Firearms in a D&D setting

Pathfinder has a lot of stuff pertaining to guns,it even has a gunslinger class.

That might take care of some of the issues, but not all of them. You're still shooting mundane bullets. And if you add enchanted bullets, there's still the thing with reload time...

The point is if you wanna be guntotting Elf, just play Shadowrun.

>Using "D&D setting" to describe fantasy

Come on user.

so more powerful than regular blackpowder?

Slings don't require you to juggle gunpowder and a lit match in near proximity to each other, while simultaneously holding on to the gun.

I always thought arming peasants with muskets would be the easiest way at starting a revolution.

What I always find odd is the assumption that introducing firearms to a fantasy setting will automatically have the same results as they did in the real world.

In a fantasy setting, we might not see the rapid increase in the viability of offence against defence we saw in the real world. A Knight in enchanted Adamant plate could walk through a hail of bullets without giving a fuck, unless you had the money to burn to make Adamant shells, for example.

I like guns in fantasy settings when you use that sort of logic, actually putting thought into how they'd interact with such a different world rather than just pasting real life assumptions onto a fantasy setting.

One of the PCs in the game I'm in has a carbine.

It's a lever action and she's exceptionally proud of it, being an artificer and all.

We just used the Superior Crossbow stats for it. All done.

Hand Crossbow - Pistol
Crossbow - Musket
Superior Crossbow - Rifle/Carbine

Might matter a bit more if she finally has time to put together her plans for some gattling guns to protect the city we are building but 4e is endlessly refluffable and it wouldn't be hard to make something with a decent Blast value for 'Running automatic fire over a zone'

Check out Lamentations of the Flame Princess and its firearms rules. Its in the /osrg/ trove.

I find firearms to be a great way to diversify combat. They are easy to use and good for hitting armoured targets, but their reload makes them basically a one-use item. Nice for giving a player without a bow/crossbow the chance to engage at range in a battle.

You would be suprised all the things a PC can use gunpowder for.

>Throwing a rock
>Metal ball being blast forward by ignited gunpowder

If you want historically accurate early firearms:

They should be simple weapons.
Because they were simple. And used by people with little training.

They should do more damage than a crossbow.
Why? Because gunpowder weapons are more powerful. It's obvious to anybody who's used both.
You may want to give them a bonus against armor at close range as well.

They should have about the same range as a bow or crossbow.
Because all 3 weapons were inaccurate (in their day) and were used for mass volley fire.

There should not be any reliability rules.
Bow and crossbows are just as subject to the elements, yet they don't have rules for reliability.

Also the reload should not be very long.
"But they did take a long time to reload!"
So did a heavy crossbow.
But in D&D it takes 6 seconds.

So why would anyone of your players not use a firearm?
Well if they want the most bang for their buck, it might be the best option.
But you can fire a bow much faster than you could a firearm if you've got the skill.
Bows and crossbows don't make tons of really loud noise and smoke.
And you can often reuse the ammo.

I was thinking along the lines of alchemy, mixing together different compounds to make gunpowder with different effects, like maybe frost damage.

Loud noise and smoke might be an advantagr in a fight. I'm no expert, but I remember reading how massed muskets during shot and pike battles could put enemy groups to rout because they were that much more terrifying than arrows.

Why not just increase times for heavy crossbows then? If you want realism there is no sense sticking to the DnD rulebook.

I think OSR is better suited to stuff like firearms. Its more moddable in general and lacks the whole 'builds' thing going on in Weaboo Fightan Magic.

Sort of like a pump-n-dump weapon in most fights. They take an entire action to reload, but can be modded to accommodate more barrels (3 on pistols 2 on rifles). Pistols do 1d8 damage and rifles do 1d10, but standard shots add +2 damage. So at the very least, it's 1d8+2. Shots can also be plated with different metals to a max of +5, or enchated to do elemental damage.

If you introduce firearms into your setting, you basically make medieval weapons and armor obsolete.

Rapiers would still be in use but you wouldn't see knight in plate armor wielding broadswords.

>arming people is an easy way to start a revolution

no fucking shit sherlock

In a campaign that is essentially colonial-era kinda shit. It's pretty great. Having a sawn-off musket hidden in a longcoat because you're about to rob a gambling house with your party toting flintlocks is good times.

Also our Orc wields a ship's swivel gun on the end of a stick. Again, firearms are pretty great.

I sometimes have guns when I run a "generic fantasy" game. They're normally only used by militaries because early firearm were inaccurate as hell, thus needed massed fire. In game they have bad hit penalties, but ignores all armor outside of plate, and has pretty damn high damage. In one game the party's ranger primarily used a bow but kept two muskets on him. Bow would cut down regular opponents with ease but if a big monster were to show up he would shoot both guns in it's face.

>If you introduce firearms into your setting, you basically make medieval weapons and armor obsolete.

Pretty sure proper plate armour came after the earliest handheld guns in Europe.

Guns making plate obsolete is a big fat meme. Guns WHERE medieval weapons.

If magic and wizards don't make traditional arms and armour obsolete then even a pretty advanced gun won't.

The traditonal problems of guns in fantasy are;

1. Misunderstanding the characteristics of early firearms. They are either completely ineffective with the dangers of malfunction exaggerated (which gives token acknowledgement to gunpwder without having to deal with the issues below) or the wunderwaffen that made everything medieval obsolete.
There is no middle ground and the second option leads to...

2.Misunderstanding the effects of firearms. The perception is that introducing gunpowder would instantly change the face of warfare forever which means that fantasy writers don't dare include them if it means wrecking the medieval vibes of the setting. The idea that firearms rendered armour obsolete overnight is the biggest issue here.

3. Misunderstanding the chronology. Cannon radically altered siege warfare but as it has been said hand-held firearms pre-date full plate armour and the two coexisted for 2 or 3 centuries. Far from being an late-coming intruder, gunpowder was an integral part of the historical Late Middle Ages which is the most popular period of inspiration (however loose) for fantasy.

4. Technological progress and the suspension of disbelief. Despite the fact that the Medieval period saw rapid change in many fields of science, art and technology most fantasy settings are stagnant and exist unchanged for hundreds if not thousands of years. For some reason though firearms are exempt from this and writers fear that gunpowder would inevitably drive massive and rapid change when every other force of progress is discarded. Firearm technology leaps from rare and primitive hand-cannon to universal armour-piercing heavy flintlock muskets with no intermediate steps when in reality these are seperated by hundreds of years.

These problems wouldn't exist if fantasy writers actually read a damn history book once in a while but that's never going to happen.

Fun fact; Pistols were originally cavalry weapons designed to replace the lance for Knights/Men-at-Arms on horseback.

myarmoury.com/feature_lancepistol.html

>arming them with easy-to-use "point and click" muskets as opposed to having to train them to fight with swords and spears and bows.

What's it like being retarded?

It's not that they have "easy" weapons that make people think they have a chance its actually having weapons that does it.

Like, look at gun nuts in america. If the goverment went full corrupt single blob of evil dickass the population could easily rise up against them as is. But they feel that the supposed dickasses should give everyone guns and they might stand a chance. One can also look at katana autists for illusion of power from having "strong" weapons in your hand.

To see guns as point&click is looking at it from an outsider perspective which knowing history, is not something anyone who changed history actually looked on things. Had you given every peasant an arming sword (Because it was the noble weapon) they would all feel very secure in their chances against "whoever tried to fuck with them".

Of course having such illusions of power wouldn't exactly bring an revolution in a feudal society without some specific events happening.

Jan Zizka approves.

As a history major, that is bullshit. by the 1560's, firearms were becoming a major staple on the battlefield and were available for civilian hunters and militias as well.

My default setting is 1600s/1700s, so there's flintlock and gunpowder and cannon all over the place. Although this is more of a side-effect of the fact that I really like the general technology of the time, not simply the gunpowder.

In the time and with the money it takes you to train a single knight, you can train and equip entire legions of peasant musketeers.

Quantity beats quality.

#4 triggers me so much in fantasy settings.

Medieval gun thread now!

I love firearms. I run an early 1500's-ish game so it's high renaissance/early modern.

I run pistols equivalent to a hand crossbow and musket equivalent to a light crossbow though the exploding damage brings their average damage up a little, 4.2 for pistols and 5.1 for arquebi compared to 3.5 and 4.5. An average npc has between 5 and 10 hp in this game and attacks are made with 2d10. Here's the specific rules I have for firearms. I feel like thisis too many rules for a weapon type but I don't know which one I'd want to get rid of.

Must be reloaded for one attack action between attacks and ignore(x) damage reduction(this is the same as crossbows, armor is damage reduction). After being submerged or in heavy downpour, firearms misfire if a 1 is rolled on either dice. On a misfire, the weapon fails to fire. Smoke from firing incurs disadvantage on ranged attacks either into or from within 5 feet of the firearm for 2 rounds(1 in heavy wind). A firearm rolls an extra dice of damage anytime maximum damage is rolled when firing. A firearm can be used in melee as a club for 1d4(pistol) and 1d6(arquebi) damage. Firing incurs disadvantage to the next enemy morale roll and alerts anyone within 300 feet or 5 rooms to the presence of the firearm user.

If a sword to the vitals does 1d8 damage, so will a musket

>I get hp wrong, look at how much of a faggot I am! :^)

Uh, shit.. 1530s tech then?
Saltpeter is rare?
Shot is difficult to make?

I use bullets like in Princess Mononoke.

Black Iron Bullets do little damage but their poison is the main problem.

Love them.

I hate firearms, annoying to use, annoying to fight against ennemies who use it (pic not related)

The arquebus is allowed in 2e, so generally it's a rule of thumb that it's present, but it's not widely used.

...

The Gods in Greyhawk use firearms.

The Iron Kingdoms was originally a DnD setting and it's got firearms out the ass.

How the fuck do you manage to misspell the only word you also emphasize?

>No laughed the fat controller, you are wrong.jpg

>But they feel that the supposed dickasses should give everyone guns and they might stand a chance.
You know nothing about "gun nuts".

Every other point you made was valid, however.

Having trouble getting the ingredients for gunpowder, I believe it was saltpeter, was legitimately an issue for a long time and made gunpowder extremely expensive. Guns are becoming a major part of warfare by the mid 15th century, though, so I would create a reason for their rarity if I were you.

I include them myself but as a reasonably new but un-trusted tech.

Sure, they can be very powerful and so forth but they're new and unreliable. This is not a good combination in a world that has parafauna. Melee weapons and bows may be less powerful but at least a sword never stopped working because something stopped burning and it doesnt cost you money to keep it ready to use.

Can't saltpeter be made from literal shit?

A gift for you, do with it as you will

I love it, and have it on the setting.

>Besides matchlock there is quartzlock and kuchalock

>bartizans with falconets are antiair emplacements on forts and ships

>The average gun is realistic (anyone can use, terrible acuracy, long reload time) so not really useful for players, but karlhoff repeaters and rifling are available for gun blazers

>The emperor himself uses a pistol grenade launcher as a ranged weapon

>Adoption of gunpowder was a way of the common people fearing mages, and the poor magical virgins were surprised by how much cannon outranges most offensive spells

>I have magic mortars powered by imprisioned djinn

>Kobolds agree they are physically impaired by their size, so they invented hwacha rocket launchers, including a smaller bazooka-like version

But it's a disappointingly terrible class and as well as Pathfinder guns.

I find the response is often long lectures on the power of artillery and other big guns that even in the case of deliberate world building to give the Adamant plate wearing knight who's primary weapon is meant to be a melee weapon an advantage over guns and anything else from last 2 centuries of weapon advancement, they still get reduced to red jam because if artillery can handle several ton tanks from dozens of miles away, the guy in magical plate has no chance because the world builder/DM doesn't comprehend the forces involved in an explosive shell going off a few feet away from you..

So your saying in a setting where I can move and fight at super-human levels, have armor made out of exotic metals such as Mythril and Adamantine nevermind the fact I could probably shrug off most mundane weapons just with my skin and you say this shit?

I bet you're the sort who'd massivly penalize fighters because you think they're too powerful.

>What about Enchanted Gunpowder?
GIVE ME FLAMBOYANT RAINBOW QUEERPOWDER OR GIVE ME DEATH

THOSE WORTHLESS PEASANTRY AND THEIR MUNDANE GREY POWDER EXHAUST WILL FEAR AND TASTE MY RAINBOW THIS DAY

He also has no idea what he's talking about. Even in the end of the 17th century, sabers, pikes, muskets, bows and heavy armor existed side by side in the battlefield.

One of the ways the 1683 Siege of Vienna is awesome, besides the greatest cavalry charge in all recorded history

>the guy in magical plate has no chance because the world builder/DM doesn't comprehend the forces involved in an explosive shell going off a few feet away from you..
user it's magical plate, which means if there isn't several kinds of wards and protective spells already on the damn suit then whoever dropped dragon sacks to have it made will certainly have little pouches that contain such anti-tank protection.

Antique firearms thread now.

...

...

Not to mention the classic D&D problem where a PC has the HP to survive a fall from orbit into a volcano and swim your way out with over half his health remaining

>ribbed for her pleasure
>rifled for his accuracy

There are viable builds, but sadly there is only like one or two and the one I can think of is dual wielding double barrel pistols enchanted out the ass and using alchemical bullets and always going both barrels for you with every shot and keeping a few on hold instead of reloading.

...

That's the point where you're supposed to be able to fight dragons face to face, so not that much of a problem.

>You know what I lust the most about you my love? It's this thick mortar you have and how hot its barrel can be.

...

...

...

...

...

...

I'm gonna level with you all, I've never played D&D before.
My friend invited me over to play for the first time on short notice so I'm here doing recon.
Assuming his setting has black powder firearms, is there any limit to how many pistols I can holster?
I want to have 6 one shot flintlock pistols on me so that I can go full Blackbeard.
Also, can you duel wield cutlasses?

>the use of firearms such as primitive flintlock pistols and rifles in fantasy settings

The problem here is that you are confusing "Fantasy" with what you mean to say as "Medieval." Once you understand they aren't the same you'll understand how stupid your question is.

>I used to be mocked by cannoneers and wenches alike, but that all changed after I invested in grape shot!

Off the top of my head you need to leqrn how holstering and drawing them works, how long to reload, and if youll need feats to make that work.

Not in a magical fantasy world it can't.

Theoretically possible if I actively build towards it throughout the game?
He said he'd guide my hips since its my first time, I just want to make the character beforehand and I don't want to make a pirate if I can't BE a pirate.

And yes, you can dual wield, it requires a bonus action. I would recommend using fighter or rogue.

Mounted pistoliers and pirates would have about six loaded pistols and fire them in quick sucession. I assume your GM will let you have around this much, and you still need a suitable build to do it well.

You can dual wield cutlasses in D&D and real life. The first requires the ranger class to work better and the second was used only in duels and tourneys.

...

...

...

I am unaware of any hard limit, though I'll note that guns tend to not be cheap, and weight can sometimes be a thing. I suspect 6 wouldn't be thought of as impossible, for what it's worth though. Regarding holstering/drawing them and reloading them, there are feats to assist with that, but you'll want to talk with your DM about this anyways first.

...

...

...

...

The happiest I've ever been was when I was playing a half orc and my DM let me attach a broadside cannon from a ship and fasten it to my back. I suggested it as a joke but he let me do it.
My movement speed was shot to shit and other PC's had to carry around cannonballs, load it and light the fuse but everyone agreed it was worth it.
Most fun I've had in D&D ever probably.

...

I had followers to carry my personal siege mortar around

...

...

...