A couple of questions. [Archive] - Wizards Community

A couple of questions. [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
ThatOneDude
11-16-06, 06:08 PM If a society in my campaign has had firearms for a generation or so, would Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) be Martial instead of Exotic?

Would a ranger be able to dual-wield pistols, or would he only be able to use the ranged feat tree with them?
crossp
11-16-06, 07:20 PM Logically, I would put guns as simple weapons in such a society. They're just as easy to use as a crossbow.

Are you using some specific rules or are you making up your own rules for them? Firearms are hard to balance in D&D rules because they are simply better than most weapons. Especially as something to put in the hands of commoner militias.

You can dual-wield guns just like you can dual-wield light crossbows. Just keep in mind that you can dual-reload neither of them.Keep in mind that something you can do with pistols that you can't do with crossbows is keep a quiver full of loaded ones. It's much faster to draw a fresh pistol than to reload one. (Pirates did this with flintlocks)
Sim_antix
11-16-06, 07:33 PM To answer the second part. Your ranger would be able to dual wield but not TWF with the psitols since TWF is for melee weapons only.
Thubby
11-16-06, 09:58 PM i would say martial is fine. simple seems illogical. have you ever seen someone unfamiliar with a pistol hold one? its pathetic, and they miss like hell. (and today guns are more than a few generations old)
my cousin is a police officer, and one thing she learned was "someone who has never used a gun before (not proficient) has a 1 in 25 chance of hitting their intending target" and that is with a semi automatic, machined weapon (machines make better precision stuff).
marines in combat have like a 1 in 12, to 1 in 6, depending on rank, training, and talent.
and yes, 2 pistols is doable (assuming proper feats)
clarkvalentine
11-16-06, 10:30 PM simple seems illogical. have you ever seen someone unfamiliar with a pistol hold one? its pathetic, and they miss like hell.

The same could be said of a crossbow. One of the many reasons firearms were introduced because it was so easy to train a mob of uneducated peasants to stand in a line and shoot them - a good longbowman took years to train.

The quick way to answer the question is this: Don't think about realism, think about how prevalent you want them to be in your setting. Do you want all your adventurers to use guns? If so, make them simple. If you want them only in the hands of the main fighting characters, make them martial. If you only want one or two using them, make them exotic.

I ran a pirates based campaign for a couple of years with firearms as simple weapons, for the simple fact that that's the flavor we wanted - every goes in guns blazing, and when you run out of loaded pistols, draw your cutlass and wade in to melee.
Thubby
11-17-06, 08:36 PM i just had an idea.
it could take longer to reload if you dont have martial.
civil war soldiers could fire like 3 times faster than a normal peasant. thanks to training.
iether that or adapt the rapid reload.
clarkvalentine
11-17-06, 08:39 PM civil war soldiers could fire like 3 times faster than a normal peasant. thanks to training. iether that or adapt the rapid reload.

Seems reasonable to me.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ThatOneDude 11-16-06, 06:08 PM	If a society in my campaign has had firearms for a generation or so, would Weapon Proficiency (Firearms) be Martial instead of Exotic? Would a ranger be able to dual-wield pistols, or would he only be able to use the ranged feat tree with them?
crossp 11-16-06, 07:20 PM	Logically, I would put guns as simple weapons in such a society. They're just as easy to use as a crossbow. Are you using some specific rules or are you making up your own rules for them? Firearms are hard to balance in D&D rules because they are simply better than most weapons. Especially as something to put in the hands of commoner militias. You can dual-wield guns just like you can dual-wield light crossbows. Just keep in mind that you can dual-reload neither of them.Keep in mind that something you can do with pistols that you can't do with crossbows is keep a quiver full of loaded ones. It's much faster to draw a fresh pistol than to reload one. (Pirates did this with flintlocks)
Sim_antix 11-16-06, 07:33 PM	To answer the second part. Your ranger would be able to dual wield but not TWF with the psitols since TWF is for melee weapons only.
Thubby 11-16-06, 09:58 PM	i would say martial is fine. simple seems illogical. have you ever seen someone unfamiliar with a pistol hold one? its pathetic, and they miss like hell. (and today guns are more than a few generations old) my cousin is a police officer, and one thing she learned was "someone who has never used a gun before (not proficient) has a 1 in 25 chance of hitting their intending target" and that is with a semi automatic, machined weapon (machines make better precision stuff). marines in combat have like a 1 in 12, to 1 in 6, depending on rank, training, and talent. and yes, 2 pistols is doable (assuming proper feats)
clarkvalentine 11-16-06, 10:30 PM	simple seems illogical. have you ever seen someone unfamiliar with a pistol hold one? its pathetic, and they miss like hell. The same could be said of a crossbow. One of the many reasons firearms were introduced because it was so easy to train a mob of uneducated peasants to stand in a line and shoot them - a good longbowman took years to train. The quick way to answer the question is this: Don't think about realism, think about how prevalent you want them to be in your setting. Do you want all your adventurers to use guns? If so, make them simple. If you want them only in the hands of the main fighting characters, make them martial. If you only want one or two using them, make them exotic. I ran a pirates based campaign for a couple of years with firearms as simple weapons, for the simple fact that that's the flavor we wanted - every goes in guns blazing, and when you run out of loaded pistols, draw your cutlass and wade in to melee.
Thubby 11-17-06, 08:36 PM	i just had an idea. it could take longer to reload if you dont have martial. civil war soldiers could fire like 3 times faster than a normal peasant. thanks to training. iether that or adapt the rapid reload.
clarkvalentine 11-17-06, 08:39 PM	civil war soldiers could fire like 3 times faster than a normal peasant. thanks to training. iether that or adapt the rapid reload. Seems reasonable to me.