3.5: Adding Guns to My World

[Draconium]

For a while now, I have been doing a bit or worldbuilding on a campaign setting I would like to use in the future. In this world, I am going to have one specific country be slightly more technologically advanced than the rest of the setting, and one of the ways I would like to represent this is by making it so that they have recently developed early firearms. However, I am not sure exactly how to go about this from a mechanical standpoint. Which brings me here today (well, tonight).

My question is this: What mechanics should I use for introducing early firearms to my setting? I am aware that possible examples for this can be found in the DMG and in Pathfinder's firearm system, but I am not wholly familiar with either, and am not sure how well-thought-out and balanced either option would be. So, please, let me hear the Playground's thoughts and opinions!

[Fizban]

Sorcery and Steam by Fantasy Flight Games.

Everything else is crap. The DMG just isn't worth using, Pathfinder is a mess of stupid failure checks and touch attacks and other garbage, even the Warcraft books have them hooked into the tinker class rules except not and also more malfunctions.

If you want a weapon to be used, it needs to work. Any system with horrible malfunctions has missed the point. If you want something to be used as a weapon, it needs to follow the same mechanics as other weapons: any system that uses touch attacks has missed the point. Sorcery and Steam has not missed the point. Their firearms use normal attack rolls and malfunctions are both rare and easily ignored, no heavily involved mechanics to confuse things. They deal enough damage to compare to bow builds without using heavily involved mechanics, and have multiple distinct models with their own tradeoffs (three sizes of matchlock, flintlock, and percussion cap, plus double barreled versions and a couple extra). Their reload times are historically accurate for normal people and appropriately sped up for specialized people, and they even have a whole section on their research for why (though amusingly they missed mentioning the most important advancement that made those speeds possible: breach loading- regardless their times are good, just remember that they're all breach loaders).

As I've said in several other threads, bottom line: if you want to use firearms this is what you should be using.

[ShurikVch]

Everything else is crap. The DMG just isn't worth using, Pathfinder is a mess of stupid failure checks and touch attacks and other garbage, even the Warcraft books have them hooked into the tinker class rules except not and also more malfunctions.Hey, what's so bad about the DMG rules? (Also, "The Way of the Gun" article in Dragon #321)

And how about the firearms in Star Wars d20? There are not just blasters - some slugthrowers and flamethrowers too!

[Fizban]

Hey, what's so bad about the DMG rules? (Also, "The Way of the Gun" article in Dragon #321)
Not enough damage, too slow, only two boring models. They succeed at the two main points all other guns seem to miss, but only because they're intentionally unambitious examples. Good enough if you have a supplementary mechanic (like say, the Black Rain (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?99529-The-Sublime-Gunslinger-s-Art-Black-Rain-Discipline&p=5471518#post5471518) discipline), but not usable on their own for any real purpose. Dunno about the article.

[ShurikVch]

Not enough damageIsn't it more "general problem of ranged combat in D&D 3.X" than firearm-specific? There are some ways to fix it - such as precision damage (the most obvious way) or special ammo...

too slowNot so different from crossbows, which are viable weapons.
What's prevent you from abusing Quick Draw trick?

http://cdn.4archive.org:88/view.php?id=http://i.imgur.com/F5aV8WPm.jpg

only two boring models.Aforementioned "The Way of the Gun" have seven different pistols, five guns, rocket launcher, and three cannons; also various paraphernalia such as bandolier, gunrest, powderhorn, bayonets, match/flint/wheellocks, and even breachloading (!)
Also, Musket in DMG is one the most long-ranged weapons in the whole game (150')

[Fouredged Sword]

In 3.5 the DMG firearms are worse than crossbows without providing any real reason to use them. You have two choices here.

A - Historical firearms - Make guns cheap simple weapons with short range increments and high damage. Full round action to reload just like a heavy crossbow. Make it cost 5gp to buy a musket and a horn of powder and 20 lead shot set you back a silver. Say about 2d6 damage and a 30ft range increment for a musket and 2d4 and 10ft for a pistol (standard action reload for a pistol). It's a commoner's weapon, able to be made and maintained by a village blacksmith and the ammo can be made by a commoner without any special tools or anything not found in a common farmhouse. Guns changed the world not because they are better than bows, but because guns became dirt cheep and in the hands of everyone who wanted one. Rather than counting on 3-5 bowmen and 6-10 spearmen to guard a village the town just has every able body male keep a musket in their home. Rather than try to feed a dedicated guard group with tons of training in how to wield complicated weapons or shell out tons of gold on expensive crossbows the town can just buy a lot of guns and trust in the easy to use dependable weapons to overwhelm any attack through volume of fire. A local lord will have a small army of bowmen and halberds, but when pressed he can draft up massive groups of farmers with muskets to form deadly lines of fire in a matter of months rather than the years it would take to train a traditional army.

For adventurers
Bows > Crossbows > guns. Bows, Martial weapon requiring special training, 100's of gold in costs. Crossbows, no special training, still too expensive for commoners (35gp! commoners make maybe a few silver a day!). Guns, simple weapons cheep enough for just about anyone with a profession skill.

Bows are for heroes, crossbows for soldiers and guards, guns for commoners.

B - Heroic Firearms - Use the pathfinder system. This keeps firearms exotic superweapons of high technology. Guns are expensive better versions of bows with super complicated and expensive components.

[LordOfCain]

Also, "The Way of the Gun" article in Dragon #321
Um...
When it became clear to even cavalrymen that lance-wielding charges were finally obsolete
What type of fighting deals the most damage in 3.5?

[Pugwampy]

I always wanted to toss a real gun with limited ammo at the players for the heck of it .

[Spiryt]

Guns changed the world not because they are better than bows, but because guns became dirt cheep and in the hands of everyone who wanted one.


That's a common oversimplification.

Guns were better than bows in many aspects from the start, that's why they caught up. And wielding early firearm wasn't particularly easy either.

Even very early handcannon would offer:

- a missile at least 3 times faster than the quickest arrow. The superiority of trajectory and target's ablity to evade such missile was obvious.

- kinetic energy 5,10,15 times higher than the mightiest bows. Even without any concept of KE, medieval people obviously quickly noticed that those things deliver far scarier amount of "whooop" than human muscle can through springs like bows.

- "line of sight" type of aiming, similar to crossbow, but even more convenient, without moving, clunky parts like the bow itself - ability to fire in close spaces, through gaps in walls etc. was great.

- effect of being scary apparently wasn't a small factor at all. There are sources mentioning Ottoman soldiers being deadly afraid of firearms, in XVIth century, when some of the soldiers of Empire already adopted them.

In short, even very simple firearms were definite new quality, that's why they were adopted very quickly. On the break of 15th and 16th century they first mostly displaced the crossbow, because they were more similar in use to those.

Bow hanged around in some uses, because it had some obvious advantages, like rate of fire.


Not so different from crossbows, which are viable weapons.
What's prevent you from abusing Quick Draw trick?

How viable are crossbows in 3.5, though, seriously?

They are slow, and have minimal amount of reach and damage over bows. The latter of course pretty instantly get's overshadowed by adding strength bonus to composite bows and stuff.

[supersonic29]

I'm a big supporter and have played under the DMG rules + Dragon 321. They feel the most like the 3.5 rules, because they are. Homebrew stuff always seems to take a lot of liberties in how things work, applying explanations that aren't worded in a WotC way at all. Now, if you are already a big homebrew user and like to shape the campaign to your vision rather than 3.5's, this opinion probably doesn't apply to you.

[Chronikoce]

I always wanted to toss a real gun with limited ammo at the players for the heck of it .

I can't imagine that your players need a gun at the gaming table. If they do you game in a really bad part of town.

[Tvtyrant]

If you want guns to perform the same role as in RL, loading time 3 rounds, touch attack, 2d6 damage 3x crit, simple weapon. Mass fired peasants are now one of the most effective tactics in the game.

If you want guns to be fun for players, make them revolves and lever actions that act like crossbows that do not need to be reloaded constantly, add in a ton of special ammo like entangling bullets, exploding, etc.

[Fizban]

Isn't it more "general problem of ranged combat in D&D 3.X" than firearm-specific? There are some ways to fix it - such as precision damage (the most obvious way) or special ammo...
Not so different from crossbows, which are viable weapons
I never said anything about ranged vs other styles. Bows get strength to damage. Crossbows have a couple special feats and can be reduced to free action reloading, so if you spend a bunch of feats you can pretend they're comparable. The DMG guns do not. Sorcery and Steam's guns have enough damage to compare with the 100gp's of bows they must compare to: 1d8-2d10 compared to 1d8+4 starting point high OP always assumes.

What's prevent you from abusing Quick Draw trick?
Hahaha, trick? Regardless of realism or style, a brace of pistols is even worse than trying to stack enough feats to make crossbows better.

Aforementioned "The Way of the Gun" have seven different pistols, five guns, rocket launcher, and three cannons; also various paraphernalia such as bandolier, gunrest, powderhorn, bayonets, match/flint/wheellocks, and even breachloading (!)
Also, Musket in DMG is one the most long-ranged weapons in the whole game (150')
Sure, now do they have enough damage and reload speed to be relevant, and does it make any sense? A 150' base range is nice, except a bow can basically match that with other bonuses while still being better in every other way. Breachloading is the difference between 1 minute and 1 round reload times, unless every gun is breachloading they've missed the point. The reload speeds need to range from more than a full round down to a free action and a single feat won't do the job, which is why sorcery and steam uses feat+skill.

Bandoliers and powerderhorns aren't a feature, bayonets are already in dungeonscape, and if those firing mechanisms had any mechanical difference you'd have a lot more guns than that. If you wanna talk counts, sorcery and steam has 11 pistols and 4 rifles, with 2 more super short range lol guns and the usual AoE blunderbuss that should be ignored. Have a list.
Matchlock pistol: light, heavy
Flintlock pistol: light, double barrel, heavy
Percussion cap pistol: light, double barrel, medium, heavy, revolver, holdout
Flintlock musket and double barrel
Percussion cap musket and double barrel
plus dorf and ogre guns with 20'-30' range
Which looks like a bunch of redundancy, until someone realizes that there's a ton of diversity in firearms made before the industrial revolution and/or asks the question "why can't I just cram more gunpowder in there for more damage?" So you've got light and heavy and double barrel versions of everything, and they all have distinct prices and damages based on their differences.

[Manyasone]

You're very passionate about this book, Fizban. Makes me want to have a look myself. Only via webshop in pdf I assume?

[Pugwampy]

I can't imagine that your players need a gun at the gaming table. If they do you game in a really bad part of town.


Forgive me , what i meant to say was .

A Genuine Imaginary gum drop island manufactured Avtomat Kalashnikova 1947 gun to be wielded by pen and paper heroes of la la land .

[Fizban]

You're very passionate about this book, Fizban. Makes me want to have a look myself. Only via webshop in pdf I assume?
Much cheaper than ebay anyway. The rest of the book is mostly okay, it's just the guns that get my attention, which is only because every other source is sooo baaad. Warcraft is annoying, but pathfinder really takes the cake.

[Karl Aegis]

You could use vaguely gun-shaped devices that shoot out magic like that one demigod in Greyhawk did. Just go "Boop boop! I'm a cowboy, I'm a cowboy!" as you twirl your hat around and don't have to worry about ricochet killing your entire party in a dungeon.

[ShurikVch]

Um...
What type of fighting deals the most damage in 3.5?There is just two words: Difficult Terrain (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/movementPositionAndDistance.htm#terrainandObstacle s). :smallwink:


How viable are crossbows in 3.5, though, seriously?Among the all weapons - not that much.
It's depend on DM, but usually encounters are mostly melee-oriented
But among the ranged weapon - pretty average
They are slowDouble Crossbows,
Repeating Crossbows,
Crossbow of Reloading,
Self-Loading Crossbow,
Rapid Reload feat,
Bloodsister PrC

and have minimal amount of reach and damage over bows. The latter of course pretty instantly get's overshadowed by adding strength bonus to composite bows and stuff.Composite bows, while may be useful, have their one flaws:
1) They penalize you for insufficient Str
2) Constant need to replace - to get full bonus when you get stronger
3) Str add to your damage, but not to attack
Seriously, Str is great for trowing weapons, but for bowmen it's the second worst ability (after the Con).
For comparison:
Dex: Hit-and-Run Tactics ACF (Drow of the Underdark), Fighter-Targetteer with Vital Aim (Dragon #310), Dead Eye feat (Dragon Compendium)
Int: Control Body (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/powers/controlBody.htm), Factotum with Cunning Insight, Wizard-Diviner with Prescience (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/classes/specialistWizardVariants.htm#prescience) variant
Wis: Zen Archery feat, Illumian with Aeshoon Power Sigils, Shiba Protector with No Thought
Cha: Charming the Arrow (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fey/20030815a) feat, Divine Might feat, Samurai with Kiai Smite
Str is the only ability which doesn't improve attack rolls with projectile weapons. Why should you care about damage, if you unable to actually hit anything?
And what other "stuff" you mentioned?


If you want guns to perform the same role as in RL, loading time 3 rounds, touch attack, 2d6 damage 3x critAnd non-magical analogue of Pyrotechnics (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/pyrotechnics.htm) (Smoke Cloud) :smallcool:


Hahaha, trick? Regardless of realism or style, a brace of pistols is even worse than trying to stack enough feats to make crossbows better.How? :smallconfused:

A 150' base range is nice, except a bow can basically match that with other bonusesHow?
Even Dragonbone Bow is only 130'
Distance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#distance)? Kinda expensive...

Breachloading is the difference between 1 minute and 1 round reload times, unless every gun is breachloading they've missed the point.Eh? What's you mean?
Why exactly they "missing the point"? (Also, do you mean "difference" as "IRL" or "in-game"?)

The reload speeds need to range from more than a full round down to a free action and a single feat won't do the job, which is why sorcery and steam uses feat+skill.Firearms with Breachloading may reloaded as Move action; the only firearms with loading time "more than full round" are cannons (and even those may be reduced to 1 full round - with sufficient crew)
bayonets are already in dungeonscape1. Really? Which page?
2. Dungeonscape was published in February of 2007; #321 - July of 2004; once again - what already was in where?.. :smallamused:


A Genuine Imaginary gum drop island manufactured Avtomat Kalashnikova 1947 gun to be wielded by pen and paper heroes of la la land .In the "Наёмники судьбы" book series (transl. as "Mercenaries of Destiny" or "... of Fate") to the pre-gunpowder "renaissance" (by their one words!) fantasy world occasionally got things (and even people) from another worlds; main characters several times got firearms (mostly pistols).
When gunpowder was actually invented there - heroes "prevented" it. Several times. With a bang. :smallwink:
In the first story arc, Necromancy Guild discovered functional rocket base, and even nuked some island for the test; if not for the heroes, their world turned into fantasy-Fallout
(Also they don't like to be called "heroes": "Heroes don't get payment for their deeds. Guild regulations forbidding to work for free")

[Luccan]

I'm not very familiar with the DMG's guns either, but looking at it now, they are too expensive and take too long to reload, along with requiring an extra feat. In a game where firearms are that common, I'd make them a martial weapon at most, possibly making it that anyone with simple weapons can use them normally and martial weapons cuts the reload time down. They'd need to be cheaper (if they are supposed to be common), but it's important to remember that if you're in a more advanced setting it's possible not all your commoners will be dirt poor either. Consider how many commoners you want to have guns when you set prices. They also need to be viable weapons, so damage is worth considering (according to the DMG, a "pistol" does 1d8 for small creatures and 1d10 for medium creatures, a musket does 1d10 small, 1d12 medium). Is this damage acceptable to you? I'm also not familiar with any feats that actually benefit guns (besides those that just benefit ranged weapons), so consider making some bow/crossbow feats and abilities work for guns as well or take ideas and make your own.

That said, if a better system already exists, I'd look for that instead, because the above seems like a bit of work, trying to balance it out yourself. I'm interested to see where this goes, since I'm also looking to do a more advanced campaign and firearms would hopefully be a factor

[D.M.Hentchel]

So here are ways I've considered:

A: DMG style (guns function like exotic crossbows)
Pros: Simple familiar and functional
Cons: Nothing about guns feels different from crossbows and many builds will ignore them in favor of classic weaponry. Guns are just as easy to block and dodge as any other weapon.

B: Pathfinder style (guns are touch attacks at 1st increment and have misfire chance as exotic weapons)
Pros: Established support material and guns feel distinctive from crossbows
Cons: Weird hit/miss zone at end of 1st range increment especially weird with heavily armored foes. No amount of armor can protect you from a close range gun, but guns are as easy to dodge as any other weapon.

C: BOOM sticks (guns use their own fixed attack bonus with specific range penalties for touch attacks and targets are denied their Dexterity to AC. No proficiency needed.)
Pros: Guns are impossible to dodge or block, but easy to miss with. Guns feel unique and realistic.
Cons: User skill isn't represented in gun use causing them to fall out of favor for PCs. No amount of armor or reflexes can protect you from a gun.

D: Sorcery and Steam style (no idea haven't read into this)

E: DMHentchel style (Guns are simple weapons with bonuses to attack rolls. Automatic misses happen on more than just Natural 1s. Shorter range increments with high maximum range)
Pros: Guns are difficult but not impossible to dodge and/or block. Guns feel distunctive but similair to other weapons.
Cons: Guns are significantly more complicated than other weapons.



None of these address things like damage, cost, or range which is kinda up to you to decide based on your desired balance point.

[Vogie]

It really depends on what you mean by "early firearms", and how knit you want to be towards reality. Most of the systems listed above are either a)skipping the early stage into the silver (or European) age of firearms, or b) have firearms already established.

Fire arms stayed at, for hundreds of years, Single shot with poor accuracy at range & long reload times. To get a volley of bullets off, you'd have a bunch of people firing their single shot rifles, then kneeling down to get out of the way for the next group, who'd kneel down for the next group, then finally the first group would have finished reloading (if not dead). In meatspace, Bows had superior accuracy and reload times, but required more training for any amount of range, and had lower damage overall.

You could have firearms, in your game, to be more like the original (Asian) era firearms such as the hand-cannon or Fire-lance - basically an encounter-only (to borrow a 5th Ed term) burst of damage at short range, not to be used as a Basic attack. Maybe they're just a literal cannon, where there's a huge burst damage with huge range, and the PCs just kind of wheel it around behind them. These have very few rules for them (save the cannon), so you'd be homebrewing them.

You can have more Silver age firearms, in the early modern (Arab-European) era, where Rifles of various sizes do exist, for moderate damage and accuracy, but long reload times still. The PCs may have a matchlock rifle, or any of the other muzzle-loading variations thereof, and may use it as their sole manner of ranged Attack, but they'll be either hauling around several firearms, building multi-muzzle firearms, or taking a shot, waiting to reload, then firing again. These are the ones that rules exist for but they're still going to be weak... because the firearms were. You may want to homebrew some of the existing rules to make them hit a little harder.

You can elect middle modern firearms, the Euro-American era, where breech loading exists. This is the domain that Pathfinder is in, covering everything from shotguns to revolvers and firing alchemical cartridges. These are the ones that have the most existing rules, can fall into basic ranged attacks, but the viability really varies on the build and how much you want.

[Fizban]

How? :smallconfused:
In addition to Quick Draw costing the same amount as Rapid Reload, you need a separate weapon for literally every attack. How could that be in any way comparable?

How?
Even Dragonbone Bow is only 130'
Distance (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/magicWeapons.htm#distance)? Kinda expensive...
Distance could be applied to either and is irrelevant. 130' is plenty, swiftwing arrows halve the range penalty which is far more useful unless you're already ignoring it, and various PrCs and possibly a few more feats are specific to bows/crossbows.

Eh? What's you mean?
Why exactly they "missing the point"? (Also, do you mean "difference" as "IRL" or "in-game"?)
Firearms with Breachloading may reloaded as Move action; the only firearms with loading time "more than full round" are cannons (and even those may be reduced to 1 full round - with sufficient crew)
Muzzle loading firearms take a really long time to reload, at 2-3 rounds per minute that's one shot every three rounds. Breech loading firearms are listed in the 7-10 rounds per minute range. That's one shot per round for a trained user, realistically, before allowing an adventurer to exceed that with superhuman skill.

Standard action for a muzzle loading musket, then move action if it's breech loading? Whoever wrote that has no idea what they were talking about. Sorcery and Steam has a 2 round unskilled reload for matchlocks (resulting in 3 shots per minute), 1 round for flintlocks (for 5 per minute), and with both feat and skill you can reduce a flintlock to a move action (for 10 shots per minute). Only the percussion cap reaches the ridiculous free action reload, basically because it needs to exist for mechanical purposes. But everyone who writes firearms for dnd (including Sorcery and Steam) has the idea of a muzzle loading musket in mind. The DMG/dragon mag articles are ridiculous, and Sorcery and Steam did a good job applying the times but didn't fully understand why (because they never mention breech loading).

Claims that these are "early" firearms and civil-war era firearms are too advanced are similarly bogus, as the advancements came through so fast once metallurgy made it possible that DnD worlds which have had adamantine since forever simply have no excuse. About 100-150 years to go from hand cannons to copper jacketed cartridges.

1. Really? Which page?
2. Dungeonscape was published in February of 2007; #321 - July of 2004; once again - what already was in where?.. :smallamused:
*Facepalm* By Dungeonscape I of course mean Complete Scoundrel, because for some reason I get them confused. Doesn't really matter if bayonets didn't exist when the article was written, basically every gun source has it's own bayonets so it's just not a feature worth noting. The gun stats are what matters.

[ShurikVch]

In addition to Quick Draw costing the same amount as Rapid Reload, you need a separate weapon for literally every attack.Yes. So what?
How could that be in any way comparable?How it isn't?
People suggested similar tactics to offset need to reload crossbows, and for throwing weapon build it's unavoidable; what's so different about pistols? :smallconfused:


Distance could be applied to either and is irrelevant. 130' is plenty, swiftwing arrows halve the range penalty which is far more useful unless you're already ignoring itSwiftwing Arrows may be good, but kinda expensive
One of the most usual complains to D&D firearms is: "Too expensive!"
There you will almost equalize them: 1 shot with Swiftwing Arrow cost 1 gp; one shot with gun ~ 1 gp, 3 sp, and 4 cp

and various PrCs and possibly a few more feats are specific to bows/crossbows.Please, can you name at least a few such feat or PrC which are applicable to bow/crossbow, but not to gun? (Besides the Crossbow Sniper and Peerless Archer)


Muzzle loading firearms take a really long time to reload, at 2-3 rounds per minuteStop-stop-stop!
Which, exactly, system you using there?
Because in 3E 1 minute = 10 rounds; in 2E - 1 round

Standard action for a muzzle loading musket, then move action if it's breech loading? Whoever wrote that has no idea what they were talking about. ... The DMG/dragon mag articles are ridiculousYou speaking about realism in a tabletop game? :smallamused:
No archer in the world is able to shoot more than 3 arrows per 6 seconds (OK, 4 arrows - +1 at 0th second); 16th level Barbarian with Whirling Frenzy and Rapid Shot can shoot 6 arrows per 6 seconds - 1 arrow/second! - and it include time to pull arrow from the quiver!


*Facepalm* By Dungeonscape I of course mean Complete Scoundrel, because for some reason I get them confused.OK. Then it's January, 2007.

Doesn't really matter if bayonets didn't exist when the article was writtenAre you insist bayonets are useless? :smallconfused:
What's happening when melee troops get to archers or crossbowmen?


basically every gun source has it's own bayonetsExcept the DMG



AoE blunderbuss that should be ignored.Why? AoE is iseful - it keeps you from being TPKed by a swarm...

[Fizban]

Yes. So what?How it isn't?
People suggested similar tactics to offset need to reload crossbows, and for throwing weapon build it's unavoidable; what's so different about pistols? :smallconfused:
It takes one feat to use one crossbow at full speed. It takes a feat and a pile of pistols to use pistols at full speed. Magic weapons are priced with the assumption you will have one, not a dozen, you cannot afford to have a brace of magic pistols. So in addition to spending hundreds of gold on each pistol, they won't be magical, and will be worse in every way than the crossbow, which is worse in every way than the longbow.

There you will almost equalize them: 1 shot with Swiftwing Arrow cost 1 gp; one shot with gun ~ 1 gp, 3 sp, and 4 cp
Ammunition is not the problem, see above.

Please, can you name at least a few such feat or PrC which are applicable to bow/crossbow, but not to gun? (Besides the Crossbow Sniper and Peerless Archer)
No, I should have gone to bed hours ago, but if you can already name two when there's zero for guns I don't really need to name any more.

Stop-stop-stop!
Which, exactly, system you using there?
Because in 3E 1 minute = 10 rounds; in 2E - 1 round
*Checks location* Ah, I see English is most likely not your native language. "Round" is another word for "ammunition," or "shot," or "bullet." 2-3 rounds per minute means 2-3 shots fired per minute, I know perfectly well how the DnD timescale works. Go back and reread that now.

No archer in the world is able to shoot more than 3 arrows per 6 seconds (OK, 4 arrows - +1 at 0th second); 16th level Barbarian with Whirling Frenzy and Rapid Shot can shoot 6 arrows per 6 seconds - 1 arrow/second! - and it include time to pull arrow from the quiver!
And yet its far less ridiculous to imagine the fluid, circular motion of moving your hand from quiver to string and pull/release and back to quiver happening every second (just watch Lord of the Rings) than it is to imagine the far more complicated motion required to load an early firearm. Muzzle or breech loader, you still have to stop pointing the gun forward while you grab the bullet and powder and shove them down the barrel or open the breech and get them loaded then return to firing position.

Are you insist bayonets are useless? :smallconfused:
I said what I said, the bayonet stats don't matter, use whatever you want. You don't choose your gun stats based on whatever bayonet stats they packaged along with it.

Except the DMG
Which as I have already pointed out is intentionally limited and incomplete, an example rather than a full system. Though while we're at it, no, the earliest firearms would not have bayonets, since as a rare weapon not yet used by large groups of soldiers, you would not find people carrying a gun as their main weapon. They would have a sword or something else and would fire the gun once before dropping it and switching to their actual main weapon.

Why? AoE is iseful - it keeps you from being TPKed by a swarm...
The blunderbuss should be ignored because it is the result of people who think shotguns hit a ridiculous area. Shotguns do not hit a cone or a line, they fire a small cluster of shot that hits a single target like any other gun. A quick googling finds an article demonstrating a spread of 16 inches at 30 yards, compared to 6 inches at 30 yards for a modern shotgun. In metric that would be, 40 cm at 27 meters vs 15 cm at 27 meters. That is not a 5' wide AoE, that is less than one body width. If you need something to kill swarms, carry a torch or some grenades.

[zergling.exe]

Stop-stop-stop!
Which, exactly, system you using there?
Because in 3E 1 minute = 10 rounds; in 2E - 1 round

Rounds are a term used to described bullets, and commonly used when saying a guns fire rate - 'rounds per minute/RPM'.

[Elkad]

I always wanted to toss a real gun with limited ammo at the players for the heck of it .


I can't imagine that your players need a gun at the gaming table. If they do you game in a really bad part of town.

We have more guns than players at my table most sessions, and that's without considering the rest of the contents of my house.

No, I don't live in a bad neighborhood.

The pizza guy says he doesn't worry about robbers jumping out of the bushes when he delivers to my place.

[LordOfCain]

We have more guns than players at my table most sessions

Starts backing away.... :smalleek:

[dascarletm]

Starts backing away.... :smalleek:

Plenty of gamers play with swords and whatnot laying around, and I've heard of more stories involving one of those bad-boys being used... :smalltongue:

[Draconium]

Dang. Thanks for all the replies, guys! Even if you did end up a bit off topic. :smalltongue: For Sorcery and Steam, it seems interesting, but I don't feel like buying a PDF unless I could see myself using all of it, and to be honest, that's how I feel about most of the PDF. So I think I'll give it a pass. Overall, looking at the options I have available (including those suggested), I can't really find any that seem both appealing to me, and that would make sense for my world. I'll try to take a more in-depth look later on, but for now, I have decided against using a gun system. Thank you all again for helping me out.

[ShurikVch]

Magic weapons are priced with the assumption you will have one, not a dozen, you cannot afford to have a brace of magic pistols.Why you need so many magical pistols, if they already loaded with magical bullets? (Also, spells such as Magic Weapon...)

So in addition to spending hundreds of gold on each pistol, they won't be magicalDuh, Sherlock!
Of course, they wouldn't be magical - magic weapon cost thousands!

Ammunition is not the problem, see above.I'm looking, but still don't see it: where is that "not a problem"? Maybe, you forget to write it?


No, I should have gone to bed hours ago, but if you can already name two when there's zero for guns I don't really need to name any more.Please, excuse me, but there you a wrong: almost all ranged-oriented stuff in 3.X works with firearms just fine; firearm doesn't need any "special" content, because 90% of general already available freely
Still, I will point one thing: Master Siege Engineer - works with firearms (cannons), crossbows (ballista), but not bows


*Checks location* Ah, I see English is most likely not your native language. "Round" is another word for "ammunition," or "shot," or "bullet." 2-3 rounds per minute means 2-3 shots fired per minute, I know perfectly well how the DnD timescale works. Go back and reread that now.Sorry for misunderstanding :smalleek:
BTW, which, exactly, age you mean?
If XV - then OK; but if XVIII - then it's too slow: 4 shots/minute were required standard, but skilled soldiers could shot up to 7/minute (with muzzle-loading smoothbore)


The blunderbuss should be ignored because it is the result of people who think shotguns hit a ridiculous area. Shotguns do not hit a cone or a line, they fire a small cluster of shot that hits a single target like any other gun. A quick googling finds an article demonstrating a spread of 16 inches at 30 yards, compared to 6 inches at 30 yards for a modern shotgun. In metric that would be, 40 cm at 27 meters vs 15 cm at 27 meters. That is not a 5' wide AoE, that is less than one body width. If you need something to kill swarms, carry a torch or some grenades.Excuse me, but may I inquire: what's was the bore form of shotgun's barrel?
Because you see: not all shotguns are created equal; there are three possible variants:
1) Narrowing bore - either in the form of cone frustum, or just with sealer at the tip of the barrel. Good for shooting shot - higher accuracy, longer range, less spread. One problem - shooting slugs with such barrels is ill-advised
2) Cylindrical bore. Simplest possible form. Work for any type of shotgun ammo, but shooting shot with it will show less accuracy, shorter range, and wider spread than #1
3) This one is also in the form of cone frustum, but wider tip pointed to the target. Shortest range and widest shot spread. Direct descendant of blunderbusses.

[Elkad]

Starts backing away.... :smalleek:

Other than the 15yr old, we all carry. Backup carry covers his lack. Has nothing to do with the game.

No new players have fled in terror when realizing they were gaming with the well-armed.
No 1-rolling d20s have been executed.
No drunken brandishing, despite a fair amount of moderate drunkenness.
Any unholstering has been done with great forethought and care, and only for the purposes of showing off a new purchase or similar.

I don't think any more about letting people into my home while armed than I do about letting them in with a phone in their pocket. It's a tool, nothing more.

[Fizban]

Why you need so many magical pistols, if they already loaded with magical bullets? (Also, spells such as Magic Weapon...)
Duh, Sherlock!
Magic ammo is overpriced (it should be per 100 shots, not 50), and it runs out, but that isn't a bad idea for a partial workaround.

Please, excuse me, but there you a wrong: almost all ranged-oriented stuff in 3.X works with firearms just fine; firearm doesn't need any "special" content, because 90% of general already available freely
Still, I will point one thing: Master Siege Engineer - works with firearms (cannons), crossbows (ballista), but not bows
If you're trying to claim that specific feature is an advantage, it has to be an advantage. If bows can boost their range with anything that guns don't get, guns don't have a decisive advantage there. A quick googling says that PrC is from dragon mag, which most people don't have.

BTW, which, exactly, age you mean?
If XV - then OK; but if XVIII - then it's too slow: 4 shots/minute were required standard, but skilled soldiers could shot up to 7/minute (with muzzle-loading smoothbore)
No idea what those numbers apply to, but (muzzle loading) matchlocks were around in the 1500s, while the breech loading guns started growing in 1770 as construction techniques improved. I didn't find any muzzle loading stats that mentioned people going that high, but that's still less than one shot per combat round.

3) This one is also in the form of cone frustum, but wider tip pointed to the target. Shortest range and widest shot spread. Direct descendant of blunderbusses.
This is actually a misconception, the flared barrel doesn't actually spread the shot, it just effectively shortens the barrel a bit more. The comparison was with a Mossberg, I expect it would be a cylindrical smooth bore, but that doesn't matter? They tested a flared barrel blunderbuss and the spread was plenty reasonable, not a giant doom cannon.

[ShurikVch]

If you're trying to claim that specific feature is an advantage, it has to be an advantage.No - I trying to claim it's overpriced, and it runs out

If bows can boost their range with anything that guns don't get, guns don't have a decisive advantage there.They don't: Hawk's Vision give the same benefit for any ranged weapon - including firearms and futuristic blasters
You better to point Aquatic Shot, because it's impossible to use early firearm underwater

A quick googling says that PrC is from dragon mag, which most people don't have.Correct. I used it just for counter-example



No idea what those numbers apply toPrussian infantry of XVII century - 5/minute is standard, maximum - 7 shots (and 6 reloads)/minute; they used muzzle-loading smoothbore flintlocks (with paper cartridges)


(muzzle loading) matchlocks were around in the 1500s, while the breech loading guns started growing in 1770 as construction techniques improved.Actually, breechloaders were around far longer than it: for example, google "Peter Peck" 1553

I didn't find any muzzle loading stats that mentioned people going that high, but that's still less than one shot per combat round.Even repeating crossbows never shot faster than 9/minute, yet you haven't any problems with them shooting in-game as fast as bows. Bias much?



This is actually a misconception, the flared barrel doesn't actually spread the shot, it just effectively shortens the barrel a bit more. The comparison was with a Mossberg, I expect it would be a cylindrical smooth bore, but that doesn't matter? They tested a flared barrel blunderbuss and the spread was plenty reasonable, not a giant doom cannon.Sorry, but I have "slightly" different information: according to Probability estimations of distance of shot: a function of the dispersion of pellets (A. F. Lisitzyn ℗ Forensic science, 1974):

http://www.forens-med.ru/book/img/sm_1974_2/_sm_1974_2-7.jpg
X is range - in meters
Y is spread - in centimeters
As you can see, even lower curve for 20 m (not even 27, like you said) give spread about 0,5 m; and for higher curve it's ~ 1 m (which is one heck of AoE :smallcool:)
Spread size depend on diameters of bore and shot (table for shot diameters from 2 to 8,5 mm)
Note under the picture says it's for "standard conditions"; spread can be increased by usage of: gunpowder, shortened cartridges, flared or sawed-off barrels, non-spherical shots, homemade wadding, and so on

[Nifft]

I don't think any more about letting people into my home while armed than I do about letting them in with a phone in their pocket. It's a tool, nothing more.

My phone has a dice-rolling app.

Now I want a gun with a dice-rolling app...

[Zombimode]

As you can see, even lower curve for 20 m (not even 27, like you said) give spread about 0,5 m; and for higher curve it's ~ 1 m (which is one heck of AoE :smallcool:)

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the chart, but 1 meter spread is not "one heck of AoE". Not even close. 1 meter is about 2/3 the side length of a single square.

[ShurikVch]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding the chart, but 1 meter spread is not "one heck of AoE". Not even close. 1 meter is about 2/3 the side length of a single square.OK, maybe I'm used too strong words, but still - let's agree: "1 m spread on 20 m" is a much more impressive than Fizban's "16 inches at 30 yards"

[Fizban]

Actually, breechloaders were around far longer than it: for example, google "Peter Peck" 1553
Which is why I said growing instead of first invented. So if we take that we can have muzzle loaders at standard action and breech loaders at move action and it's actually accurate, if you assume maximum training and don't want to leave room for the difference between match/flint/percussion, color me surprised. Now all you need is proper damage values and variety.

Even repeating crossbows never shot faster than 9/minute, yet you haven't any problems with them shooting in-game as fast as bows. Bias much?
Repeating crossbow has the same advantage as bows with a smooth movement that doesn't interrupt aiming. Most people are going to have trouble imagining the motions required for muzzle loading a gun being sped up to match dnd firing speeds, but bows and repeating crossbows don't have that problem. As for not finding the same stats you used, well gee, sorry my wiki research isn't on your level.

Sorry, but I have "slightly" different information: according to Probability estimations of distance of shot: a function of the dispersion of pellets (℗ Forensic science, 1974):
That spread is only 2.5 times the size of the one I found, still not that crazy as already mentioned. I really don't feel like arguing about about who's sources are more accurate: I'm not a gun enthusiast and researching the most advanced physical understanding of the the internals so I can post it here does not interest me. I expect the gun they tested for that table simply had a shorter barrel/longer flare than the one I googled, which seemed pretty long and had a fairly tight barrel.

A 1 meter spread is still not a cone attack nor a line attack (unless it specifically states that the first creature hit stops the line), so if you have blunderbuss stats that say it's a line or cone attack they fail.

[Manyasone]

I don't think any more about letting people into my home while armed than I do about letting them in with a phone in their pocket. It's a tool, nothing more.

A hammer is a tool, hell, even an axe is a tool...A gun is not a tool, a tool serves multiple purposes.
*sigh* some people...

EDIT: I'm aware this is off topic, but come on, I had to say this

[LordOfCain]

A hammer is a tool, hell, even an axe is a tool...A gun is not a tool, a tool serves multiple purposes.
*sigh* some people...

EDIT: I'm aware this is off topic, but come on, I had to say this

Um... a gun's also a handy dandy kitchen device. A cookie to anyone who gets the reference.

[dascarletm]

A hammer is a tool, hell, even an axe is a tool...A gun is not a tool, a tool serves multiple purposes.
*sigh* some people...

EDIT: I'm aware this is off topic, but come on, I had to say this

The definition of a tool does not require multiple functions. I wish people would stop changing the definition of words to suit their narratives. I'll just say that since I don't want to talk politics. :smallwink:
A quick google search gives me this:
"A device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function."

[Manyasone]

The definition of a tool does not require multiple functions. I wish people would stop changing the definition of words to suit their narratives. I'll just say that since I don't want to talk politics. :smallwink:
A quick google search gives me this:
"A device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function."

Very well then...Tools can be used for both creation and destruction...Weapons can only be used for destruction, unless you count the creation of corpses.

Not politics, merely an important distiction. I am not any sort of activist concerning gun carrying, but I am a cynical bastard and invoking a hundreds of years old law "to protect yourself from the Redcoats" is just very, very...USA.
As a wise man once said "Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken"

[Nifft]

The definition of a tool does not require multiple functions. I wish people would stop changing the definition of words to suit their narratives. I'll just say that since I don't want to talk politics. :smallwink:
A quick google search gives me this:
"A device or implement, especially one held in the hand, used to carry out a particular function."

You should be aware that Weapons and Tools are totally different types of Proficiency. Musical Instruments are yet a third type, even the ones that are held in one hand.

Also: recognizing that weapons and tools are different types of thing is not a political stance. It's just linguistic accuracy.

I feel like anyone with a weapon should care about accuracy.

[ShurikVch]

Which is why I said growing instead of first invented.OK. Still, it was more dependent on chemistry than metallurgy: you can't have percussion caps without fulminate of mercury and chlorate of potash, and without percussion caps breachloading is lacking


Repeating crossbow has the same advantage as bows with a smooth movement that doesn't interrupt aiming. Most people are going to have trouble imagining the motions required for muzzle loading a gun being sped up to match dnd firing speeds, but bows and repeating crossbows don't have that problem.OK, then what's you will say about the Heavy Crossbow?
You know - with a winch (lower left corner):
http://archive.wizards.com/dnd/images/ph35_gallery/PHB35_PG118_WEB.jpg
Rapid Reload (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#rapidReload) feat allow to shoot with it at every turn, which means - 10/minute.
Only the best of modern crossbows may allow such rate of fire (and, frankly, draw weight of those crossbows aren't that impressive)


That spread is only 2.5 times the size of the one I found, still not that crazy as already mentioned. I really don't feel like arguing about about who's sources are more accurate: I'm not a gun enthusiast and researching the most advanced physical understanding of the the internals so I can post it here does not interest me. I expect the gun they tested for that table simply had a shorter barrel/longer flare than the one I googled, which seemed pretty long and had a fairly tight barrel.

A 1 meter spread is still not a cone attack nor a line attack (unless it specifically states that the first creature hit stops the line), so if you have blunderbuss stats that say it's a line or cone attack they fail.Wikipedia article about blunderbuss (in my language (https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9C%D1%83%D1%88%D0%BA%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BD)) says:

During the period of blunderbuss's production, existed widespread misconception about the muzzle flare increasing spread of pellets (and thus - hit area), but, in fact, it wasn't the case: for increasing spread of pellets will be necessary make not just a muzzle flare, but the whole barrel in the shape of expanding cone. Though such weapon really existed, but was exceptionally rare (because expensive)So, what's the form of D&D blunderbusses?
Their trumpet-shaped barrels were designed to scatter shot across a wide arc
A primitive shotgun, this weapon has a wide, bell-shaped barrel and is designed to hold and fire shot that scatters when discharged.So, does it sound like "expanding cone"?

Also, if you are so much against the idea of AoE blunderbuss, then 1st edition of Warcraft the RPG had Blunderbuss which, while hitting targets in 5' "line", wasn't true "area attack": rather than "auto hit, Reflex for half", it caused separate hit for every affected creature; if you annoyed about the "hitting creatures who are behind the other creatures", then I will point on Cover (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatModifiers.htm#cover) rules


Very well then...Tools can be used for both creation and destruction...Weapons can only be used for destruction, unless you count the creation of corpses.Crowbar is a tool. For which, exactly, creation you can use it?

[Manyasone]

Crowbar is a tool. For which, exactly, creation you can use it?

That's easy, you can create openings:smallcool:

[Ashtagon]

That's easy, you can create openings:smallcool:

A gun can do that too.

[Yahzi]

Adding guns to my world
Some of us have written whole novels about this. :smallbiggrin:

Others have discussed the mechanics; I think any of them are fine. The key to understanding guns is understanding that players don't want them.

In D&D, it is the man, not the weapon. A 5th lvl Fighter with a spoon is more dangerous than a commoner in plate and sword. Your players are super-heroes who can do supernatural feats with their weapons; the actual chunk of metal or wood in their hand is largely irrelevant.

What guns do (as others have noted) is make ordinary, untrained commoners dangerous to the professional fighting classes. This is why the Japanese actually got rid of them once; to protect the monopoly on violence held by the samurai. Note: your players are the samurai of their world. Go watch The Last Samurai to see how samurai felt about guns.

The other thing everyone misses about guns is scaleability. Ballistae non-withstanding, there is a limit to how much force you can achieve with wood and rope. You can't just keep making them bigger and bigger; a ballistae big enough to kill a dragon in one shot would simply fall apart.

But guns... guns are different. Want double the power? Just double the powder. Sure, there's a limit on how big you can make the barrel using medieval technology... but in the real Middle Ages they made guns that could fire a mile. And if that's not good enough, you can always make a bomb of arbitrary size. The Dutch made a fire-ship that killed 800 men in one shot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellburners).

Dragons, giants, and other monsters are still fearsome; but they are no longer the undisputed queens on the board. They cannot stand and roar; they must duck and weave, dodge and hide, like ordinary men. De Gaulle said, "Armor without mobility is merely a target," and it's true of huge monsters too, in the age of gunpowder.

[Fizban]

Others have discussed the mechanics; I think any of them are fine. The key to understanding guns is understanding that players don't want them. . .
What guns do (as others have noted) is make ordinary, untrained commoners dangerous to the professional fighting classes. This is why the Japanese actually got rid of them once; to protect the monopoly on violence held by the samurai. Note: your players are the samurai of their world. Go watch The Last Samurai to see how samurai felt about guns.
Half right. Guns don't make commoners significantly more dangerous to adventurers than any other weapon. Every gun source I've seen requires exotic proficiency in spite of the whole point being that they're as simple to use as a crossbow, most don't have any better damage, and those with better damage only match strength+longbow. While you're right that guns are a threat to scads of 1st level NPCs who go from having a decent chance of surviving a crossbow shot to a significantly lower chance of surviving a rifle shot (if you're using good stats), this doesn't threaten PCs any more than usual. Meanwhile, it takes a high level specialized character to do the same things with a gun that a low-level ranger can do with a bow, which if anything emphasizes the fact that this character is a badass.

But guns... guns are different. Want double the power? Just double the powder. Sure, there's a limit on how big you can make the barrel using medieval technology... but in the real Middle Ages they made guns that could fire a mile. And if that's not good enough, you can always make a bomb of arbitrary size. The Dutch made a fire-ship that killed 800 men in one shot (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hellburners).
That's not how any of these mechanics work? Even the Warcraft tinker mechanics effectively put a hard limit on how much damage you can do, and killing large groups of people is a function of area, not damage. A gun that fires a mile isn't going to be accurate without significantly more tech or magic, and Stormwrack already has a cannon with max range 2,000ft.

Dragons, giants, and other monsters are still fearsome; but they are no longer the undisputed queens on the board. They cannot stand and roar; they must duck and weave, dodge and hide, like ordinary men. De Gaulle said, "Armor without mobility is merely a target," and it's true of huge monsters too, in the age of gunpowder.
Sure they can, AC and DR work on guns just as well as anything else. You're thinking of volley fire mechanics, which work just as well for cross/bows as they do for guns, and bombs of arbitrarily large size, which have no stats and are thus simply arbitrary.

[Yahzi]

Every gun source I've seen requires exotic proficiency
As you note, that's just silly. Any vaguely historical representation will make them Simple (like crossbows already are). Also, all the "touch" attack stuff is supposed to represent that guns made armor obsolete (not at first; but by the time you get to breech-loaders, yes).

However, the problem is also that the representations are too historical. Guns are the size they are because people are the size they are. If we lived in a world where people could be 15 ft tall (or have the vitality of an elephant), we'd have built bigger guns.

Also, the thing about bombs is that they can be made by commoners. It takes a wizard to make a fireball; but a commoner can make explosions of arbitrarily large sizes quite easily.

Now, in the real world, people didn't go around lobbing giant bombs at each other. But that's because they didn't need to. If Da Vinci had figured out how to make his tanks work, people would have made anti-tank rockets. And in D&D, there are lots of things that might as well be tanks.

Essentially, the point is that gunpowder makes killing things an engineering problem, instead of a mystical test of your personal character. This is pretty much the antithesis of the Heroic story.

I mean, I'm all for guns in D&D; but I'm the DM. I'm on the commoner's side. :smallbiggrin:

[Fizban]

But you haven't refuted any of my points? You seem to be saying that because you would let guns ignore armor and deal whatever damage you want and write bomb stats that do whatever you want, these printed stats that don't do any of those things would do that. Sure, if you run your guns and gunpowder in a way that takes the heroic fantasy out of the game then they'll take the heroic fantasy out of the game, and that's why no one does that when they write up their stats. Unless what you're saying is that statted guns aren't guns because they're not designed from an in-universe perspective, but that basically applies to everything in dnd from castles to magic so. . .

And if you ask any char-op player, killing things is already an engineering problem. Take wizard/party of level X with Y resources and use it to kill Z. Even without personal ability or resources, a town contains NPCs of level X and has buying limit Y, enact scheme to leverage these into killing Z.

[ShurikVch]

Sorcery and Steam by Fantasy Flight Games.

Everything else is crap. The DMG just isn't worth using, Pathfinder is a mess of stupid failure checks and touch attacks and other garbage, even the Warcraft books have them hooked into the tinker class rules except not and also more malfunctions.BTW, are you familiar with the Kolter Firearms rules (in the Freeport)?
If yes, then how is it?

Also, do you seen my reply #43 (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showsinglepost.php?p=21409850&postcount=43)?

[Mato]

My question is this: What mechanics should I use for introducing early firearms to my setting?I'd suggest looking into the Modern d20's supplement Past for further information. Modern uses the 3.0 rule set that you can update as needed if you're already familiar with the differences, primarily has weapon size in 3rd became light/one/two in 3.5.

Wealth conversion is the hard part through. The actual core book (not the srd) has a table for converting purchase DCs if you want a more gold based transaction system. But the system correctly interprets how a semi-auto handgun is cheaper now than a shard sword was then.

So I'd consider WotC's already canonical pricing on this, which they released through two different online articles. The first is laser guns (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/d20m/20060505a), and power armor & robots, but you can use their pricing to quickly judge how to price other firearms based on how much better or worse they are compared to the lasers. The second is about mech armor (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/20061020a) and the Future Tech supplement gives you an increased ranged of mech building choices.

The systems are pretty easy to learn. Like a musket is a two-hander that deals 2d8 and takes two full-rounds to reload. The supplement even explains how it interacts with the quick reload (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/resources/systems/pennpaper/modern/smack/featorder.html#quickreload) feat. You can also find general firearm rules (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/resources/systems/pennpaper/modern/smack/combatsa.html) such as covering fire or burst/auto rules through Modern's SRD.

[Yahzi]

Sure, if you run your guns and gunpowder in a way that takes the heroic fantasy out of the game then they'll take the heroic fantasy out of the game,
But that's the point of guns - to change the game.

If you want them to act like regular weapons, just take the entry for Heavy Crossbow write in Musket. As everyone has pointed out, early firearms were pretty close.

The reason players ask for guns, though, is because they think the guns will make them more powerful, in a way magic items won't. If all they want is different fluff for the same thing, why even have a discussion over mechanics?