Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Benicus 04-15-07, 02:31 AM	Do guns exist in Eberron? I can't seem to find an answer anywhere in the book...
TLD777 04-15-07, 02:48 AM	I don't think that there's any actual reference to guns in the eberron material, but one of the main themes with eberron seems to be that everything has a place. I could totally see the gnomes of zilargo carrying around little pistols with fire elementals bound into the chamber so it didn't need any gunpowder. I could also see house cannith elite riflemen. Sweet idea, I'm totally letting you think these up vicariously through me, and then stealing them from you for my campaign. Awesome. Much Love, TLD
KidChainsaw 04-15-07, 02:52 AM	Nope. But, take a look at p.145 of the DMG for some quick stats. Given the level of sophistication on Eberron, firearms wouldn't be such a stretch but they are not in the setting as written. Of course, with magewrights/artificiers and charged items accompanying most front line military units, it could be argued that they were never needed so never developed. Of course, you do what you want in your game.
Benicus 04-15-07, 03:11 AM	Originally the reason why I asked was because of A) The renaissance level tech in Eberron so I assumed at least muskets would be around, B) I already had stats for um (DMG) C) I saw this pic from Todd Lockwoods page: http://www.toddlockwood.com/galleries/dnd/03/firearms.shtml And I knew I had to have guns somewhere and Eberron seemed to fit. TLD, thanks for the love.
Nived 04-15-07, 03:11 AM	I warn you this is a hot button issue, I haven't seen it come up recently but in the past these kinda thread got ugly quick. The fact of the matter is that according to canon, the history and rules of Eberron, no there are no firearms. People can argue back and forth giving well thought out and reasoned arguements whether they should or should not be included in Eberron. At the end of the day however these well thought out and reasoned arguements are opinions, note the 'should or should not'. As a yes/no question, "Are there guns in Eberron?" No, there are not. That doesn't mean that you can't use them, but it'd be a houserule that they exist, as mentioned D&D rules for firearms can be found in the DMG. You will not however find official Eberron material that supports it.
turalisj 04-15-07, 04:57 AM	If you want to give your gnomes firearms, go ahead. Personaly, I like to split the two kinds between psionic and arcane users: Psionic: More starwarsy, blaster pistol with bright red bolt that singes flesh and smells like ozone when fired. Arcane: More like a modern day gun. A combination of a bound earth ele (for ammo) and a bound fire or wind ele (for propulsion).
Breeder 04-15-07, 08:32 AM	I've always based my guns off of the elemental guns from Final Fantasy Tactics. Originally they did damage of a specific elemtental type. Physical = Earth, Lightning = Air, Ice = Water, Fire = Fire. But now, with alchemical weapons I use those instead. It is very easy to use the stats of a heavy crossbow and say "it's a gun". In the case of a rifle just up the damage die one catagory.
hiryuu 04-15-07, 11:26 AM	They never fit the theme to me; Eberron's about using magic to do things. In Eberron, it's not likely that they would think of using an explosion to hurl a projectile down a barrel in order to deliver it at high speed, it's more likely they'd think about making a device that casts scorching ray or magic missile a few times per day, and they already did. They're called wands.
Edymnion 04-15-07, 12:47 PM	Do guns exist in Eberron? I can't seem to find an answer anywhere in the book...By the rules? No. By the setting's creator? No. By the opinion of the majority of players I've talked to? No. The answer I typically give for someone that just *HAS* to have a gun? Get a wand with a bent handle that looks like a pistol grip. I'll spare everybody the standard airtight case of "guns absolutely freaking SUCK until the modern day" speech though.
Just another user 04-15-07, 02:56 PM	I think that there good reasons both pro and against guns in Eberron, but the argument was debated to death already, In my eberron gunpowder weapons (as from the DMG) are a kobold invention, copied and commercialized by the Zilargo's gnomes, It is another of their secrets, even if it is not so well protected like the elemental binding. It is nothing world-shaking, many military see it just as another oddity, but it can be an interesting option if you want to use it. some of the previous threads on the argument http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=726562 http://boards1.wizards.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-659342.html http://boards1.wizards.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-644393 http://boards1.wizards.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-457381
Deekin 04-15-07, 04:28 PM	Originally the reason why I asked was because of A) The renaissance level tech in Eberron so I assumed at least muskets would be around, B) I already had stats for um (DMG) C) I saw this pic from Todd Lockwoods page: http://www.toddlockwood.com/galleries/dnd/03/firearms.shtml And I knew I had to have guns somewhere and Eberron seemed to fit. TLD, thanks for the love. That pciture- From the Forgotten Realms Campaign Setting.
ArcTan 04-15-07, 11:38 PM	By the rules? No. By the setting's creator? No. By the opinion of the majority of players I've talked to? No. The answer I typically give for someone that just *HAS* to have a gun? Get a wand with a bent handle that looks like a pistol grip. I'll spare everybody the standard airtight case of "guns absolutely freaking SUCK until the modern day" speech though. They don't suck -- they're not that much worse than bows, and significantly easier to use, which is why they actually did use them before the modern day (armies were never so foolish as to use something that absolutely freaking SUCKED if it didn't have some value).
ArcTan 04-15-07, 11:39 PM	It has reached the point, though, where the easiest thing to say is to just put them there if you want them and leave them out if you don't. If you want a good d20-based setting that *does* depend heavily on firearms, check out Iron Kingdoms.
ChaoticGood 04-16-07, 01:06 AM	I just have to put in my two cents and say that the idea of firearms being a kobold invention is brilliant. While gnomes are generally the "inventive" races in most worlds, kobolds make perfect sense to me as the inventors and perfecters of gunpowder. Sure, kobolds have plenty of sorcerors amongst them, but the scariest tribes have always been the ones who have used good old-fashioned everyday physics to beat their enemies. (See Tuckers Kobolds, Horrifying Flashbacks of.)
Sereno 04-16-07, 09:34 AM	The biggest argument against guns, IMO, is simply this: Gunpowder is explosive. Gunpowder is easily ignited. Do you really want to be carrying an easily-ignitable explosive on your person when there are people running around who can engulf you in flames with a couple of words, a gesture or two, and some bat crap? :)
Bluebrush 04-16-07, 12:29 PM	Surely the same applies to alchemist's fire? Or a necklace of fireballs?
Sereno 04-16-07, 03:58 PM	Surely the same applies to alchemist's fire? Or a necklace of fireballs? Not really ... you don't need to carry those items to be an adventurer (if they *do* explode when subjected to heat/fire), but you can't be a musketeer without multiple powderhorns.... One sorcerer with Burning Hands would easily wreak havoc on a troop of gunners.
dunkeykong 04-16-07, 05:02 PM	This is an exceptionally hot-button issue among Eberron players(Eberronians??) Ultimatley, we cant tell you how to play your game. The DMG has those stats in there as a varinat possiblity. In my opinion, guns have no place in Eberron, but by all means, play with them and get back to us.
SwarthmoreDB 04-16-07, 05:31 PM	If anything, include the futuristic weapons in the DMG such as the flamer and the disintegrator gun (IIRC) as either artifacts from the Age of Demons or maybe even the Age of Giants. One thing I was thinking of was that the power cells (which there are very few of) are actually containers for souls, so maybe if the characters want to recharge the cells they might have to kill some people (probably innocents or 'those untainted with magic???)...
Bluebrush 04-16-07, 05:40 PM	Not really ... you don't need to carry those items to be an adventurer (if they *do* explode when subjected to heat/fire), but you can't be a musketeer without multiple powderhorns...My point was that if carried alchemist's fire doesn't explode when you have a fireball dropped on you, why should gunpowder?
Edymnion 04-16-07, 07:12 PM	They don't suck -- they're not that much worse than bows, and significantly easier to use, which is why they actually did use them before the modern day (armies were never so foolish as to use something that absolutely freaking SUCKED if it didn't have some value).The only reason armies carried them is precisely because they were so easy to use. First up, until the invention of rifling though, there really was no such thing as "aiming", you just pointed the gun in the general direction of the target. Thats why classic gunfights in war had dozens of guys lining up and shooting, pure probability said that at least SOME of them would hit the other row. In fact, the phrase "Ready, Aim, Fire" didn't come into use until what, the first world war? Before that, it was "Ready, Steady, Fire". Again, because doing more than generally pointing the barrel at what you wanted to die, there was no such thing as aiming. Second, they took forever to reload. The best trained armies in the WORLD could only manage 2-3 shots per minute. 3-5 rounds to reload your weapon does indeed suck. Its why you always see the classic pirate carrying multiple pistols, because you didn't bother reloading them in combat, you fired one, then tossed it on the deck and pulled another one. Third, until the invention of smokeless powder, any concentrated use of gunfire created a thick smog that would blanket the battlefield to the point you couldn't even see the opponents. The term "Fog of War" that you commonly see in computer strategy games these days literally referred to the gunsmoke blanking out the field. Fourth, while the glamorous picture of the cowboy is all well and good, a shootist (the actual period term for a gunslinger) was almost always deaf in one, if not both ears due to the repeated damage caused from the loud gunshots. Fifth, you wouldn't WANT to fire a gun twice in a row anyway, because the quality of the powder and the design of the barrel meant they fouled after every shot and required cleaning, or the thing would literally explode in your hands. Especially earlier guns, the shooter was in just as much trouble as the guy he was shooting at. In the real world, the gun only had two advantages. It would tear through any armor, and it was easy as DIRT to train someone to use a gun. "Point this end at the badguy. Pull the trigger". Training complete. Even then, guns were only effective if you had an entire regiment firing them, as the accuracy problems were so bad that hitting anything at a closer range than a dozen meters or so was pure freaking luck. In D&D terms, a gun would probably do about 1d6 x4 damage, take 3d4 rounds to reload, and instead of range increments, would have a straight 10% cumulative miss chance per 20', but it would at least be fired as a ranged touch attack. Oh yes, and every time you fired it, you would need to make a Fort Save (DC 5) or deafened. In *EVERY* way, if you had the choice between a trained gunman or a trained longbowman in any period combat, you would choose the bowman. Because period guns SUCKED. People don't want "real" medieval guns. They want modern 9mm and assault rifles that they can fire multiple times per round, slap more ammo in, and keep on shooting. That sort of weapon simply did not exist until the 1800s.
Chie 04-16-07, 08:27 PM	In my role as an Artificer I've built guns before.I just use alchemy to work them though,since it fits with the setting better.Using alchemy and engineering there are all manner of interesting ways you can create projectile weapons.And they don't actually have to be medieval style firearms either since Eberron and DnD don't conform to our rules of reality.Just make sure you run a gun design by your GM first.
Edymnion 04-16-07, 09:41 PM	In my role as an Artificer I've built guns before.I just use alchemy to work them though,since it fits with the setting better.Using alchemy and engineering there are all manner of interesting ways you can create projectile weapons.And they don't actually have to be medieval style firearms either since Eberron and DnD don't conform to our rules of reality.Just make sure you run a gun design by your GM first.Heh, well I hope he made you make the relivant checks to first come up with the idea, and then design the thing, and then again to build the prototype.
crashbangboom 04-16-07, 10:09 PM	If you want an interesting set up for firearms just check out Monte Cook's PTOLUS; City by the Spire. the firearms listed in there may be what you're looking for.
Just another user 04-17-07, 06:31 AM	Real life/DND paragons are always iffy at best, but when it come to guns are beyond useless, imho. In real life? Sure, let's show me a real life archer able to shot 2 arrows at the some time while in the middle of combat with some chance to hit with both or someone that can hide in plain sight as for the D&D class ability and we'll talk about real life guns in D&D, until then I stick to the DMG version and rules to decide about their praticality (sp)
ArcTan 04-17-07, 07:01 AM	In the real world, the gun only had two advantages. It would tear through any armor, and it was easy as DIRT to train someone to use a gun. "Point this end at the badguy. Pull the trigger". Training complete. Even then, guns were only effective if you had an entire regiment firing them, as the accuracy problems were so bad that hitting anything at a closer range than a dozen meters or so was pure freaking luck. In D&D terms, a gun would probably do about 1d6 x4 damage, take 3d4 rounds to reload, and instead of range increments, would have a straight 10% cumulative miss chance per 20', but it would at least be fired as a ranged touch attack. Oh yes, and every time you fired it, you would need to make a Fort Save (DC 5) or deafened. You are aware that D&D says you can reload a heavy (winched) crossbow as a full-round action, right? That's six seconds. That's ridiculous. So is the whole range increment deal. A D&D archer can shoot and kill a running man from hundreds of feet a way. He can shoot *several shots* in the *same six-second round* and have them *all hit*. That's more ridiculous than ridiculous. In *EVERY* way, if you had the choice between a trained gunman or a trained longbowman in any period combat, you would choose the bowman. Because period guns SUCKED. People don't want "real" medieval guns. They want modern 9mm and assault rifles that they can fire multiple times per round, slap more ammo in, and keep on shooting. That sort of weapon simply did not exist until the 1800s. Well, they also want archers who do ridiculous stunts like Legolas from the Lord of the Rings movies who seem to be able to fire arrows at approximately the rate a submachine gun fires bullets. And D&D gives it to them. So I don't really see what the problem is here.
Sereno 04-17-07, 08:54 AM	My point was that if carried alchemist's fire doesn't explode when you have a fireball dropped on you, why should gunpowder? Because alchemist's fire is magical and therefore doesn't follow the rules. I have no problem suspending disbelief to state; this substance doesn't burn unless exposed to the air. Just heating it is not a problem, but breaking the container it's in is.... If you wanted to create a magical gunpowder that doesn't explode when it gets set on fire, but can still be ignited somehow, that's up to you. The problem as I see it is that magic makes the gun so unlikely that it just would never get invented.
Bluebrush 04-17-07, 11:39 AM	Because alchemist's fire is magical and therefore doesn't follow the rules.No it isn't. It's alchemical. I have no problem suspending disbelief to state; this substance doesn't burn unless exposed to the air.Surely that's the case with gunpowder too? If you can build sturdy yet easily breakable containers for relatively highly volatile alchemist's fire, why not sturdy containers for gunpowder?
Sereno 04-17-07, 12:51 PM	No it isn't. It's alchemical. Surely that's the case with gunpowder too? If you can build sturdy yet easily breakable containers for relatively highly volatile alchemist's fire, why not sturdy containers for gunpowder? According to the PHB, to use Craft Alchemy to make Alchemists' Fire (among other things) you must be a spellcaster ... that implies to me that such items made with this skill are in some way magical. Regardless, Alchemists' Fire (as described in the PHB) doesn't EXIST in our world ... gunpowder does. Sturdy containers isn't the only problem, it's also accessibility. Once you make a flask of AF, you only "open" it when you use it as a weapon. A gunpowder holder needs to be opened and closed a lot (multiple times per round if you're ever going to allow multiple attacks (which is silly in itself!)). Like I said, you could easily create your own alchemical/magical "gunpowder" call it "mages' sparkpowder" that can only be ignited by a spark from a particular type of stone/crystal striking a particular type of metal.... That said, I don't think development of such a weapon would continue in the face of the "simplicity" of casting a fireball or using a wand. If you want guns ... no one is stopping you from making them. I just don't think they're right for Eberron (except for the "coolness" factor, which you can easily get with other equipment).
John Q. Mayhem 04-17-07, 02:08 PM	Don't listen to haters. If you think guns are fun, use them. I ran a short, very wild-West-style game in Eberron set between Breland and (I forget if it was Darguun or Droaam), using slightly modified dart thrusters from Underdark as a very common weapon. http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ud_gallery/52120_CN.jpg Bottom left. Basically 3-shot hand crossbows. It was a lot of fun, showdowns in dusty streets, sieges of inns by gangs of outlaws looking for loot, standoffs, just a grand ol' time. Basically, guns can be a lot of fun (I LOVE IK, f'r instance), but there are also just-as-fun substitutes; just do whatever is the most fun for you.
Sereno 04-17-07, 02:34 PM	Bottom left. Basically 3-shot hand crossbows. It was a lot of fun, showdowns in dusty streets, sieges of inns by gangs of outlaws looking for loot, standoffs, just a grand ol' time. Now, I like *these* a lot better ... all the "cool factor" of pulling out a pair of concealed guns and taking aim without having to explain away the complexities of getting to that point with black powder. Let's face it, I don't think anyone really wants the "historical" firearm experience in D&D ... what we really want is to crash through a window, roll down some stairs and pull a pair of semi-auto pistols like Trinity in the first Matrix! :cool: We might also be happy with the Pirates of the Carribean pre-loaded pistol; fire and drop then draw steel. I doubt anyone *really* wants to spend at least 5 rounds futzing with powder and shot and rammers and slow-burning matches, etc....
SiouLubb 04-17-07, 05:10 PM	I've always enjoyed wands with ranged touch spells as being the closest equivalent to guns in DnD. A nice wand of Scorching Ray created by a 12th level caster gives a nice submachinegun feel as well. Or a wand of lesser orb (of fire, cold, acid, energy, etc) So what if the wand is just a bit thicker than normal and bent at one end to look like a flintlock pistol? If you're having fun.....
Edymnion 04-17-07, 09:08 PM	I've always enjoyed wands with ranged touch spells as being the closest equivalent to guns in DnD. A nice wand of Scorching Ray created by a 12th level caster gives a nice submachinegun feel as well. Or a wand of lesser orb (of fire, cold, acid, energy, etc)Totally. You want fun, play an Artificer in a trenchcoat, hat, and a half-smoked cigarret hanging out of his mouth as he quick draws a couple of pistol gripped wands and starts spewing rapid fire orb spells. At higher levels, craft stubby staves and hold them like shotguns or rifles when you fire them off. Staff with Cone of Cold makes for a GREAT shotgun like spread. You can have all the fun and flavor of a gunslinger in Eberron quite easily, without the need for blackpowder weapons.
Alex_ 04-18-07, 02:16 AM	According to the PHB, to use Craft Alchemy to make Alchemists' Fire (among other things) you must be a spellcaster ... that implies to me that such items made with this skill are in some way magical. You need to be a spellcaster to make ANY alchemical substance, even stuff like anti-toxin, and acid. I think this refers more to the fact that spellcasters are usually the only people educated enough to create them, and also a balancing factor to keep non-spellcasters from replicating the effects of low-ish level spells. Regardless, Alchemists' Fire (as described in the PHB) doesn't EXIST in our world ... gunpowder does. Actually, it does. It's basically White Phosphorus: a sticky chemical substance that bursts into flames when exposed to open air. Supposedly invented by Irish arsonists at around the turn of the century, it was commonly known as "Fenian Fire" (Fenian referring Irish nationalists). Since there's no Ireland in D&D, they changed it to "Alchemist's Fire". Actually still in use today in many military incindeary, illumination, and obfuscation systems, where it goes by the nickname "Willie Pete" (at least with US forces). Maybe if the DMG had just called it "blastingpowder", they could have avoided this whole mess. That said, I don't think development of such a weapon would continue in the face of the "simplicity" of casting a fireball or using a wand. It's weaker than a wand, but cheaper, and can be used by non-spellcasters. More expensive and harder to get access to than a crossbow, but more powerful. It's actually a nice middle ground. While magic has accomplished many things in Eberron, it hasn't totally supplanted alchemy or non-magical advances. I would expect to see magical enhancements applied to firearms as much as any other device in Eberron. +1 Shocking Pistols, +2 Keen Musket, +1 Thundering Blunderbuss, etc. Yeah adding them is mostly a personal decision, and based more on cool factor than anything else... but so was leaving them out in the first place.
SiouLubb 04-18-07, 09:06 AM	While magic has accomplished many things in Eberron, it hasn't totally supplanted alchemy or non-magical advances. I would expect to see magical enhancements applied to firearms as much as any other device in Eberron. +1 Shocking Pistols, +2 Keen Musket, +1 Thundering Blunderbuss, etc. Strangely, no-one seems to be a big fan of the +5 Returning Submachinegun I put in my campaign.... Never understood why.....
Sereno 04-18-07, 01:26 PM	Actually, it does. It's basically White Phosphorus: a sticky chemical substance that bursts into flames when exposed to open air. Supposedly invented by Irish arsonists at around the turn of the century, it was commonly known as "Fenian Fire" (Fenian referring Irish nationalists). Since there's no Ireland in D&D, they changed it to "Alchemist's Fire". Actually still in use today in many military incindeary, illumination, and obfuscation systems, where it goes by the nickname "Willie Pete" (at least with US forces). Hmmm, I always thought it was based on "Greek Fire" (what it used to be called in the older versions of the game) ... but, even then, Greek Fire was more like napalm (sticky and hard to put out) than a flash-bang.... However, does white phosphorous explode if exposed to heat? Because, as far as I know, Alchemist's Fire does not....
Bluebrush 04-18-07, 04:33 PM	Strangely, no-one seems to be a big fan of the +5 Returning Submachinegun I put in my campaign.... Never understood why.....I think I know. You generally don't throw machine guns. ^_^
Edymnion 04-18-07, 06:37 PM	Strangely, no-one seems to be a big fan of the +5 Returning Submachinegun I put in my campaign.... Never understood why.....:rofl:I think I know. You generally don't throw machine guns. ^_^Nah, ranged weapons pass the enchantment on to their ammunition. :D
Alex_ 04-18-07, 06:39 PM	Hmmm, I always thought it was based on "Greek Fire" (what it used to be called in the older versions of the game) ... but, even then, Greek Fire was more like napalm (sticky and hard to put out) than a flash-bang.... However, does white phosphorous explode if exposed to heat? Because, as far as I know, Alchemist's Fire does not.... Greek fire is indeed closer to Napalm in that it requires a separate source of heat. Simple exposure to air does nothing for it. White Phosphorous, however, like Alchemist's Fire, requires no external heat source. Contact with oxygen in the atmosphere causes the reaction that makes it ignite and burn. White Phosphorous/Alchemist's Fire is only like Napalm and Greek Fire in that it is also a sticky liquid that is very difficult to remove and burns longer than normal.
Bluebrush 04-18-07, 09:17 PM	:rofl:Nah, ranged weapons pass the enchantment on to their ammunition. :DReturning: This special ability can only be placed on a weapon that can be thrown.Though depending on your group and the technological knowledge you allow the characters, you might just find them complaining that the big hollow spear with curve at one end the wierd metal point coming out at an angle at the other is a pretty weird design.
Sereno 04-19-07, 10:25 AM	Greek fire is indeed closer to Napalm in that it requires a separate source of heat. Simple exposure to air does nothing for it. That's the way we always played it in previous editions ... you had to light it like a molotov cocktail, but it burned hotter and was harder to put out. White Phosphorous, however, like Alchemist's Fire, requires no external heat source. Contact with oxygen in the atmosphere causes the reaction that makes it ignite and burn. What I'm wondering, though, is it safe to carry a white phosphorous "bomb" if you might get caught in a fairly large flame like Burning Hands, a dragon's breath or a Fireball ... carrying Alch. Fire *is* safe (by RAW)....
Alex_ 04-19-07, 03:16 PM	What I'm wondering, though, is it safe to carry a white phosphorous "bomb" if you might get caught in a fairly large flame like Burning Hands, a dragon's breath or a Fireball ... Yes. The heat source would have to burn/melt through whatever was containing it and expose it to oxygen to cause it to ignite.
Just another user 04-19-07, 05:06 PM	What I'm wondering, though, is it safe to carry a white phosphorous "bomb" if you might get caught in a fairly large flame like Burning Hands, a dragon's breath or a Fireball ... carrying Alch. Fire *is* safe (by RAW).... Remember that is D&D that we are talking about here. By the RAW you could go around wearing a paper dress, be hit in full by a fireball for max damage and not have it even scorched.
Bluebrush 04-19-07, 06:15 PM	Never mind all those scrolls your average caster is carrying by level 5.
LittleGreatMaker 04-19-07, 10:12 PM	WotC has not done enough in regards advancing bow weapons. Dungeonspace has helped a little, but only bit. Honestly as real world user of bow and crossbow, both weapons very under powered in the game world. Eberron is possibly the best setting to introduce more advanced forms of the basic weapons and maybe firearms as well. And to anyone who think blackpowder firearms, even a matchlock, wouldn't be effective in combat has never fired one. And, they make good clubs once the bullet is gone. Iron Kingdoms may have interesting ideas to add to Eberron. Iron Kingdoms (http://privateerpress.com/ironkingdoms/default.php?x=rules/characters) :dragon:
Captain_Kobold 04-20-07, 04:38 AM	Out of interest, what do you mean by 'advancing' bow weapons? And how are they underpowered? I think that the reason why technology has not advanced as far in Eberron has been said before: with magic being more available, there has been less need to. In the example of firearms, wands have been easier to produce and are more reliable. Plus most of the spells in them have better range than primitive guns and ignore armour. It might simply be that there is no substance in Eberron equivalent to gunpowder. If you want to introduce firearms into Eberrron though, go for it. I hope that your game will be enriched by them.
Alex_ 04-20-07, 10:34 AM	In the example of firearms, wands have been easier to produce and are more reliable. Plus most of the spells in them have better range than primitive guns and ignore armour. You have to be a 5th level caster to craft a wand. I'm pretty sure the Alchemical DC for crafting a gunpowder-like substance, or a firearm are much easier to meet. A pistol costs 250GP and a Musket 500 and can be used by anyone, while a wand costs at least 750 GP and can only be used by someone with high ranks in UMD or a spellcaster. Wands are superior to any non-magical ranged weapon, but that doesn't mean development of ranged weapons has ceased. They're too expensive and limited in who can use them to be. The vast majority of Eberron's population are not casters, and still rely on mundane weapons. And at lower levels, ranged soldiers equipped with firearms are deadlier than those equipped with crossbows or bows. Eberron is a world where alchemical advances have surpassed other worlds. They just came out of a major war and it looks like another one is on the horizon. It's a setting that in many ways mirrors a late 1800's/early 1900's world, with heavy influences from film noir, Lovecraft's works, and high action adventure films, which all usually involve a firearm at some point. Plenty of reasonable conditions for the appearance of firearms. The real reason that Eberron doesn't have firearms is pretty much the reason people add them to it- thematic. Eberron is a world where people come up with roundabout mgical ways to do things, just like in the Flintstones, they came up with roundabout ways to do things using rocks and extinct animals. It wasn't about what was doing what was most efficient (why do you need a turtle to hold a record, and why do you need a bird to act as the needle?). It's about maintaining a theme. It's not logical, but it's not -illogical-. It's just cool. If it were a fantasy land where they had an excess amount of candy, you'd imagine seeing more things done with and made out of candy. Both an artificer with a bandoleer full of pistols and a bandoleer full of wands is cool no mater how you slice it. Having your ship attacked by Lazhaar pirates is cool, whether they're using canons or ballistas. Spending an action point to get the high DC tumble check to do a flip, and still pulling off a critical head shot on the enemy is cool, whether you're using a pistol or a hand crossbow.
ChaoticGood 04-20-07, 10:14 PM	Amen! Preach it, Brother Alex_! :clap: I'm determined to use the Dwarf Sniper mini in an Eberron game at some point... It's just too cool to ignore. :)
Phalo 04-26-07, 03:37 PM	No it isn't. It's alchemical. Surely that's the case with gunpowder too? Alchemist fire is alchemial but only produceable by a person with the ability to cast spells. As far as guns go i tend to find them more trouble than they are worth. granted a period gun could punch through armor but when you throw in magic armor you change the rules. put guns in ebberon if you feel the need but like i told the party i was dming for if you guys want guns to exist remember your not the only ones that are gonna have em Think of a army of goblines each with a pistol even if they only get off one shot that can kill a group easily with volley rules
John Q. Mayhem 04-26-07, 04:26 PM	Yup. They're a lot like an army of goblins with heavy crossbows in that regard. Or bows, or any other missile weapon.
ArcTan 04-27-07, 11:35 PM	WotC has not done enough in regards advancing bow weapons. Dungeonspace has helped a little, but only bit. Honestly as real world user of bow and crossbow, both weapons very under powered in the game world. You're kidding me. D&D lets you pepper opponents with arrows with a reasonable chance to hit from 200 feet away. It lets you shoot 12 arrows in one minute. It lets you reload a heavy crossbow in 6 seconds. It's insane. Bows are *ridiculously* better in D&D than in real life -- it's actually a *viable strategy* in D&D to shoot at someone, stand there, run away and shoot at him again, and *trade shots with a sword-wielding knight blow-for-blow*. That's insanely ridiculous in any real-life context.
ArcTan 04-27-07, 11:36 PM	Alchemist fire is alchemial but only produceable by a person with the ability to cast spells. As far as guns go i tend to find them more trouble than they are worth. granted a period gun could punch through armor but when you throw in magic armor you change the rules. Well, if you can have magic full plate you can have magic matchlocks to shoot through it. (You have magic crossbows, after all.)
ArcTan 04-27-07, 11:41 PM	That said, I don't think development of such a weapon would continue in the face of the "simplicity" of casting a fireball or using a wand. The thing about spells is that if you look at them from the perspective of the whole world -- say, a major nation's army -- rather than an adventurer, they're a quite limited, quite expensive resource. An "artillery mage" really is the equivalent in cost of an artillery piece -- I'm not talking a mid-level Warmage (who's the equivalent of an F-15) or a high-level Wizard (who's the equivalent of an ICBM missile silo), I'm talking the Magewright with a wand of fireball. You've got maybe one of those guys for every five hundred regular soldiers. So yes, if you had a cheap and powerful ranged weapon that anyone could learn to use regardless of magical talent, they'd probably lap that right up.
ArcTan 04-27-07, 11:43 PM	:rofl:Nah, ranged weapons pass the enchantment on to their ammunition. :D Seems like a stretch that it'd regenerate the spent shells and re-load the shells into the spent magazine, though. Realistically, what this gives you is a big pile of useless bent-up slugs lying at your feet.
Yare 04-29-07, 10:54 PM	I ran a campaign with two firearms in it. One of my players was a Cannith tinkerer whose job was was research and development of alternative weaponry. His pet project was of course -a prototype pistol. But between the Mourning and the end of the Last War, his character no longer had a home or his old job etc... He kept two of his pistol prototypes for personal use as he became an adventurer and improved them over time through Craft ( gunsmithing ). They were the only two weapons of their kind in all of Eberron and people reacted to them with an appropriate level of astonishment. It worked out well. The player got to have his gunslinger, but the flavor of the setting remained entirely unchanged.
John Q. Mayhem 04-30-07, 08:21 AM	That rocks, Yare. Sounds like a blast.
Edymnion 04-30-07, 09:30 PM	Seems like a stretch that it'd regenerate the spent shells and re-load the shells into the spent magazine, though. Realistically, what this gives you is a big pile of useless bent-up slugs lying at your feet.Honestly, is everyone missing the point of the joke that all of the bullets you fire turn around and hit you instead, or are we just intentionally trying to make it fall flat?
ArcTan 05-01-07, 03:08 AM	Honestly, is everyone missing the point of the joke that all of the bullets you fire turn around and hit you instead, or are we just intentionally trying to make it fall flat? Er, it's not an obvious joke, because that's not how returning weapons work? I mean, there's no obvious reason why bullets would return and hit you while throwing axes would return and *not* hit you. So no, I wouldn't get that joke offhand. (BTW, to clarify in case anyone is confused, the actual returning property on D&D can only be put on throwing weapons, not ammo.)
Edymnion 05-01-07, 08:27 AM	Er, it's not an obvious joke, because that's not how returning weapons work?Well SiouLubb, I thought it was funny at least.
Kreistor2 05-01-07, 02:32 PM	In the real world, the gun only had two advantages. It would tear through any armor, and it was easy as DIRT to train someone to use a gun. "Point this end at the badguy. Pull the trigger". Training complete. Even then, guns were only effective if you had an entire regiment firing them, as the accuracy problems were so bad that hitting anything at a closer range than a dozen meters or so was pure freaking luck. You got a lot right, but part of this one isn't. Bullets are made from lead. Lead is a soft metal. When a lead bullet hits a steel plate (which hard and strengthened by being bowed out), you get a flat disk of lead, not a punctured steel plate. In modern testing of period guns against late medieval armour, the armour wins -- the lead splatters on the steel and does not penetrate. Steel armour was designed to be a problem for crossbow bolts, which arguably had higher penetrating power than a bullet without a point. Even into 1812, some cavalry wore breastplates (notably the French). The guns were more powerful then than earlier periods, so on a direct hit on the flat center of a breastplate, they could penetrate, but anything off center hit the equivalent of sloped armour... the trick modern tanks use to increase the effectiveness of their armour. And, as you say, it's hard to hit a specific spot with a musket. So, the breastplate was effective against any except the luckiest of shots. (Since bullets weren't good at penetrating armour, then why'd the knight disappear? Well, there are many theories to that, including my favorite -- financial. Knights were expensive. You could hire 20 pikemen mercs for the cost of 1 knight merc. No brainer.) Even now, plate armour is still used as a defense against modern steel jacketed rounds. Kevlar is good against non-sharp projectiles, but it is possible to make bullets that have that sharp point and will pentrate. They layer the kevlar with steel plates. The sharp point is blunted against the steel, but though the bullet penetrates, the kevlar is facing a blunt object, which it defeats.
Captain_Kobold 05-03-07, 02:17 PM	Actually, <Pedant mode on> The main reason that guns became widespread was that their use in the armies of the time forced more interest in improving their design. It took a long while before guns became superior to bows and crossbows. They were used as the primary military weapons well before then. The reason that they became the main weapon in the armies of the time was simply due to economics. The armies at that time were generally larger than before, but were required not to drain so much of a country's rescources. More of the army was soldiers: there were less serfs whose job was just to keep the combatants supplied. Guns could be mass-produced, bows less so, however the real difference lies in the ammunition. An arrow takes a reasonably skilled workman a while to produce. Lead bullets and gunpowder require no special skill once someone has worked out the actual formula and come up with the method. You can mass-produce ball-and-powder charges in the millions. In a situation where soldiers had to carry their own ammunition, and battles could last for hours, the lighter weight and superior supply of the gun was better than the effectiveness of the longbow, or the ease of the crossbow. This in part, is where the problem with integrating realistic early guns into D&D comes in: They will only be developed and improved if they are used. They will only be used if gunpowder is very easy to produce. If gunpowder is easy to produce, it is cheap. If the PCs can get hold of cheap gunpowder, they will try to use it for everything. Up to and including cleaning their teeth. It starts to dominate the game. In most settings, this jars a bit. Hence if guns are going to be introduced, they are best combined with a little magic. Even if it is just used to create superior guns from the start. Treat them as magic items, make alchemical gunpowder expensive, up the damage a bit, and extend the reload time.
Kreistor2 05-03-07, 04:51 PM	Hence if guns are going to be introduced, they are best combined with a little magic. Even if it is just used to create superior guns from the start. Treat them as magic items, make alchemical gunpowder expensive, up the damage a bit, and extend the reload time. Or, abandon the gunpowder entirely and simply make them the equivalent of reloadable wands. That's what I did with my cannon in Eberron. The cannon simply became really big wands that took multiple people to load. So instead of firing shot, they fire lightning bolts, fireballs, sonic cones, and so on. Smaller arms can do the same thing. In the end, does it matter if the damage is physical or energy in warfare?
ColtFlenn 05-07-07, 07:50 PM	Awhile ago, I had a player who suggested Moogles in Eberrron. I humored him and created them as a Arcane superior race that is much like the Zil Gnomes in experimenting with magic and the like. Well then as I made them, I realized that it would be EXTREMELY cool for them to be able to have their own kind of "guns" that used magic instead of science. So after a little contemplating, I made such weapons. I saw this topic and the amount of discussion and thought I would introduce these and get some feedback on them! Cheers, Colt Flenn Arcane Pistol, Mog: 1d8 damage. Native to the magically inclined moogles, this is a metal pipe with a wooden stock. Resembling the dwarven pistol, the moogle’s version utilizes magic into the firing and bullets themselves. The pistol holds four shots at a time. This restricts the character to firing no more than four shots in a single round. Reloading four shots into the pistol is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity. A character with the two-weapon fighting feat can fire two pistols at a time, suffering all the normal penalties for wielding two weapons. Arcane Rifle, Mog: 1d10 damage. Native to the magically inclined moogles, this is a long metal pipe with a wooden stock. Resembling the dwarven rifle, the moogle’s version utilizes magic into the firing and bullets themselves. The rifle holds a limit to 2 shots in the rifle at any time. This restricts the character to firing no more than 2 shots in a single round. Reloading 2 shots into the rifle is a move-equivalent action that provokes an attack of opportunity.
Kn1ves 05-08-07, 12:53 AM	What do people think of either mounting the Gnome Crossbow Sight that let's the user treat the target as if they were two range increments closer but has no effect on targets within the first two range increments or modifying parts from the Gnome Steam Bow to work with a firearm so that one could take a standard action to either add one's Intelligence bonus to their attack roll with the next shot from the gun or double the range increment of the gun for the next shot. If someone took the time, two standard actions, they can add both effects to the next shot from the gun. Do either of these seem to overpower the standard D&D, one shot wheel lock pistol or musket? Both of these items are from the A&EG.
Glunk71 05-09-07, 11:49 PM	I have 2 guys in one of my campaigns that have designed guns. Created by Psionic Artificers they fire Crystal Shard rounds. There are 3 types, Revolvers - 10ft range increments - 6 shot - 1 shot per round unless you have the Rapid Fire feat. Maximum damage is 2d6, it all depends on the ammo you purchase, (1d4=2gp, 1d6=4gp, 2d4=8gp, 2d6=16gp). Ammo cost is per 10 shots. Rifles - 50ft range increments - 20 shot magazine - 1 shot per round unless you have the Rapid Fire feat. Maximum damage is 4d6, it all depends on the ammo you purchase, (1d6=5gp, 2d6=10gp, 3d6=15gp, 4d6=20gp). Ammo cost is per 10 shots. Shotguns - 20 ft range increments - 2 shot side by side - 1 or 2 shots per round. Damage is 5d6 for solid shot or 2d6 for buckshot. Buckshot is a 30ft cone, reflex save for 1/2. Ammo cost is per 10 shots. Solid shot is 20gp and buckshot is 10gp. Reloading is a standard action unless you have the Rapid Reload feat which makes it a swift action. You can take all the standard range weapon feats i.e. Weapon Focus - Firearm type, Weapon Specialization - Firearm type, Point Blank Shot etc. Rumor has it that certain Gnome artificers have even more exotic types.
mhacdebhandia 05-11-07, 01:54 AM	I don't think I would ever use firearms in Eberron, because to me one of the features of the setting is that magic is used in place of technology, not to enhance it. You don't have telegraph systems, you have speaking stones. You don't have steam trains - even steam trains powered by enslaved fire elementals rather than coal - you have the lightning rail. Likewise, you don't have guns. You have wands and one-shot magic items.
BrokenJade 05-31-07, 02:57 PM	If any one has the Chaositech supplement put out by Malhavoc press that has some interesting sci-fantasy type weapons and the like. Including firearm like weapons. on a sidenote i found this it might be of some interest to some people http://www.malhavocpress.com/images/Technology.pdf