Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Evadyn 02-01-05, 04:20 AM	I'm starting a little pirate campaign and have developed some weapons for it, so if you could tell me: Are the weapons balanced or not? Name Damage Critical Range Price Blunderbuss 2d8 20/x3 15.ft 350gp Pistol 2d4 19-20/x3 50ft. 125gp* Musket 1d12 20/x3 80ft. 400gp Rifle 1d10 20/x3 160ft. 550gp *see weapon description Blunderbuss This is a single-barreled “shotgun”, reloading takes one standard action. The barrels are roughly 25 inches long. Blunderbusses are generally illegal. This weapon can be loaded with two shells (Full-round action); a character can fire both at once. The character receives a –2 penalty on the attack but deals +1 die of damage (or 3d8) with a successful hit. Attacking this way uses both shells. Rifle This weapon is often used by professional army's or other organizations. It is a single-Barreled rifle, capable of one shot per round (reloading takes one standard action). Pistol This weapon comes in three variants, a single-barreled(125gp), a double-barreled(250gp) or a three-barreled(500gp) version. Each version can hold one two or three shots (one per barrel), it can still be used only once per round but it doesn't have to be reloaded every other round (one barrel takes one standard action to load, two take a full round, and three a full round and a standard action) the weapon need not be fully loaded to be used. The musket is the same as in the DMG (a bit different stats)
Evadyn 02-01-05, 12:38 PM	Anyone? :weep:
god the giant 02-01-05, 04:02 PM	the third d8 makes the bluderthingy a wee bit over powered but if you take that off the others are fine.
Evadyn 02-01-05, 04:15 PM	the third d8 makes the bluderthingy a wee bit over powered but if you take that off the others are fine. Yeah, I wasn't sure if it was OK, how about at a -4 penalty (the weapon it self is from the d20 modern sawed of shotgun) Sawed-Off Shotgun This is a 12-gauge, double-barreled shotgun with the stock and barrels sawed short. All that’s left of the stock is a pistol grip, and the barrels are roughly 12 inches long. Sawed-off shotguns are generally illegal; most are homemade by cutting down a standard shotgun. If this weapon if fully-loaded, a character can fire both barrels at once. The character receives a –2 penalty on the attack but deals +1 die of damage with a successful hit. Attacking this way uses both shotgun shells. and it has a range of 10ft. not 15ft.
Ptarmigan 02-01-05, 04:49 PM	Are you planning on making these firearms simple, martial, or exotic weapons? As exotic weapons, and even as martial weapons, I'd say these weapons are somewhat underpowered. As simple weapons, I think they're okay. Compare the rifle to a shortbow: For 550 gp, you get a rifle that fires once every other round for 1d10 damage, averaging 5.5 damage per two round, or 2.75 damage per round. It has good range, but a poor critical compared to a bow. For 550 gp, you could get a composite shortbow with up to a +6 strength bonus. Let's assume for a moment that the user doesn't have any strength bonus - that's 1d6 every round, averaging 3.5 damage per round. Of course the shortbow has less than half the range, but it does have a better critical. So far, the two weapons seem fairly well balanced... the bow wins out in a short-range fight, the rifle wins out from a distance (I'd say). Now, factor in the possiblity of a character with a strength bonus. Shortbow starts looking a bit better. Now throw in at +6 BAB, allowing multiple attacks with the shortbow... the bow is growing in power, but the rifle isn't. In short, at low levels for characters with little or no strength bonus, the firearms are a viable options. Later in the game, when multiple attacks and strength-boosting items/magic become more readily available, firearms are going to be about as effective as crossbows. I'd either make firearms simple weapons, or simulate advancements in firearm technology by having better models available later in the game.
Evadyn 02-01-05, 05:47 PM	Are you planning on making these firearms simple, martial, or exotic weapons? As exotic weapons, and even as martial weapons, I'd say these weapons are somewhat underpowered. As simple weapons, I think they're okay. Compare the rifle to a shortbow: For 550 gp, you get a rifle that fires once every other round for 1d10 damage, averaging 5.5 damage per two round, or 2.75 damage per round. It has good range, but a poor critical compared to a bow. For 550 gp, you could get a composite shortbow with up to a +6 strength bonus. Let's assume for a moment that the user doesn't have any strength bonus - that's 1d6 every round, averaging 3.5 damage per round. Of course the shortbow has less than half the range, but it does have a better critical. So far, the two weapons seem fairly well balanced... the bow wins out in a short-range fight, the rifle wins out from a distance (I'd say). Now, factor in the possiblity of a character with a strength bonus. Shortbow starts looking a bit better. Now throw in at +6 BAB, allowing multiple attacks with the shortbow... the bow is growing in power, but the rifle isn't. In short, at low levels for characters with little or no strength bonus, the firearms are a viable options. Later in the game, when multiple attacks and strength-boosting items/magic become more readily available, firearms are going to be about as effective as crossbows. I'd either make firearms simple weapons, or simulate advancements in firearm technology by having better models available later in the game. I completely agree with you. there is the option to give them rapid reload for fire arms (all reloading as move actions) but that wouldn't help much, they can still use the three-barreled pistol up to 3 times per round. I could also ban bows from the game, but this seems stupid. Any ideas?
Ptarmigan 02-01-05, 06:29 PM	I completely agree with you. there is the option to give them rapid reload for fire arms (all reloading as move actions) but that wouldn't help much, they can still use the three-barreled pistol up to 3 times per round. I could also ban bows from the game, but this seems stupid. Any ideas? I'd say this: Treat firearms as martial weapons. Allow Rapid Reload to take the reload time down to a move action. Later in the campaign, give access to breachloading/magical weapons that can be reloaded as a move action (this idea comes from Dragon #321). With both Rapid Reload and breachloading weapon, you could reload as a swift action (a free action that you can only take once per turn). You end up with this: 1) A firearm can be fired once every other round. 2) A firearm with breachloading or Rapid Reload can be fired once a round 3) A firearm with breachloading and Rapid Reload can be fired three times every two rounds. This makes firearms a good alternative for characters with fairly low strengths and BABs - for such characters, one strong attack at their highest BAB is usually as good or better than multiple weak attacks at progressively lower attack bonuses. If you're going to have firearms that have multiple barrels, I'd probably make them exotic - you're paying for extra attacks with a feat, which is basically what Rapid Shot gets you with a bow. This should make firearms attractive to some characters, while bows will still be superior for others. If you want to make firearms feature a little more prominently in your campaign, I'd say push either the damage or the critical multiplier up a little bit. Hope that helps a bit... I'm going to be using firearms in my next campaign, so I've been thinking about this a bit. I'd really like to hear everyone else's thoughts on the matter. Oh yeah, if you can get a copy of Dragon #321, the firearms article it has is really quite good, in my opinion.
Evadyn 02-01-05, 07:15 PM	maybe just say double masterwork weapons (+600gp) can be reloaded as a move action, and as for rapid reload well the more I think about it quick draw is better, You could have 4 or more weapons stored (loaded) and even get 4 attacks (which means a 16th level fighter could do 12d8 damage with no magic (using fully laded Blunderbuss)) but you would have to have more enchanted weapons not just one.
Nom 02-01-05, 09:28 PM	On reload times: Breech loading a firearm (with a cartridge) should probably take a move action, similar to loading a light crossbow. Unlike a light crossbow, it is unlikely to be possible to increase this to a free action. To gain rapid reload capability on a firearm, you need a completely different weapon style (such as a revolver). Note that breech loading is quite high technology, as is 'rifling' (carving fine grooves on the inside of a long barrel to make the bullet spin, thus increasing accuracy). Muzzle loading should be at least a full round action, if not more. At least a heavy crossbow has a hand crank. To muzzle load a gun, you need to pour a variety of bits and pieces down the barrel, occasionally wadding them down with a long rod. On the weapons themselves, a pirate-era pistol should probably be 1d6 damage, poor range, and good weight. Old pistols were notoriously inaccurate and weren't actually that deadly. The main advantage I'd give to a pistol is that it does not provoke an AoO when fired. Similarly, I'd allow a blunderbuss to be fired in melee without AoO in exchange for a to-hit penalty. Muskets, being weapons that require a fairly stable firing position to gain any sort of accuracy, would provoke AoOs as normal.
Evadyn 02-02-05, 03:30 AM	Well I could argue about the damage but as it stands 2d4 for a pistol is fine with me, also the rifle is a bit more modern (and replaced the musket) but in a fantasy game like D&D you need some long range firearms if you use them. The double masterwork also does not make sense; breech loading as you said is high-tech. How about this: Reloading: If you have a masterwork weapon with appropriate masterwork shells (real shells with the gunpowder and everything else within) it takes a move action to reload. The shells them self cost 1gp each so a masterwork shell costs 10 gp (yes I know it's a bit more than +6gp but this isn’t a arrow or bolt so I find it ok).
JimC 02-02-05, 10:37 AM	The real question is, do you want historical accuracy or not? If so, what time period?
Evadyn 02-02-05, 01:51 PM	... in a fantasy game like D&D... So that is not a question any more. But the problem with firearms is making them equal to bows (by rate of fire) but have better damage ofcourse. And I have come up with a decision, You CAN'T enchant weapons with special abilities that deal any extra damage (all other thing coun't) you can only enchant amunition with the damage dealing. Cause a shocking rifel of thundering,shocking burst and undead bane doesn't make any sense. You agree?
DrakeRunner 02-02-05, 02:07 PM	Uh no, because in the long run, enchanting ammunition isn't worth it, especially since I believe in 3.5 magical missle weapons bestow their enchantments on their ammunition anyway, and don't stack. I think. Not 100% sure.
Evadyn 02-02-05, 02:22 PM	Uh no, because in the long run, enchanting ammunition isn't worth it, especially since I believe in 3.5 magical missle weapons bestow their enchantments on their ammunition anyway, and don't stack. I think. Not 100% sure. That is the point, by making damage enchantments only for amunition I can at least ad some realism to a combo of firearms+magic
ElvisTheImpaler 02-03-05, 10:08 PM	Just a quick thought, and I'll leave the stat-mongering up to you. As I recall, a blunderbuss is a muzzle-loader designed to spew shot all over at close range. Kinda the infantry version of grapeshot. I'd do something like this: give it low damage and a short, cone-shaped area of effect. No to-hit roll, but everyone in the area gets a reflex save to avoid damage. By the way, pirates are way cool. Rock on! Elvistheimpaler
Kulthos 02-04-05, 12:20 AM	Just say no to guns. D&D, with the HP system, gets you into dumb situations like where you don't have enough bullets to kill the barbarian. Oh, he has 200 HP, and my gun does 5.5 points on average. Hmmm... Better go buy some more gunpowder. Damage in D&D is primarily from bonusses like strength, which guns don't get, so guns, despite being far deadlier than daggers, will do less damage than a dagger in a half-orc's hands. Also, compare these guns to simple spells. Scorching ray does more damage than a blunderbus, uses touch attacks, and is a mere second level spell. If you want guns, play GURPS or some other game system that makes more sense.
Evadyn 02-04-05, 04:47 AM	Well I'm not gona say no to guns. And as for the blunerbuss, well yes that would be more correct but this way the players have a greate damage gun so that the names is more for flavor(cause this is more a sawed-of shotgun anyway).
Kulthos 02-04-05, 03:28 PM	How can one get the guns do do useful damage at higher levels? A strong person throwing a rock does more damage than guns do in D&D. Beyond level six or so and the guns become usless. I would up the damage on guns by a factor of two and make them hit with ranged touch attacks. Wearing chainmail will not stop a bullet, it will just lodge a bunch of broken chain links in your flesh. You may say "Wow, that is powerful!" and I would say "Yea, like in real life." Even so, guns would be useless beyond around level ten.
Evadyn 02-04-05, 05:01 PM	You don't like guns do you. And as for the proposal of a touch attack, well it would be to powerful, so a level one Commoner with a dex of 12 could hit a Dwarf in +5 adamantine fullplate with a +5 tower shield (this is AC 33) on a average roll.
Ilium 02-04-05, 05:18 PM	IMHO, guns should not be realistic, since nothing else in D&D is. :) Even in d20 modern guns do approximately the same damage as Evadyn suggests. It's supposed to be heroic action, not "bang, you're dead." :) And not having enough ammo to take down the barbarian is a problem that already exists with bows, crossbows, etc. Same thing, different special effect. If it were me, I would keep the stats similar to Evadyn's original post and make them simple weapons. Yes this makes them much better than crossbows, but they are also much more expensive. Plus you have all the overhead of keeping your powder dry, etc. If they are martial or exotic weapons, nobody will use them. One of the reasons guns became popular, I think, is that they are more powerful than crossbows and about as easy to use.
Evadyn 02-04-05, 05:56 PM	well I decided on something like this Pistol=simple, Two or Three barreled pistol=exotic(gues why) Musket and Rifel=Martial Blunderbuss=exotic This isn't a problem with my PC cause the mage will use the pistol all the standard combat classes have the musket and rifel and The Pirate (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?t=358801) class has all firearms any way (and I have two pirates in my group) so the firearms are not gona be simple at least not in my campaign
Andrew_980 02-04-05, 06:17 PM	I have used many of these weapons and i can tell you that your probably better of with the bow if you are worried about the rate of fire. these guns relaod slow, as you must measure the powder, put powder, wadding, and bullet in the barrel ant ram them to the base. then you must set the pan up with powder and pull back the hammer. all that takes time. A blunderbuss is a primative shotgun, thats all. It it like a musket with a bigger barrel and instead of one lead ball it if filled with shot. piont blank it is deadly, long range not so much. it was designed for hunting small game sense all it takes is a "scratch" to kill a rabbit and its hard to miss
11d7 02-04-05, 06:26 PM	lol Ilium I play d20 modern more than I play D&D and guns in modern a way more powerful! Weapon Dmg Range Increment Rate of Fire Magazine Glock 20 2d6 40ft semi 15 (always mastercraft so +1 to hit, with the duble tap feat 3d6 damage) Desert Eagle 2d8 40ft semi 8 (with double tap feat 3d8) Winchester 94 2d10 90ft semi 6 I choose to use the winchester becuase its a hunting rifle its more like the rifles that would be used in the middle ages type setting. The millitary rifles do 2d12 and there are plently of ways to make them more powerful. A Level 3 Fast Hero with 18 Dex and the Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Tap and Weapon Focus (Glock 20) feat: To hit: 2(BAB) + 4 (Dex) + 1 (mastercraft) + 1 (weapon focus) -2 (2WF) = +6 to hit for 4d6 damage now with double tap: +4 to hit for 6d6 damage (AC in modern is alot lower than in D&D usualy so +4 isnt that bad IMX) Now put this guy into D&D and guess what boom there goes most low level monster, people in towns, the PCs, anything! Gun are alot more powerful than you think. PS: And in d20 modern any joe off the street can have these weapons and feats (maybe no 18 Dex but if a fast hero Dex 15 becuase modern all use elite array). Guns are vastly more dealy and if put in D&D dont expect anything else to be used if they are implemented realisticly at the right tech level, there is a reason we use them now rather than swords and bows. And I'd personaly take on a high level barb if guns are done relisticly (negating armor and where they are pointed as fast they cant be avoided in any way) with my 2 glock double tap special anyday. HP represents the ability avoid the brunt of an attack, well when that attack comes at you at just under the speed of sound with enouph force rip through you and keep going you ain't going to avoid the brunt of it.
Kulthos 02-04-05, 11:39 PM	You don't like guns do you. And as for the proposal of a touch attack, well it would be to powerful, so a level one Commoner with a dex of 12 could hit a Dwarf in +5 adamantine fullplate with a +5 tower shield (this is AC 33) on a average roll. I DO like guns, just not the way d20 handles them. Firearms did indeed turn commoners into killers of heavily armored knights, making knights obsolete. Bows had a higher rate of fire and a longer range than earlier firearms, but you needed more training to use them well, and any farmer with a little training and a gun was dangerous. The ranged touch rule would simulate the very real effect guns had in making heavy armor obsolete. I would also make the range of the guns reasonably short, those old guns were not accurate for very far but were devistating at close range. My friends and I discussed which magic armors may be "bullet proof" enough to count against guns. Things like chainmail, steel full plate, and whatnot would be (and in fact were) totaly useless against firearms, but mithral or adamantite may count against a primitive gun. Perhaps a few +'s would make the armor count, or not. In the end, after a long talk, we decided that d20 and guns don't mix. When we want to shoot guns at people in a game, we will play GURPS.
ting-bu-dong 02-05-05, 01:33 AM	Hi, I would agree with the previous posters and make firearms ignore mundane armor but be subject to magical armor. The latter would also include mithral and adamantine since armor made of these materials have a natural enhancement bonus. Also, I would increase the critical multiplier by at least one. Usually guns are not that dangerous unless you manage to hit a vital spot such as an organ (I am no expert, but this seems to be the general consent on every board dealing with firearms in role-playing games and it sounds sensible). This way, a lucky shot with a musket fired by a peasant can still hurt a knight in shining armor, but the dwarven warrior in adamantine breastplate would be in a much better position. Concerning proficiency, I would make them exotic but offer a feat that turns all firearms into martial weapons (similar to the way racial weapons are done) to represent the general training of some factions or professions with firearms without making them spend 4+ feats. I prefer this way since more primitive firearms should not be usable by untrained people since firing and reloading takes some degree of training and knowledge. Concerning deadlyness, keep in mind the option to spend feats such as weapon specialization or point blank shot on them to represent expert training. It will not stay at 5.5 damage per round if you concentrate on these weapons. tbd
Andrew_980 02-05-05, 01:41 AM	mideval armors were fairly thin, crossbows punched through them easily. if crossbows don't ignore armor than neither should guns. the pope wanted to outlaw the arbalast (heavy crossbow) because it could punch through an armored knight (and at greater range than early firearms). consider than when you set the numbers on the guns. I agree that the guns should have a good crit range, as internal shock does much of the damage and non-living things are less affected.
Kulthos 02-05-05, 01:52 AM	That is a really good point about the heavy crossbow. I may have to home rule those to be ranged touch. Nobody uses them, as they are so slow and do so little damage. In RL they were very fearful weapons.
Andrew_980 02-05-05, 02:17 AM	i have a hand crossbow that can penitrate sheetmetal backed with hardrubber, as we found out when we tested on my freinds homemade armor. the worst part is he wanted to be wearing it when i shot. and thats just a tiny hand crossbow
Tee-drake 02-05-05, 09:25 AM	Remember a Cutlass
Evadyn 02-05-05, 12:56 PM	Remember a Cutlass The blade that does 1d6 19-20/x2 Arrrgh
Jaxen723 02-05-05, 01:06 PM	I believe in either june, july, or august issue of Dragon Magazine there was a whole article introducing firearms as a permanent fixture in D&D. Rifle- 1d12 range of 150 feet carbine- 1d12 range of 100 feet blunderbuss- 1d10 range of 20 feet grenade pistol- fires grenade like weapons. Has 3 different types of ammo, bombs, bomb casings which you can fill with acid,holywater,alchemists fire,etc,and non-explosive casings which you can put a scroll or other such item in to fire to a comrade who can catch it with a DC 15 dexterity check, range increment of 40 feet
Gabriel Hawkins 02-05-05, 01:33 PM	blunderbuss- 1d10 range of 20 feet I can not belive they put only 1d10 on a blunderbuss and her is a picture for all who are wondering what a blunderbuss ishttp://store1.yimg.com/I/seagifts_1826_12293249
Andrew_980 02-05-05, 04:41 PM	the d10 damage is because you are only being hit by a few tiny things the size of @ not a large bullet smashing into you, and the damage probably is better than RL at any range beyond 20'. put the muzzle almost touching the target it is deadly, but it was primarily a light hunting weapon.
Evadyn 02-05-05, 04:56 PM	well I still like my blunderbuss better.
Andrew_980 02-05-05, 05:06 PM	like it or not it is imbalanced and not historically acurate in function
Evadyn 02-05-05, 06:09 PM	Well as i said D&D is a fantasy game, FANTASY, and how much you try, D&D will never be realistic (If it is then it isn't D&D) As for the blunderbuss, it wass based on the d20 modern sawed-of shotgun and modified, it is called a blunderbuss cause my players and most other people would asociate a sawed-of shotgun more with the Mafia and not Pirates. If you don't like it, then call it a high damage firearm or something for all I care.