| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| Rolzup05-27-06, 04:23 PM | ...anybody use it? It seems to fit the setting *very* well, and doesn't seem particularly unbalancing to have simple flint-lock pistols and rifles. I'd be inclined to make guns a simple weapon, make it a very new technology...and introduce a mid-level arcane spell that ignites all gunpowder within its radius. The stuff wants to burn, after all.... But who among ye have already introduced guns to Eberron? And who finds the idea anathema? |
| Joni-san05-27-06, 04:40 PM | RUN! RUN WHILE YOU STILL CAN! RUN BEFORE THE CANON FANATICS GET YOU! ... While that seems a little drastic You just might get interesting reactions :P In any case most Eberron fans (I know of) have decided not to include Gunpowder and Gunpowder weapons into their Eberron campaigns. Still, I guess some have done it... Sorry for not being of any help. |
| Edymnion05-27-06, 05:09 PM | Here we go again. Might I suggest you check out a few of the existing threads on the subject? aren't there firearms in Eberron? Why no firearms? I'll avoid saying what they've already said and just put it this way. I don't play d20 Modern. I play D&D to get away from guns and muggers and all the rest of real life. No gun will ever, and I mean *EVER* be in any D&D game that I am ever a part of. That means no game I run will ever have a gun in it, and any game that I play in that introduces guns, I will walk out on without looking back. If you want guns, there are dozens of other systems to play. D&D is not one of them. |
| kelvinaw27305-27-06, 05:43 PM | There are a lot of reasons for not putting firearms into Eberron. Mainly, early firearms would actually be downgrade when you can get a company of warforged longbowmen made-to-order (or you could before the Last War ended). Muskets caught on because they were easy to use, not because they were better than the bows and crossbows of the period. Only by the 1800's did they become more effective at range than a skilled bowman, when rifling became common and the miniball ammunition turned Picket's Charge into a massacre. Who needs gunpowder that is hard to care for when you have alchemist's fire? Firarms would probably be bypassed by the arcane technology of Eberron for these reasons. |
| VedalkanWizard05-27-06, 06:02 PM | I agree with magic being supieror to gunpowder. Ebberon has an abundance of magic to make life easier for the common people. Artificers develope new ways of using magic, not technology. |
| twelvedrunkenmonkeyz05-27-06, 06:25 PM | Personally I have to DISAGREE WITH EVERYONE! No no, I think guns could make a good addition to Eberron, but ONLY...ONLY IF HANDLED PROPERLY. Saddly that cannot be done by mere mortals such as ourselves, so we are doomed to never see guns in play in Eberron. If you want guns go play Forgotten Realms, they got'em look on the base starting equipement for Lantanesse characters in campaign setting book. However I think there are a couple of interesting ideas that can be taken from this. One is the Gun is an alchemist weapon and doesn't use gunpowder. Another is a magic item that can be used by anyone that activates "mini-wands" as a standard action. The final option is a weapon that is useable only by arcane classes and replicates spell effects. Personally my favorite idea anyone had was the Alchemical Glob Launcher which launched ICBM style Alchemist vials (more like pints). But anyways that just my advice. |
| (Psi)SeveredHead05-27-06, 07:44 PM | Another is a magic item that can be used by anyone that activates "mini-wands" as a standard action. The final option is a weapon that is useable only by arcane classes and replicates spell effects. These aren't guns. |
| Rolzup05-27-06, 11:23 PM | If you want guns, there are dozens of other systems to play. D&D is not one of them. Personal taste? That can't be argued with. If you don't like guns, you don't like guns...so be it. It's hardly an issue, though, as I've never met you, and I'm unlikely to try and force you to play in one my games. Really, that sort of thing never ends well, does it? It means that I would have to buy chains, and new padlocks, and probably some sturdy new chairs...just not worth the trouble, I'm afraid. I'll have to settle for the folks that I'm already gaming with. Can firearms ever work in D&D, though? Sure they can, no question about it. They already have, in a variety of campaigns. I really don't think that there's any question that simple firearms would fit both the swashbuckling feel of Eberron *and* the magitechnological outlook. What got me started was a wonderful little book called Fell Cargo, by Dan Abnett. It's a Warhammer book, but don't hold that against it -- Abnett is a damned fine writer, and I recommend it highly. It's got everything you could possibly want from a book: zombies, pirates, vampires, demons, swordfights, giant sea-monsters...and guns. Piracy, I cannot help but think, needs guns. And cannons. And parrots. (Should the parrots carry little guns, though? No, I suppose not.) And of course, the ads for the new Pirates of the Carribean movie started some more thoughts. Illitihid Pirates, anyone? And then I picked up the Player's Guide to Ptolus, and I was sold. The only question is, how to introduce it? Option One: Change the canon, and slot gunpowder into the setting as it stands. Not a difficult thing to do; I hardly think that simple firearms would have made much of a difference in the War, all things considered. And if you make them a development of the war's closing years? Well, then, it's even easier. Option Two: Gunpowder is new. Couple options for who's responsible; there's a part of me that likes the idea of the original discovery being made somewhere in Xen'Drik. Pistols and such are largely status symbols; still rare and expensive, and frankly nowhere near as effective as a good sword. But anyone who's anyone carries a gun these days, darling, and have you seen mine? Studded with diamonds, and yes that's Avak Keronweit's own maker's mark, thank you very much! Won't Lady Destina be jealous? Option Three: Gunpowder is *very* new. No one knows how it is made, or who's responsible. Those ships sighted near Stormreach, the ones with the red sails...the sailors say that they can throw thunderbolts, using some new kind of magic. But you know how sailors talk, don't you? Good potential for an espionage game here, with the secret formula. And who's behind the Bloody Sails, eh? Option Four: Drop it in the players' laps. That mad old alchemist finally did it, and made a new kind of weapon. Who killed him for it, and why did he entrust the secret to Character X before he died? And how long before his murderer strikes again? That last one is the most player-dependant of the four; I doubt that my current group would have much with it. But the others? Well, there's a good bit of potential there, methinks. Being lazy, and considering the kind of campaign that I want, Option One is most appealing on the face of things. But again, I assure you: I shan't force you to use any of these! At gunpoint or otherwise. |
| DBlizzard05-27-06, 11:56 PM | No gun will ever, and I mean *EVER* be in any D&D game that I am ever a part of. For me, I wouldn't mind having the occasional black powder gun as a curiosity in the game. Unfortunately, once you introduce them to a setting players tend to expect them to take over. Look at the Forgotten Realms, they started as curiosities and soon smokepowder was everywhere. The only campaign world I think that kept them under control was Glorantha, because the dwarves had the many secret weapons to keep them a secret that's under control. |
| Quicksilver05-28-06, 12:38 AM | Eberron is a setting with a high amount of low-level magic permeating its cultures. It has just been through a war, with all of the weaponry advancement that that entails. I think that any guns in Eberron would be magical, and based on unmagical people saying "I wish I could shoot lightning/fire/magic missiles, I'll get an artificer to make it happen." So, my idea: spell cartridges. It's based on the potion tiles from Complete Arcane. Change the tiles to small clay balls or tubes, each holding a targettable 0-3rd level spell. Fit these spell cartridges into a hand spell-thrower, which has a barrel, grip, hammer to crack and activate the cartridge and a trigger to fire it. The result: at the expense of an exotic weapon proficiency, anyone can use magic missiles, rays of frost, scorching rays or fireballs. There are some balancing factors, however. Each one of these spell cartridges would cost the same as a potion of the same level, meaning that you can't throw fireballs around all the time. You can't have 4th level spells, like a wand, let alone 6th level spells like an eternal wand. You can't use metamagic effects after the cartridge is made, so you're stuck at fairly simple spells. In short, a Cannith Wand Adept will outshoot you everytime, but if you swagger into town with a spell-thrower on your hip, everyone will wonder if you're packing a fireball... The artificers get their due, because people have to keep buying the expensive reloads. From a flavour point of view, you get all the fun of flintlock firearms in a swashbuckling setting, keep the magical connection in the technology and add something fun and useful to the setting. It has not escaped my notice that this method of producing firearms suggests a method for making a two-shot, or even a revolving cylinder, multishot spell-thrower. |
| Yare05-28-06, 03:46 AM | "If it's in D&D, then there's a place for it in Eberron.", or however the design philosophy goes. And firearms are core D&D. Let's leave personal taste and preference out of the discussion. Personal taste is not a very good foundation to base an opinion on. That aside, there are a number of reasons that somebody, somewhere in Eberron would be researching firearms. 1) Warforged longbowmen would be better, yes. But Warforged are prohibitively expensive to make, and can no longer be created. Somebody out there (house Cannith. hint hint) is definitely looking for the next "must have" weapon for when war breaks out again. 2) Magic is more powerful in every way, but has many drawbacks. Namely that magic items are expensive, not everybody can use them, and it takes years of training to become a mage. 3) Bows require an incredible amount of skill to use properly. Crossbows are slow to reload and require a decent amount of strength to draw or crank back. All bows take two hands, all crossbows that do respectable damage require two hands. You could use two-weapon-fighting with firearms and have minimum penalties since they are generally small and light. Guns taking over the setting? Hardly. Who's going to make them? Who's going to produce the alchemical powder? Any DM worth their salt can enhance the setting with firearms. One of my players had a warforged scout character who specialized in flintlock pistols. He was a soldier in the Last War tasked with testing out new weapon designs made by a genius smith of house Cannith. Over time, he grew fond of the flintlocks and adopted them as his primary weapons (and invested a considerable amount of skill ranks in craft(gunsmith) to create his ammunition and upgrade the weapons) and was the only person left alive in Eberron after the Mourning who knew the secret of their construction and (frequent) maintenance. Was one of the best Eberron characters I've ever had the pleasure of DMing for. |
| (Psi)SeveredHead05-28-06, 10:54 AM | Piracy, I cannot help but think, needs guns. And cannons. And parrots. Nah. Medieval pirates got along without it. Without guns, there's much cooler boarding actions. "If it's in D&D, then there's a place for it in Eberron.", This satement gets misinterpreted over and over again. Hellcow's explanation is in the Eberron section of my sig. |
| Yare05-28-06, 02:53 PM | This satement gets misinterpreted over and over again. Hellcow's explanation is in the Eberron section of my sig. How did I misinterpret it? I took it for exactly what it means. Guns are a part of D&D and as such, you can find a place for them to fit nicely in Eberron if you so desire. It's especially easy for firearms, in fact, since they suit the setting so well. I can understand Keith's decision not to include them in canon, though, since it would make a lot of people see Eberron as an Iron Kingdoms ripoff. |
| Edymnion05-28-06, 06:22 PM | Personal taste is not a very good foundation to base an opinion on.Lol, okay, I find that funny. Your opinion *IS* your personal taste. It is what you think, based on your own experience and tastes. Its like saying "Just because you don't like chocolate is no reason to have the opinion that chocolate is yucky". Yeah, it is. People's opinions are entirely based on their own tastes. How did I misinterpret it?Read the ECS. The "If its in D&D, its in Eberron" is only a teaser header. If you actually read that block of text underneath it, it specifically spells out that it only means the PHB, MM, and DMG. Although, unfortunately, this dribble got repeated in Players Guide to Eberron, which means we're stuck with it now. |
| Raziel_Brokodar05-28-06, 07:08 PM | ...not this again... (checks the time and date to see if we've gone back in time) I wish people would stop bringing up the same topics... |
| alder_zeal05-28-06, 08:56 PM | Read the ECS. The "If its in D&D, its in Eberron" is only a teaser header. If you actually read that block of text underneath it, it specifically spells out that it only means the PHB, MM, and DMG. Although, unfortunately, this dribble got repeated in Players Guide to Eberron, which means we're stuck with it now. Actually In the ECS it does not just specifically spell out the PHB, MM, and DMG because another main source is Psionics, then you need to include EPH, and MM2. As for gunpowder, do you really need a gun in Eberron. A wand of Fireballs, Lightningbolt, or damaging spell is 3 times more dangerous than a gun. |
| obtusehobbit05-28-06, 09:10 PM | I personal think this argument is one that we should all end now with the statement repeated so many times: This is your Eberron, do what you want with it. |
| Yare05-28-06, 09:15 PM | Lol, okay, I find that funny. Your opinion *IS* your personal taste. It is what you think, based on your own experience and tastes. What you think should be based on facts. Well, in an ideal society, anyway. Read the ECS. The "If its in D&D, its in Eberron" is only a teaser header. If you actually read that block of text underneath it, it specifically spells out that it only means the PHB, MM, and DMG. Although, unfortunately, this dribble got repeated in Players Guide to Eberron, which means we're stuck with it now. So what you're contending is that Eberron actually exists in a vacuum with respect to other D&D material? Good news for the Forgotten Realms fanboys, I guess. The one thing Eberron really has over FR is that Eberron is extremely friendly with respect to adding in things from other D&D sources. |
| (Psi)SeveredHead05-28-06, 10:06 PM | How did I misinterpret it? I took it for exactly what it means. Guns are a part of D&D and as such, you can find a place for them to fit nicely in Eberron if you so desire. It's especially easy for firearms, in fact, since they suit the setting so well. I can understand Keith's decision not to include them in canon, though, since it would make a lot of people see Eberron as an Iron Kingdoms ripoff. Well now you got it right. I've colored in red the important bit. The one thing Eberron really has over FR is that Eberron is extremely friendly with respect to adding in things from other D&D sources. Too bad it sometimes gets inappropriate things crammed into it. |
| Yare05-28-06, 11:01 PM | I think you must have made an assumption somewhere. I don't advocate the inclusion of firearms in Eberron. I think widespread use of them would dilute the flavor of the setting. However, the original poster asked if anybody had included firearms in Eberron and how it worked out. I related my experience on the matter and simultaneously refuted some bad reasoning presented by other posters. |
| Teron Gorefiend05-28-06, 11:43 PM | Note that we can only consider the setting as published when discussing whether a particular addition (in this case, gunpowder) fits; if we forego this common ground, it becomes a matter of whether the element fits in our customized version of Eberron, and meaningful exchange on the topic becomes impossible. Fact: Eberron is not "technomagical" in the sense many people seem to believe. It isn't steampunk. If anything, it tries to be slightly less so than other settings (downplaying clockwork, omitting gunpowder, and eliminating the stereotypical tinkering gnomes). The oft-mentioned theme of magic as technology means that magic takes the place of technology in Eberron's societies; backed by wondrous locations and focus items, magewrights and dragonmarked houses effectively made much of our modern technology obsolete before it could ever be invented. Opinion: In this context, guns would stand out as an unnecessary, unusually advanced technological element. Bows, (hand) crossbows and wands already fill all the roles anything short of modern automatic weapons might occupy, and with more style. Edymnion, this is off-topic and kind of personal, so feel free to tell me to butt out, but I'm curious whether your dislike of guns extends to all forms of entertainment, including books, movies, and what have you, or if it's only in D&D that you insist on such a reprieve. |
| yossarius05-28-06, 11:52 PM | I suppose you could put guns in Eberron. I'm having trouble understanding why you would want to, though. It would completely change the nature of the setting for low level characters. A world where any 1st level NPC can be packing heat is a dangerous place. I understand wanting to change the setting in some way, to make it your own, but I wouldn't advise doing it this way. Gun play at low levels is deadly, and at high levels it becomes a joke, unless you do away with hit points. I mean, how threatening is a blunderbuss that does 3d6 damage to a character with 80 hit points? i just don't think that guns fit into the d20 system. But, whatever. It's your game. |
| Edymnion05-29-06, 12:05 AM | So what you're contending is that Eberron actually exists in a vacuum with respect to other D&D material? Good news for the Forgotten Realms fanboys, I guess. The one thing Eberron really has over FR is that Eberron is extremely friendly with respect to adding in things from other D&D sources.No, just that everything under the sun doesn't get tossed into the setting willy nilly. Anything is fair game to include as the DM wishes. But if you say "If its in D&D, then its in Eberron!" what you're saying is that its there by default. Not "If you want Warlocks, they could go over here" but "Yeah, every Eberron game by default has Warlocks in it, they're over here." One says its the DM's choice what to put in just what they like, the other says that the DM has to remove everything they don't like. Eberron is sort of like a good soup. You mix the right ingrediants in it in just the right portions, and its delicious. Some people add a little cheese into the mix, other people add some garlic. What you don't say is "Yeah, everything in the supermarket is in this soup! What, you don't like ice cream in your soup? Then just leave that part out." Eberron ceases to be differant when you put everything in it by default. After all, "If its in D&D, its in Eberron!" also means all of the Faerun material is in Eberron by default.Edymnion, this is off-topic and kind of personal, so feel free to tell me to butt out, but I'm curious whether your dislike of guns extends to all forms of entertainment, including books, movies, and what have you, or if it's only in D&D that you insist on such a reprieve.It depends. If I went to see Lord of the Rings, I don't want to see Gandalf with an AK-47. I don't think its appropriate to the genre. No more than I think phasers and photon torpedos have a place in Saving Private Ryan. |
| Just another user05-29-06, 03:38 AM | Lol, okay, I find that funny. Your opinion *IS* your personal taste. It is what you think, based on your own experience and tastes. Its like saying "Just because you don't like chocolate is no reason to have the opinion that chocolate is yucky". Yeah, it is. People's opinions are entirely based on their own tastes. Read the ECS. The "If its in D&D, its in Eberron" is only a teaser header. If you actually read that block of text underneath it, it specifically spells out that it only means the PHB, MM, and DMG. Gunpowders weapons are in the DMG. Laser weapons, too. :D |
| Just another user05-29-06, 03:43 AM | As for gunpowder, do you really need a gun in Eberron. A wand of Fireballs, Lightningbolt, or damaging spell is 3 times more dangerous than a gun. But with the money you need to buy a single wand you can buy dozens of guns. Plus, you need a spellcaster to use a wand, or an medium-high level UMD-using character, while a 1st level warrior, or even commoner can use a gun. I already made the argument in the summentioned threads, so I'm not going to repeat it, but there are good reasons for guns to be still pratical in D&D even, if not expecially, in a setting like Eberron. The way I see it, Guns make sense only for NPCs, but for PCs, expecially high level one, they kinda sucks. |
| KelvanNailo05-29-06, 04:20 AM | The one thing Eberron really has over FR is that Eberron is extremely friendly with respect to adding in things from other D&D sources. well there's that, and the better design of everything else. Frankly I like my character being a badass to the world. In FR I feel like Butters from South Park, when he kept doing stuff from the simpsons. "Drittz did that already" |
| nemovadit05-29-06, 08:35 AM | Hellcow and Rolzup posts made me muse about Quori agents (Inspired spys for instance) using deadly, but very short-ranged thunderous weapons that need some time to recharge. Gunpowder can be in D&D, it only makes it go on a more Renaissance-fantastic atmosphere than the usual medieval-fantastic one. As Rolzup outlined, Warhammer universe has some early gunpowder, it's unreliable but deadly at short range, the way it should be in a Renaissance world. In many ways, I feel Eberron much more Renaissance than Medieval, but then that's me. As for the 'if it's in D&D' motto being a teaser, if you look at how many hints there are on how to introduce or adapt classes, spells, etc. from various sources in the Player Guide or Eberron explorer handbook, I for one doubt it's only a teaser. So why not imagine House Cannith introducing primitive pistols as weapons that didn't get past trials during the Last War? |
| Kreistor105-29-06, 10:44 AM | I have already introduced the concept of cannon into my own campaign. I've advanced the entire Eberron wrld to 1800's, and wanted to ensure that the wholesale slaughter of men that only cannon were truly able to introduce as an expected aftereffect of war occured(whereas in earlier eras it is the accidental, though desired effect). I base them off the elemental system, not gunpowder. I think that gives a more fantastic motif to the system, while maintaining the visceral feel of the 1800's. I haven't introduced handweapons, mainly because I can't at this time justify a 100 year war based on armies the size such guns require. My Khorvaire never really learned that large armies of weakly armed and moderately trained individuals were less expensive and more effective than a few highly trained individuals with a lot of low level fodder. The world is, of course, ripe for such an invention and I may introduce it as the beginning of the next War, if I go that far. The Karrnathi Skeleton corps actually make a good model for that kind of army and could inspire a smart Colonel or General. I would suggest gunpowder weapons be: 1) Inaccurate. Early firearms were not very good at hitting a single target, but 100 of them fired at 100 people would have a hard time missing. Apply a -2 to hit if proficient, and -6 if non-proficient. 2) High damage. 2D6 or 2D8. 3) Solid Metal armor is effective AC, and that means plate mail. Early guns did not penetrate metal armor well, due to the softness of the bullet. A BP effectively stops any early era muskets. Later era pointed bullets for rifled weapons penetrate, though. Leather, chain, and wood all go down. It is hardness that determines if something will stop a bullet, not it's effective AC. Hardness 10 and completely inflexible, or the bullet ignores the armor. 4) Short range. 50' at most. Until rifling came along, they were wildly inaccurate. Double range penalties and limit them to 5 range bands. 5) If fired en masse, treat them as an AE weapon. Using elemental weapons, I would treat them in much the same way, simply to retain the flavour. Make them elemental weapons and introduce a variety of types. Lightning, Fire, Sonic, Ice Spike... lots of alternatives. |
| WizO_Sith05-29-06, 10:47 AM | Ok folks, let's dial back some of the rancor on this topic, shall we? When you stop and think about it, arguing about something as ephemeral as using gunpowder in a game of make-believe (albeit a highly-structured game of make-believe) is akin to arguing about the best way to cook a steak. --- As to the original poster's question.... I have, *SORT-OF*, introduced gunpowder weapons to my Eberron Campaign (in a highly controlled situation)... This requires a bit of explanation: I ran an adventure recently where the party was flung forward in time aproximately two-thousand years to an information-age/quasi-cyberpunk Eberron (to the year 2056 of the Callendar of "New Galifar"), while there they encountered and used guns extensively. I lifted the rules on Guns straight out of D20 Modern, but for the purposes of the adventure, I treated any gun anything that fires one bullet per trigger squeeze as a Simple Weapon and didn't hit anybody with the "Simple Weapon Proficiency" feat with a non-proficiency penalty. Rusty the Warforged (our party fighter) wound up eating a penalty for using an assault rifle, but his annoyance at the penalties was offset by the thrill of screaming "Say hello to my little friend!!!" and unloading on a gang of Daelkyr-Mutants in the undercity of the Sharn Metro-Hub. There's a follow-up adventure in the works, so I'm going to be somwhat cagey about this in case my players decide to check the boards, but the entire adventure was to forshadow a planned plot-arc of my campaign (that a massive, civilization-destroying, apocalypse is in my campaign's near-future). I didn't let the PCs hang onto any of the guns when they came back. During our traditional game post-mortem, I asked my players what they thought about the guns and how they impacted the game and one of them said something that I thought was pretty interesting. "When you get down to it, a fireball, a rocket launcher, or a diplomacy check is just rolling dice. The excitement all comes from how invested you are in the action." Anyway, thought I'd share. |
| Sarlax05-29-06, 01:01 PM | I'm suprised (by the game world, but not when in the context of it being D&D) that guns don't already exist in Eberron. Even if gunpowder itself is somehow magically prohibited by magiphysics, there are easily replacement substances that can do that job, such as alchemist fire alternatives. All of the pull factors for firearms are there: they require less training than alternative (bows or magic), they are remarkably deadly, the knowledge of how to make and use them is nonspecific (not held by a few character classes), etc. The difficulty with guns in Eberron is not that they are unbalancing. They also aren't bad for flavor for many people. The difficulty is that it's hard to make them exciting. Players know what a gun is, so after a few booms and bullet holes in platemail, they won't be curious about them. Compare a new gun to a gargoyle-like warforged, and you'll find it's the thing that's new and different to player and PC alike that is more fun. Where would I put guns in Eberron? I certainly wouldn't give them to gnomes; more than anything, Eberron should be thanked for working to erase tinker gnomes from the sands of time. Additionally, the Zil seem to have less demand for guns than almost anyone, as all order is kept through discrete killing and assassinations. Elven traditions would prevent them from innovating much at all. Dragons, who actually do possess universal magical ability, have less of a pull to invent than other races. The goblinoids are a good option, as they had a martial empire (or series of them) which existed for thousands of years. I prefer kobolds as the inventors of guns, though. Being natural miners, they'd be very familiar with the kinds of metals and other substances best used to produce firearms. They also need them more than anyone else, since they've got the hardest time translating their hostility into damage, pound-for-pound. And as their trapmaking shows, they have an affinity for mechanics. Perhaps some group like kobolds does possess guns but they kill anyone else who comes close to inventing them. Kobolds might see guns as a gift from the progrenitor dragons and keep them from the hands of lesser races. |
| Melvin the Mediocre05-29-06, 05:56 PM | Piracy, I cannot help but think, needs guns. And cannons. And parrots. I once played in a game where parrots saved the lives of the whole crew. See we needed a ship and crew, but the only ship we could afford was cursed, so no one would sail on it. So we threw a big party and... um... spiked the booze. Somehow or another a lot of the party goers woke up on our ship with little pirate hats, wooden swords, and parrots. When we ran out of food, they ate the parrots. But anyhow.... I've never really bought into the guns don't fit Eberron argument. In fact I've been thinking I'd introduce firearms through the kobolds. I figure they would consider gunpowder to be Khyber's gift, and keep it pretty much to themselves. But if it cropped up in the Principalities, I can see the players tracing it back to a deal made with the kobolds. Perhaps a "merchant prince " agreed to obliterate a rival kobold tribe in return for the secret of gunpowder. His artificers might just be expirementing with cannons or bombs. I'd require a craft alchemy skill to create the powder and a seperate craft: gunsmithing skill to make small arms, then finally a craft: cannon smithing skill to make the big guns. |
| Teron Gorefiend05-29-06, 07:28 PM | But with the money you need to buy a single wand you can buy dozens of guns. Plus, you need a spellcaster to use a wand, or an medium-high level UMD-using character, while a 1st level warrior, or even commoner can use a gun. I already made the argument in the summentioned threads, so I'm not going to repeat it, but there are good reasons for guns to be still pratical in D&D even, if not expecially, in a setting like Eberron. The way I see it, Guns make sense only for NPCs, but for PCs, expecially high level one, they kinda sucks. All that is true about crossbows, too. Guns would pretty much have to be either re-flavoured crossbows, or flat out better. Wizo_Sith, your game sounds like a lot of fun. For what it's worth, I personally would have pushed the "magic as technology" angle even further instead of introducing actual technology - cheap wand equivalents anyone can use, readily available teleportation, floating buildings and extra-dimensional spaces everywhere - but that's just my own inclination. Again, your approach sounds great too. |
| Just another user05-30-06, 02:40 AM | All that is true about crossbows, too. Guns would pretty much have to be either re-flavoured crossbows, or flat out better. They are better, better range, more damage, higher criticals, faster reloads, but I already made this point and I don't want to repeat it, check the thread reported by edyminion on the third post of this thread for more details on a comparison betwen wands of fireballs and gunpowder weapons. |
| ArcTan05-30-06, 11:14 PM | Here we go again. Might I suggest you check out a few of the existing threads on the subject? aren't there firearms in Eberron? Why no firearms? I'll avoid saying what they've already said and just put it this way. I don't play d20 Modern. I play D&D to get away from guns and muggers and all the rest of real life. No gun will ever, and I mean *EVER* be in any D&D game that I am ever a part of. That means no game I run will ever have a gun in it, and any game that I play in that introduces guns, I will walk out on without looking back. If you want guns, there are dozens of other systems to play. D&D is not one of them. Wow. That's a little harsh, isn't it? I sympathize with those who take the view that firearms dilute the otherworldly feel of Eberron and don't make sense with Eberron's strongly magitech setting. But I don't know about this. I mean, you want to get away from guns and muggers and all the rest of real life, but surely that doesn't mean that your Eberron doesn't have muggers, criminals, street violence, race riots, and "all the rest of real life". I understand that a lot of people have very strong emotional reactions to guns in particular as opposed to weapons, but sheesh. D&D is a lot of things, but I've never thought of it as a "clean", truly escapist setting -- and Eberron is supposed to be far less "clean" than the Forgotten Realms in this case -- muggings and beatings and racism and corruption and mistreated war veterans with PTSD and weapons of mass destruction and espionage and intrigue and all that. Would you object if a setting included other "modern" weapons that are completely allowed under D&D rules? A Molotov cocktail made with lamp oil and a bottle? A switchblade knife or homemade shiv? Chains, broken bottles, makeshift clubs? A truncheon wielded to quell a Sharn race riot among the goblinoids by a corrupt Watch cop? An airship hijacked and sent to crash into a populated area? A suicide bomber running through a crowded street (chemical or arcane, doesn't matter -- although the existence of _explosive runes_ makes setting up a suicide bombing almost trivial)? Mass mailings to the Dragonmarked Houses of letters laced with contact poison? An urban terrorist who rides through the streets in a covered horse-drawn carriage and picks off civilians with a crossbow (as opposed to a rifle)? It's only historical distance that makes swords and bows somehow escapist or heroic while bayonets and rifles are gritty and real. The thing is that, having both read horrifying accounts of brutal medieval and Renaissance warfare and knowing what swords and bows have been used for -- and, well, having lived in a city where someone was murdered in the middle of the road by a crossbow bolt -- I have a hard time treating "medieval" weaponry as inherently less traumatic than modern weaponry. And, thing is, while some might object to the way all of the urban conflicts I listed above deviate from the "cleaner" heroic-fantasy image of an armored sword-and-shield knight attacking a dragon in the wilderness, they all seem to me to be the sorts of things Eberron directly tries to encourage as a result of its pulp/noir setting. You can't have the "noir" side of pulp/noir, anyway, without improvised, nasty, dishonorable violence on the streets of the city that puts innocents in harm's way. |
| ArcTan05-30-06, 11:25 PM | Lol, okay, I find that funny. Your opinion *IS* your personal taste. It is what you think, based on your own experience and tastes. Its like saying "Just because you don't like chocolate is no reason to have the opinion that chocolate is yucky". Yeah, it is. People's opinions are entirely based on their own tastes. I can have the opinion that I don't like chocolate because it's bitter and cloying and nasty in my mouth, which is a matter of personal taste. I can have the opinion that I don't like chocolate because it's produced in high-sugar, high-fat forms that are hugely detrimental to the American diet and contribute to obesity, as well as the fact that it tends to be imported from countries that treat the farmers and workers who produce chocolate very poorly. That is *not* a matter of personal taste; that is a moral value judgment. I can also have the opinion that not only do I not like chocolate but that liking chocolate is associated with a certain low-class gluttony for anything rich and sweet and that a more cultured palate involves more subtle tastes, and that food would be more interesting if fewer people ate chocolate and tried other, more worthwhile tastes. That is also not a matter of personal taste; that is an aesthetic value judgment. If all you say is that you personally don't like the idea of having guns in your own games because they freak you out personally, but you don't have any reasons why, in general, it'd be a bad idea for the rest of us to use guns in our game, *then* you're only talking about personal taste. And while it might be interesting to hear about your personal tastes to learn more about you, really, for the most part, your tastes are completely irrelevant to a general discussion forum. Just like someone who came here asking for some good recipes for chocolate desserts, or asking whether a chocolate pastry was a good complement for a red wine, would find it completely unhelpful for you to say "I hate chocolate because I think it tastes nasty". If you actually want to convince someone to stop eating chocolate, you need to do better than that -- if not, then harping at people who do like chocolate about how you don't is just wasting time and being an ass. The problem with debates today is that a lot of people try to either take all judgments and turn them into issues of personal taste, so you can't argue about anything ("Some of us find President Bush to be the kind of president we like, and some don't, so why bicker?") and others go the opposite direction and think we should treat their statements of taste as aesthetic judgments ("I didn't laugh at any of the jokes in that movie at all, so anyone who likes it must have something wrong with them"). (Disclaimer: I, personally, love chocolate and eat it at every opportunity, but I don't like the idea of guns in an Eberron D&D game. I do love the idea of guns in a d20 Modern or Iron Heroes game, however.) Read the ECS. The "If its in D&D, its in Eberron" is only a teaser header. If you actually read that block of text underneath it, it specifically spells out that it only means the PHB, MM, and DMG. Although, unfortunately, this dribble got repeated in Players Guide to Eberron, which means we're stuck with it now. I read this as "Everything can be included in Eberron if you so desire, but Eberron by default only assumes the inclusion of the three core books". Which, you know, isn't any different from how *all* D&D games tend to work -- people come in assuming the presence of all PHB, DMG, and MM material and you have to ask about everything else. What I don't like is your assertion in the opposite direction -- that if KB doesn't explicitly *create* a place for it in Eberron, then I am Not Allowed to use it. Part of the point of WotC's setting design contest was to create a setting that *was* amenable to throwing random sourcebook crap in and out by DM fiat without changing the setting's fundamental assumptions -- hence the existence of a psionics-using continent, the existence of a continent of Lost Magical Wonders, the existence of a super-powerful plot NPC (Mordain th Fleshweaver) who makes random new species for fun, the existence of Eldritch Machines to enable any necessary rules-breaking events, etc. KB, up in the Ask Keith Baker thread, did take exception to the Player's Guide to Eberron's "such-and-such *exists* here" language as opposed to "such-and-such *may exist* here" language, but he stated his support for the idea of giving inexperienced or unconfident DMs hooks to work with to integrate sourcebook material if they felt so inclined. I know he purposely made Eberron a no-firearms setting, but I doubt he would react to the idea of putting in firearms as violently as you seem to be reacting. The Official Setting says firearms don't exist as of the Official Setting's year, but there's no reason that a campaign that delves forward into the future can't see the invention of such, if only as a curiosity. After all, the pricing, range and damage rules for Renaissance firearms are in -- ta-da -- the DMG. |
| Setherial05-31-06, 03:04 AM | I'm working on a dark fantasy adventure in a slightly modified version of Eberron (totally set appart from our usual games). The setting would feel very medieval, the Church of the Silver Flame dominates most of Khorvaire, prosecuting everyone they labeled heretics. They are the wealthy and the powerfull while the commen folk live in poverty and fear. Sorcerers and Warlocks are labeled demon worshippers and are hunted down and burned. Wizards are tolerated though kept on a tight leash. They are not allowed to use what the church labels Black Magic (basically most damage dealing spells and of course evil spells). And for them the risk of false accusation is even greater then for the commoner. Clerics, Paladins, knights and favourite souls are the classes that wield true power and respect/fear. I created two new classes, the Witch Hunter and the Holy Inquisitor. The Witch Hunter is a class that uses simple short ranged inaccurate pistols with silver bullets as specialized weapons. Since it is a seperate adventure with a different tone, it is a good test to see how people will react to the introduction of simple firearms. I used to be one of those fantasy players that really couldn't see the fun of guns in a fantasy setting, in my opinion back then, it ruined the fantasy feel. Then I played an Iron Kingdoms adventure at a large games gathering where I played a character with an awsome 2d6 damage dealing pistol. It was great fun. Since that and since looking around for instance at games like Warcraft I think simple firearms blend well in fantasy games, eberron included. I just have to see how my players react. |
| Yare05-31-06, 03:43 AM | You can do some hilarious stuff with firearms. Check out this prestige class from D20 Modern. The "Spellslinger", based on the Arcane Archer, but with guns: Requirements To become a Spellslinger, a character must fulfill the following criteria. Base Attack Bonus: +5. Skills: Concentration 6 ranks, Spellcraft 10 ranks. Special: The candidate must have the Weapon Focus feat or class feature with one ranged weapon. (here's the important class feature) Imbued Shot At 5th level, a Spellslinger who has divine or arcane spellcasting ability gains the supernatural ability to invest her shots with magical effects. If she has no spellcasting capability, then this class feature does not function. As a standard action, the Spellslinger may spend 1 action point to fire a single shot invested with the power of one spell that she is currently capable of casting. The spell must have a target other than “You.” Once the shot is fired, the spell is expended as if it had been cast normally. An imbued shot may be aimed at an individual, an item, or a specific 5-foot square. When the target is a creature or object, treat the shot as a touch attack. In this case, the normal damage of the shot is negated and only the magical effect occurs. (In other words, the Spellslinger could fire a “healing bullet” that would produce a cure light wounds effect on the target without dealing damage.) When the target is a 5-foot square, use the rules for thrown explosives (see Chapter Five: Combat in the d20 MODERN Roleplaying Game). Once you determine whether or where the shot hits, the spell’s effects are centered on that spot. A spell that targets a creature or object functions only if the shot hits the intended target. Certainly any respectable gunslinger in Eberron with magical abilities would put two and two together and begin taking levels of this or a similar prestige class. The best part (as the description says) is the healing bullets. I chuckle every time I think about it. Turning touch spells into ranged touch attacks with bullets is awesome! And totally balanced. |
| Hodo05-31-06, 11:50 AM | Guns could work fine in Eberron. Although magic certainly dominates, they are also more advanced than other DnD worlds alchemically. Some kind of combustible powder of alchemical or magical nature is not a world breaker. The problem seems to be that when people introduce guns, it becomes a needlessly complex focus of the setting. They come up with all of these explenations about who invented it, and associate it with this huge paradgm shift in the world. Some give their worlds a multitude of firearms and additional rules singling them out as extra special weapons. This is what causes trouble. This is one of my criticisms of Iron Kingdoms- which I love. They have guns, but there is too much focus on them. There are books with several pages regarding the evolution of the feed and firing mechanisms, the nature of the propellant, and the history of their use in warfare. They introduced a new skill and a plethora of skill checks where no other weapons- no matter how powerful or complex- requires similar skills or such a number of checks. It's ridiculous. Firearms are statted in the Dungeon Master's Guide. They're exotic weapons with decent damage and range, but are slow to fire and expensive to purchase and keep supplied with ammunition compared to other weapons. I personally don't even like the gunpowder rules in the DMG, and feel they could be easily simplified by claiming that propellant is provided with each individual projectile and upping the price. From a flavor point of view, they really aren't that much more advanced than the other alchemical or mechanical devices you'd find in a DnD game. The Bugbear mugger on the street, instead of brandhishing a hand crossbow or repeating light crossbow, just uses a small pistol. A couple of dwarves you fight happen to have some muskets. It didn't kill the fantasy aspects of Warhammer, World of Warcraft, or Final Fantasy did it (maybe I shouldn't have mentioned those)? Not that I have that much of a problem with Eberron as is. |
| Soulkeeper05-31-06, 09:44 PM | I use gun powder in Eberron, but I do not have guns in a traditional sense. It really ads to my world, but it has specific limitations. No matter what anyone says, its your world, do as you desire. My sailing ships, both air and water use it for cannons. Some castles have it in use as well. These cannons exploded with the same damage as a standard fireball, including area of effect. A "rifle" so to speak is a distance weapon, it requires the same feats as a Ranger might use for archery, but my players have "(gunpowder)" added to their feats to specify they are skilled in the use of gunpowder weapons. The dwarves of the Mror Holds produce it, it is an expensive item, and no...there are no automatic weapons. It is a common dwarven item, not often used elsewhere except a few unique places. Most "guns" deal damage similar to a bow, or crossbow. They take bullets, the same used for a sling. Long range rifles take the same time to load as a crossbow and hold only 1 bullet. Without a prop, such as a wall, or surface, or gun staff, they are fired at a -4. (Think musketeers) More expensive hand guns (imagine Pirates of the Caribbean, not modern weapons) can hold a total of 4 rounds before needing to be reloaded. Much like bows, their targeting becomes worse by distance, but by most respects, they are treated just like bows. It is used solely for a physical effect, and style, many of the Lhazaar areas are common to use it as a weapon, just like you might expect of a pirate. Frank |
| Edymnion05-31-06, 10:38 PM | That is also not a matter of personal taste; that is an aesthetic value judgment.And aesthetics are entirely a matter of personal taste. Something that is attractive to one person can be repulsive to another. Anything that is an opinion is essentially a matter of taste. Just like someone who came here asking for some good recipes for chocolate desserts, or asking whether a chocolate pastry was a good complement for a red wine, would find it completely unhelpful for you to say "I hate chocolate because I think it tastes nasty". If you actually want to convince someone to stop eating chocolate, you need to do better than that -- if not, then harping at people who do like chocolate about how you don't is just wasting time and being an ass.Except that, you know, the OP asked for people that don't like the idea to express their views as well. What I don't like is your assertion in the opposite direction -- that if KB doesn't explicitly *create* a place for it in Eberron, then I am Not Allowed to use it.For one, who said anything about Keith having to be the one to do it? I'm not a huge fan of some of the stuff Keith did put in there (ask anybody my opinion of reproducing changlings). Secondly, the DM is always allowed to put in whatever they want. But from the player's perspective, no, you shouldn't be allowed to use just anything you want without caring about the DM's stance on it. I've actually seen players try to browbeat DMs into letting them use some overpowered/broken/nonsensical thing from random sourcebooks by quoting that "If its in D&D, then its in Eberron, so you have to let me do it!" nonsense. At least if there's something that says "Hey, not everything under the sun is in Eberron until you put it there" more DMs would have the backbone to Just Say No. KB, up in the Ask Keith Baker thread, did take exception to the Player's Guide to Eberron's "such-and-such *exists* here" language as opposed to "such-and-such *may exist* here" language, but he stated his support for the idea of giving inexperienced or unconfident DMs hooks to work with to integrate sourcebook material if they felt so inclined.Two edged sword, for every inexperience or unconfident DM that is helped by it, there's another DM thats backed into a corner for not wanting to use Book X that has to pull stuff back out. I know he purposely made Eberron a no-firearms setting, but I doubt he would react to the idea of putting in firearms as violently as you seem to be reacting.Nah, my reaction has nothing to do with Eberron in particular, its to guns in D&D in general. I assure you, I was just as ticked off about the idea long before Eberron ever came out. |
| TarlSS06-01-06, 05:44 PM | Guns would probably be even more advanced with magic than without. You could use magic as a catalyst for the small explosion firing the gun. There wouldn't even need to be powder involved. There wouldn't even be need for a trigger. A gun is essentially metal propelled by a small explosion, and the focus of the explosion increases the force greatly. I don't see why they couldn't just channel a fireball into a tube to propel a cannonball- it's a relatively simple principle that would greatly increase the force of the attack. Fireballs to take out infantry, cannons to break walls. Indeed, magic would allow for automatic weapons since no moving parts are involved, no gas chambers, springs, etc. You could fire at the speed of thought rather then a trigger finger. Guns fit best if they function along with swords, bows and crossbows. Everyone asks 'why wouldn't guns takes over the whole campaign world?" Yeah, fine they probably will. But they'd take at least 50 years to do so. I don't think your campaign covers a span of 50 years. The sword and spear were still prevalent for four hundred years after the introduction of the gun. Trying to say whether guns would dominate or not in the long run is pretty ridiculous. A typical campaign spans a single year, few world shattering historical changes incur in such a duration. |
| Roxlimn06-02-06, 03:37 PM | I don't believe that magically themed guns are inappropriate for Eberron and have statted out several options for such in past threads. |
| Cainne06-03-06, 04:03 AM | I included some gun rules from Iron Kingdoms by Privateer Press, even though that world is kinda steampunk, it can mesh VERY well with ebberon in the right quantity. however guns can be dangerous with backlash and the fact that there's a cumulative % tha tthe gun stops working or malfunctioning. Good rules overall though. plus they got some good magical classes centered around the guns. However in the campaign guns are VERY expensive as is the ammunition as it can be destroyed rather easily. In a campaign where guns are new, chances our they'd be rare due to the fact that creating them would be harder than common weapons like crossbows and unless you're talking about revolvers or something like that reloading would be just as if not more difficult. That is unless you create a world where guns have been around for some time, but that could also reflavor the whole setting in a sense. In my campaign guns where a recent invention by a merchant family and thus they're the only ones in the campaign that can make them, but that doesnt stop other rivals from trying to steal their ideas....and improve upon them |
| locksley9206-04-06, 12:52 PM | Not again... Ok, lets review the facts. 1) Adding guns changes many fundemental parts about DnD combat. In the surprisingly accurate words of Lenin "a man with a gun can control 100 men without". Using a gun requires little training or ability. Unlike a wand of some sort (which requires a Use Magic Devise), a gun can be used untrained, as a simple weapon. 2) Eberron evolves through the "advancement of arcane mystery". The gun would most likely be arcane and magic in nature. 3) Finally, introducing a gun is a logical step in the advancement of technology. The inventors would look for a way to hurt someone from far away. Also, they would want their technology to not require years of training to use. If the Last War broke out again, having thousands upon thousands of conscripted gunmen would be able to bring down a contigent of swordsmen. Imagine, with forty guns, a group of commoners could bring down a whole cabal of mages, if the attack was panned correctly. Just my ramblings |
| Logos706-04-06, 01:01 PM | I've had a Niggling Idea to Create a Projectile Launcher that utilises the Explosive Power of DragonShards when they are crushed. Use the Base Stats out of the Dmg for Guns, Add an extra D6 of Dmg for Bigger than usual Shards or more kyber/siberous shards instead of eberron, or an extra 2d6 and a spread if both are used. It's gun like, , cartidges can be made allowing all the archery feats to be used, but it's going to get expensive quickly, I might have a dwarf NPC do it for giggles And i allow gunpowder in my games, No one has gotten past the Blow Thing's Up Application meaning asside from a few miners (and the team artificer) almost no one bother's I can see how a person with a repeating rifle could control a hundred, but not say with anything less, besides the whole case of HAHA i got your gun, always pops up , gimme a wand please Logos |
| Hodo06-04-06, 06:53 PM | Not again... Ok, lets review the facts. 1) Adding guns changes many fundemental parts about DnD combat. In the surprisingly accurate words of Lenin "a man with a gun can control 100 men without". Using a gun requires little training or ability. Unlike a wand of some sort (which requires a Use Magic Devise), a gun can be used untrained, as a simple weapon. Adding guns does not fundamentally change DnD combat. Even then, compared to other weapons, firearms don't have world shattering capabilities in the DnD world. They're described in the Dungeon Master's Guide. 1) They are exotic weapons, meaning not as many people would see them, let alone be trained in their use. Crossbows are much more common, and repeating crossbows, although exotic, are still based off of the common crossbow and should be among the more common exotic ranged weapons as well. 2) A pistol has a range of 50 ft and does 1d10 damage. A musket has a range of 150 ft and does 1d12 and both only crit on a 20, so they don't terribly outrange or outdamage crossbows or repeating crossbows. 3) A pistol requires a move action, while a musket requires a standard action to reload. A 20th level fighter will only get 1 shot per round with a pistol or musket. With a crossbow, however, they can take the Rapid Reload feat and get full round attacks with a hand or light crossbow, and reload heavy crossbows as a move action. With repeating crossbows, you can already get a full attack, without the need for any other feats. 4) A pistol costs 250 gp, a musket costs 500 gp, and both require bullets and powder, which cost a dozen gold or more purchased seperately. Crossbows range between 35 for a light crossbow, and 400 gp for a heavy repeating crossbow, with much cheaper ammunition. 2) Eberron evolves through the "advancement of arcane mystery". The gun would most likely be arcane and magic in nature. In the Ebrron campaign book's section under adventuring equipment section, Alchemy is described as a "well-developed science", and it's said that artificers and spellcasters are always looking for new ways to use alchemy to enhance the adventuring profession through it's use. The book also introduces several new alchemical substances like acidic-fire, alchemists's lightning, and the noxious smokestick. Gunpowder, or it's equivelant would definately be alchemy, and as such, not out of place in Eberron. 3) Finally, introducing a gun is a logical step in the advancement of technology. The inventors would look for a way to hurt someone from far away. Also, they would want their technology to not require years of training to use. If the Last War broke out again, having thousands upon thousands of conscripted gunmen would be able to bring down a contigent of swordsmen. Imagine, with forty guns, a group of commoners could bring down a whole cabal of mages, if the attack was panned correctly. Again, firearms in DnD aren't that powerful, and not nearly that common compared to other weapons. Guns have their place, but their capabilities are not so much that they would dominate warfare in DnD or render existing concepts obsolete. ........................................ ........................................ ........................ The decision to leave specific references to use of firearms in Eberron campaign sounds practical. There are many people who don't like firearms in their DnD. Guns are already statted and described in another book. It's easier to leave them out and let particular DMs add them on a case by case basis, than to make them an integral part of the setting where many would find them harder to remove. And in the Ebrron book, the #1 thing you need to know about Eberron is that, "If it exists in D&D, then it has a place in Eberron." It says that some items might need to undergo some alterations if you want them to better fit the flavor of the setting, but if it's in any of the core books, it has a place. And pistols/muskets are stated in the DMG... then again so are assault rifles :D |
| Edymnion06-04-06, 08:27 PM | That, and the fact that people who want guns don't actually want anything even close to actual period guns. They want modern day semi-automatics and high power rifles. Period guns could fire at most 2 rounds a minute if the shootist was very skilled in reloading the gun. Most gunners actually went deaf from the loud blast the guns would create. "Fog of War" wasn't created by computer games, it was a real problem where the smoke from the gunpowder became so thick you couldn't see the battlefield any more, and you had to stop and wait for it to clear. Or the simple fact that before rifling was invented, there was essentially no such thing as aiming a gun. You just pointed it in the general direction and pulled the trigger, because the field of fire was basically a cone coming out of the barrel, and the bullet could be anywhere in that cone on a random trajectory. Yeah, pirates had guns, but they never shot them at range. Real historical pirates didn't pull the trigger until the barrel was already jabbed between the guy's ribs, because that was the only way to assure you could actually *HIT* the guy. I have yet to find a person that wanted guns in D&D that actually wanted to use *REAL* period guns, or even anything from pre 1900. They want guns that can be fired at least once per round, that have range increments over a hundred feet (instead of 20'), and do like 10d10 damage, when getting split down the midde by 6 feet of steel is only 2d6. Any sort of period gun, to be perfectly blunt, sucked. Not to mention that if you didn't spend a *LOT* of time cleaning it, the things were just as likely to blow up in your hands and kill you instead of the guy you were shooting at. So lets be honest. Nobody really wants period guns in D&D, they want 9 mils and AK-47s, because real guns from the time weren't worth using individually. The only way they were of any use was when you had a couple dozen people all shooting in the same direction at the same time, so pure probability said one or two had to actually hit. You want D&D era guns, its easy. 1d10 x3, straight up 25% miss chance (that cannot be negated), DC 5 fort save for every shot or be deafened, reloading takes 5 rounds, rapid reload in 3 rounds, and if you don't spend at least 5 minutes cleaning the barrel after every combat you use it in, it explodes for an immediant CdG against you upon rolling a natural 1. Oh yes, and if there are more than 3 guns in the same battle, you are covered by an Obscuring Mist every 3-4 shots until it blows away. Yeah, not many people would play that. |
| Yare06-04-06, 09:03 PM | The stats for firearms in the DMG are sort of unrealistic, but D&D is a fantastic setting -Eberron bordering on the cinematic. |
| Hodo06-05-06, 07:00 AM | That, and the fact that people who want guns don't actually want anything even close to actual period guns. They want modern day semi-automatics and high power rifles. Many people, when designing custom statted games do go overboard and make unbalanced weapons. However, they can be unbalanced as in overpowering, or be underpowered, and in either case, have many special rules that go with every use- like you have done. Any implementation of firearms in the DnD setting has to make sure it's balanced against other weapons in the game, so as not to upset the nature of it. That is why the firearm stats in the DMG are the way they are. They want weapons that look and feel sort of like period guns, but they want to be able to compete somewhat with the ranger using his bow to fire 4 arrows at once, the rogue who fights wielding dual shortswords, or the Wizard with a a heavy repeating crossbow. None of those are historically accurate either. Firearms just have slightly higher damage, more range in the case of the musket, but have a very slow reloading time compared to other weapons in the game (once a round or every other round). There are many things unrealistic about many of the weapons statted in Dungeons and Dragons. Firearms are no exception. They are not actually coversions of real world period firearms' capabilities anymore than the Scimitar's stats are a real coversion of the actual weapon's capabilities. |
| Roxlimn06-05-06, 11:42 PM | Edymnion: So lets be honest. Nobody really wants period guns in D&D, they want 9 mils and AK-47s, because real guns from the time weren't worth using individually. The only way they were of any use was when you had a couple dozen people all shooting in the same direction at the same time, so pure probability said one or two had to actually hit. Now, now. Let's not be nasty. Nobody wants actual muskets and ball pistoles in their game, but by that standard, nobody wants metal string crossbows either, particularly that of the heavier varieties. Not everyone stats out AK-47s and 9mm guns because that kind of gun clashes with the fantastic setting. Not all guns that fire well have to be. Indeed, as far as I can tell, most people who want guns in Eberron don't want any gun based on historical models. I presented several guns statted out after low-end wands (slightly more expensive, actually) in another gun thread, and it seemed to be well received. I imagine people want those kinds of guns, not machine guns and automatic rifles. |
| TarlSS06-06-06, 11:56 AM | I think the mechanics of gun pushingis simple, DMs like them because they give lower end NPCs a decent chance against higher end PCs. After about 5th level, guns are fairly worthless to PCs because they simply don't use alot of feats. They're a fine backup, but by no means worth taking available gun feats for. On the other hand, for a 1st level warrior spending 2 feats on Gun-oriented feats, it's a pretty good deal. And the whole thing about gun armed troops defeating sword armed troops is fallacy. While the scenerio is true with equally matched regiments, the fact is melee oriented troops such as swordsmen were usually armed with heavier armor, were better trained and stronger. Given the fact that artillery exists in Eberron, regiment style combat would pretty much be gone after the first decade of the last war, evolving into Trench Warfare that probably extended the usefulness of melee fighters. Just look at the Indian Gurkhas, they were some of the most feared troops in WWI, and still are today. Ever since urban combat became a reality, the range effect of guns has mostly been dulled. The gun's best asset is automatic fire and immediate lethality, and unless you plan on introducing automatic weapons into Eberron, which I wouldn't advise, your sword is still a fine weapon in a 30x30 room. |
| Prince Indirian06-06-06, 08:34 PM | Instead of Gun powder use dragonshards and instead of bullets arcane blasts. Use the rules from the DMG or Iron kingdoms. The Cannons on ships might shoot magic blasts instead and magic shields might used as protection agaiinst these for example. |