowly (which black powder bullets did), a 60 caliber slug is going to cause a world of hurt on the unarmored man. On the other hand, that large chunk of lead will be lousy at piercing armor because of it's low velocity.

buzzard