PDA

View Full Version : Firearms? (3.5)



The Oakenshield
2011-04-11, 06:24 PM
I have been looking around, and haven't really found any really good homebrew for guns in 3.5.

Anybody know of any?

Thanks!

arguskos
2011-04-11, 06:27 PM
Why yes, yes I do (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=187811). :smallcool:

I'm using those rules right now in a game I'm running. A PC is dual-wielding pistols, and having a nice time with it actually.

Ashtagon
2011-04-11, 11:46 PM
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10405229&postcount=29 is what I'd use as a baseline when i actually get round to making proper rules for firearms.

Prime32
2011-04-12, 08:28 AM
Historically, firearms became widespread because while they were inferior to bows they were easier to use, meaning that you could send ten untrained gunmen instead of one trained archer.

As such, I disagree with the idea of making firearms into exotic weapons. I would just stat guns as crossbows with 20/x3 threat ranges.

If you want more differentiation, I suppose you could increase the damage dice and reloading times by one step. Well, leave the heavy crossbow at full-round action; the light crossbow is better in most cases anyway. Or you could reduce the range and make them like ranged warmaces (higher damage die, -1 AC)

For instance:

Light firearm: Ranged simple weapon, 1d10 20/x3 piercing, 60 ft.
Loading a light firearm is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity. A light firearm is unwieldy, and you take a -1 penalty to AC while wielding one.

Normally, operating a light firearm requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a light firearm with one hand at a -2 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a light firearm with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.


Heavy firearm: Ranged simple weapon, 1d12 20/x3 piercing, 90 ft.
Loading a heavy firearm is a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity. A heavy firearm is unwieldy, and you take a -1 penalty to AC while wielding one.

Normally, operating a heavy firearm requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a heavy firearm with one hand at a -4 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a heavy firearm with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two one-handed weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.
Extend to the various other types of crossbow.

Ashtagon
2011-04-12, 09:25 AM
Historically, personal firearms didn't become widespread mili6tary weapons until the advent of the brass cartridge. Not uncoincidentally, I made guns that use this cartridge into simple/martial weapons, which means that every normal soldier would have the skill to use them.

The original muskets were complete rube goldberg contraptions that required considerable expertise to use.

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-12, 09:31 AM
For give my ignorance, but why not just use the d20 modern or d20 past, which is probably more what you want since it starts at wheal lock and moves from there.

The Oakenshield
2011-04-12, 04:45 PM
Yes, I'm looking for guns that use metal cartridge rounds. In the campaign, they are to be quite rare, so even if training is not that difficult, it is extremely difficult to acquire, so deserves the Exotic Weapon Feat.

Thanks, liking the replies a lot so far!

Icedaemon
2011-04-13, 03:43 AM
Firearms, especially early firearms should do more damage than a crossbow and be rather inaccurate. I propose something along these lines:

Martial, one handed:
Flintlock pistol 1d12 damage. Crit x3; -5 to hit penalty (cumulative with non-proficiency).
Martial, two handed:
Arquebus: 2d8 damage Crit x3; -3 to hit penalty
Musket: 2d8 damage Crit x3; -3 to hit penalty
Bayonette (musket): reach weapon, 1d6 damage, can be set against charge.
Exotic, two handed:
Hand Cannon 3d6(-4d8?) damage, Crit x2 -6 to hit penalty. Requires a stand or other form of bracing (without, the penalty is increased by 4)

This is in addition to the above loading rules.

ForzaFiori
2011-04-13, 07:17 AM
Historically, personal firearms didn't become widespread mili6tary weapons until the advent of the brass cartridge. Not uncoincidentally, I made guns that use this cartridge into simple/martial weapons, which means that every normal soldier would have the skill to use them.

The original muskets were complete rube goldberg contraptions that required considerable expertise to use.

The first all metal-cartridge was used in 1845. Pretty sure guns were featured heavily in arms as far back as French/Indian war (7 years war to any Europeans), Napoleonic Wars, and American Revolution, if not even slightly before (I just cant remember what wars happened right before that... 30 years war maybe?)

What the brass cartridge did allow was the quick reloading of guns, allowing them to be used more than just one or two times before a charge. However, nearly every foot soldier that could find a gun had one during the Revolution.

Ashtagon
2011-04-13, 07:28 AM
The first all metal-cartridge was used in 1845. Pretty sure guns were featured heavily in arms as far back as French/Indian war (7 years war to any Europeans), Napoleonic Wars, and American Revolution, if not even slightly before (I just cant remember what wars happened right before that... 30 years war maybe?)

What the brass cartridge did allow was the quick reloading of guns, allowing them to be used more than just one or two times before a charge. However, nearly every foot soldier that could find a gun had one during the Revolution.

The brass cartridge didn't improve reloading times significantly over paper cartridges. What it did allow was for guns to be reloaded through a breech, instead of muzzle loading which was required for paper cartridges and loose powder & ball shots. This also coincided with the invention of more advanced trigger mechanisms (specifically, the percussion cap mechanism), which were a lot easier to operate and maintain, as well as being resistant to rain.

The first war in which rifled barrels were routinely used was the American Revolution. This also saw a vast increase in the lethality of battles involving personal firearms, due to massively improved accuracy. Prior to this, rifled barrels were seen as primarily hunting weapons, and were not commonly issued to soldiers.

For those keeping track, there are several semi-independent technologies at work here:

* ammo type (powder and ball, paper cartridge, brass cartridge)
* barrel (smooth, rifled)
* lock (matchlock, wheel lock, flint lock, snaphaunce, percussion cap, etc)
* loading type (muzzle loader, breech loader, revolver, clip, box magazine, etc)

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-13, 08:53 AM
Firearms, especially early firearms should do more damage than a crossbow and be rather inaccurate. I propose something along these lines:

Martial, one handed:
Flintlock pistol 1d12 damage. Crit x3; -5 to hit penalty (cumulative with non-proficiency).
Martial, two handed:
Arquebus: 2d8 damage Crit x3; -3 to hit penalty
Musket: 2d8 damage Crit x3; -3 to hit penalty
Bayonette (musket): reach weapon, 1d6 damage, can be set against charge.
Exotic, two handed:
Hand Cannon 3d6(-4d8?) damage, Crit x2 -6 to hit penalty. Requires a stand or other form of bracing (without, the penalty is increased by 4)

This is in addition to the above loading rules.

The problem with that is no one will really want to use them with those kinds of penalties, especially the hand cannon and flintlock pistol. They may have the potential to do a bit more damage per shot, but that doesn't help you if you're not hitting or if you hit so much more often with normal weapons that the extra damage is irrelevant (or less).

Blynkibrax
2011-04-13, 10:31 AM
This is going to sound odd, perhaps, but what about firearms as melee weapons? The hand cannon, for example, had a spike about half a foot length on the back of it, allowing it to be used like a pickaxe when you were out of ammo.

The wielder of a flintlock pistol, upon discharging their weapon, if caught in a dangerous close-quarters situation could give their foe a weighty clonk in the face with the gun's heavy barrel.

Do we have D&D rules for pistol-whipping and such?

Icedaemon
2011-04-13, 10:32 AM
In reply to Epsilon Rose

Those were brought in as an example. I did not try to balance things yet, merely show the basic premise of how I'd handle firearms.

Really, I would not mind if most weapons had some sort of accuracy modifier. A battleaxe and a rapier should not be equally accurate weapons. Has someone done something along these lines?

Epsilon Rose
2011-04-13, 11:00 AM
In reply to Epsilon Rose

Those were brought in as an example. I did not try to balance things yet, merely show the basic premise of how I'd handle firearms.

Really, I would not mind if most weapons had some sort of accuracy modifier. A battleaxe and a rapier should not be equally accurate weapons. Has someone done something along these lines?

This is true, just like how a full blade and a dagger shouldn't have the same speed and reach:smalleek:, unfortunately implementing fix on the whole system would require quite a bit of work (especially because if you're going that far you're probably going to want to model their other unique features (armor breaking, multi-hit, arc trajectories, ext) and implementing it on only a few of the weapons would just discourage their use. If you can find someone who's done that then I'd be more than happy to look at it, but without that you're probably better off losing the penalties and relying on proficiencies like normal.

acelegna
2011-04-13, 11:11 AM
I would use some (or similar) rules that the World of Warcraft D20 campaign has. Basically, there the most basic and primitive forms of firearms (in order to compliment the "medieval" theme).

Hawkfrost000
2011-04-13, 01:16 PM
Historically, personal firearms didn't become widespread mili6tary weapons until the advent of the brass cartridge. Not uncoincidentally, I made guns that use this cartridge into simple/martial weapons, which means that every normal soldier would have the skill to use them.

The original muskets were complete rube goldberg contraptions that required considerable expertise to use.

dude, guns have been used in armies since the 100 years war, they weren't the only weapon like today but they made up a solid 30-50% of infantry

Ashtagon
2011-04-13, 01:27 PM
dude, guns have been used in armies since the 100 years war, they weren't the only weapon like today but they made up a solid 30-50% of infantry

okok, slight mistake. The rest of what I said was true though.

Prime32
2011-04-13, 02:25 PM
This is going to sound odd, perhaps, but what about firearms as melee weapons? The hand cannon, for example, had a spike about half a foot length on the back of it, allowing it to be used like a pickaxe when you were out of ammo.

The wielder of a flintlock pistol, upon discharging their weapon, if caught in a dangerous close-quarters situation could give their foe a weighty clonk in the face with the gun's heavy barrel.

Do we have D&D rules for pistol-whipping and such?There are rules for bayonets and concealed blades in a few places. There's a bow that can be used like a quarterstaff.

Mutazoia
2011-04-13, 08:31 PM
okok, slight mistake. The rest of what I said was true though.

Not really....



Historically, personal firearms didn't become widespread mili6tary weapons until the advent of the brass cartridge. Not uncoincidentally, I made guns that use this cartridge into simple/martial weapons, which means that every normal soldier would have the skill to use them.

I would suggest looking here (http://armscollectors.com/gunhistorydates.htm) to get the dates. Barrel rifling was invented around 1540...the french Musketeers were formed in 1622...the entire British army was equipped with flintlocks in 1690... Perhaps you meant to say that firearms didn't become widespread personal weapons until the advent of the brass cartridge? (although though this wouldn't be entirely true either) :smallsmile: