Is there anyway to get a gun RAW?

[Flik9999]

Hey so I stumbled upon matt mercers gunslinger fighter archetype and also found this on sale for 5E. My question is, is the gunslinger archetype RAW? http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170778/Gunslinger-Martial-Archetype-for-Fighters

[Unoriginal]

The Gunslinger is an homebrew, aka not official. If you want it, you need your DM's approval, and you won't be able to get it for an AL character.

Now, official guns are in the DMG, but once more it's a question of DM approval.

[Ninja_Prawn]

There's no RAW 'gunslinger' class or archetype in 5e. The firearm rules (which literally just cover the weapons as items) in the DMG are very much a 'variant' option, and to be honest the way they're presented makes it look like they were tacked on as an afterthought.

If homebrew is an option but your DM doesn't like Matt Mercer's version, maybe show them ours (http://mfov.magehandpress.com/2017/02/gunslinger.html)? It's a bit different but might be an easier sell. Maybe.

[Flik9999]

What about this?

http://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/1_UA_Artificer_20170109.pdf

It has a gunsmith archetype.

[Vorpalchicken]

That's Unearthed Arcana, aka play-test material.

A DM may allow that (outside AL) if you ask nicely (or you put a gun to her his head.)

[Red Bear]

Hey so I stumbled upon matt mercers gunslinger fighter archetype and also found this on sale for 5E. My question is, is the gunslinger archetype RAW? http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170778/Gunslinger-Martial-Archetype-for-Fighters

It's not, there is only one way to get a gun by RAW as far as I know: the gunsmith archetype of the artificer class, not exactly a gunslinger though. You can find it here:
https://media.wizards.com/2016/dnd/downloads/1_UA_Artificer_20170109.pdf

[ATHATH]

There's a difference between "first party" and "RAW", you know.

[carrdrivesyou]

If the UA stuff is being considered, there are two ways.

1. The Artificer - Gunsmith subclass. Gets a portable CANNON that deals a ****-ton of damage. Not a bad choice here.

2. There is a UA Warlock Invocation called Arcane Gunslinger. Allows Bladelocks to spawn any side arm or long arm weapon as well as bladed ones.

[2D8HP]

Hey so I stumbled upon matt mercers gunslinger fighter archetype and also found this on sale for 5E. My question is, is the gunslinger archetype RAW? http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170778/Gunslinger-Martial-Archetype-for-Fighters.
I really hope not, I RPG partially to imagine a fantastic world without guns, yes I know Gygax had a player who's PC was "Murylynd" an old west gunfighter in Greyhawk, I don't care.

I also know there's optional rules for "Renaissance" and "Modern" weapons, I still don't care!

Conan, Aragorn, Robin Hood, and The Gray Mouser did not have guns!

Just nope, nope, and NOPE!

[Quoz]

As always, you can refluff an existing system. The various crossbows are a fine base. The feats that work best with them, expertise and sharpshooter, end up giving you a pretty good gunslinger feel.

If you want to go all out, make a magic crossbow of gnomish design. Adds one die of damage but alerts everything in 500 feet to your presence.

[TheTeaMustFlow]

It should be mentioned that one of the official adventures does contain a useable firearm.
Curse of Strahd, there's a musket in one of the Castle Ravenloft tombs. p.88.
However, beyond this no official character options for firearms exist, beyond the alternative rules in the DMG.

[Willie the Duck]

.
I really hope not, I RPG partially to imagine a fantastic world without guns

And the existence of gun rules (which btw, have existed in nearly every edition of D&D, in one layer of optionality or another) hinders this how?


Hey so I stumbled upon matt mercers gunslinger fighter archetype and also found this on sale for 5E. My question is, is the gunslinger archetype RAW? http://www.dmsguild.com/product/170778/Gunslinger-Martial-Archetype-for-Fighters

Okay. The term RAW might have a technical definition, but the way it was used in 3e, PF and 4e communities is different than the 5e community uses it. It certainly doesn't seem to be the most appropriate term for this discussion. Why don't you decide what you are really asking.

For instance. WotC officially sanctions the creation of 3rd party product to be sold through DMs Guild, but it does not police it (in terms of balance, etc., I'm pretty sure they have rules about offensiveness and age-appropriateness, etc.). Thus this DMs Guild product you reference is no more "official" than any other 3rd party product.

The UA gunsmith archetype you mention is Unearthed Arcana, which is considered playtest material. It is actual WotC material, but also isn't "official" as most people consider the term*.
*while at the same time, they encourage you to use it, as they are hoping that people try out their playtest material and report back what they think

Beyond that, even stuff in published material may or may not be included in a DM's game. There is plenty of stuff even in the Core 3 books which is labeled optional (and honestly, everything is optional, but let's not nitpick here).

So we really need to understand your goals for labeling something RAW. Are you trying to come up with an argument to convince your DM to allow something? Are you the DM?

[ZorroGames]

.
I really hope not, I RPG partially to imagine a fantastic world without guns, yes I know Gygax had a player who's PC was "Murylynd" an old west gunfighter in Greyhawk, I don't care.

I also know there's optional rules for "Renaissance" and "Modern" weapons, I still don't care!

Conan, Aragorn, Robin Hood, and The Gray Mouser did not have guns!

Just nope, nope, and NOPE!

+1 to this view.

Given the time to reload involved this is basically once a battle type weapon. I see it as a trap option. Just IMNSHO.

[2D8HP]

... I RPG partially to imagine a fantastic world without guns....


And the existence of gun rules (which btw, have existed in nearly every edition of D&D, in one layer of optionality or another) hinders this how?....
:confused:

I'm not getting what you mean?

Because, allowing the existence of guns, allows guns?

The rest of your post was perfect, and just what the OP needed.

I still don't like guns in my Fantasy.

[Willie the Duck]

I'm not getting what you mean?

Because, allowing the existence of guns, allows guns?



You said "I really hope not," to the question of whether a gunslinger/gun rules were RAW. How does having RAW gun rules affect your particular game?

Like I said in the getting off the treadmill thread: "As long as everyone recognizes that we are discussing what we want for our own gaming, there's nothing wrong with complaining about something....," but this makes it sound like you are complaining that other peoples' preferences might be supported.

If guns are allowed, but not required (not that they could be, but you know what I mean: pre-published adventures being full of gunslingers and so forth, such that playing the game while wanting no gunslingers is an actual chore), then you can play your gun free game and the op can play their gun-filled game and everyone is happy.

I've had this discussion with some OSR-fan friends who dislike things like warlocks and dragonborn and tiefling and my response is always "their inclusion in the book does not require you to play them. It literally doesn't negatively impact you at all." And that is what I was going for.

[Knaight]

.
I really hope not, I RPG partially to imagine a fantastic world without guns, yes I know Gygax had a player who's PC was "Murylynd" an old west gunfighter in Greyhawk, I don't care.

I also know there's optional rules for "Renaissance" and "Modern" weapons, I still don't care!

Conan, Aragorn, Robin Hood, and The Gray Mouser did not have guns!

Just nope, nope, and NOPE!

Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and d'Artagnan did. Plus, there's the small matter of this RPG:
http://www.tripleacegames.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/TAG30008_thumblarge-231x300.jpg


You said "I really hope not," to the question of whether a gunslinger/gun rules were RAW. How does having RAW gun rules affect your particular game?

Like I said in the getting off the treadmill thread: "As long as everyone recognizes that we are discussing what we want for our own gaming, there's nothing wrong with complaining about something....," but this makes it sound like you are complaining that other peoples' preferences might be supported.
In theory, the inclusion of a mechanic doesn't mean it necessarily shows up in the game. In practice, D&D just doesn't have the right culture and presentation for that - there's a reason that homebrew settings almost always feature the same core races (or at least maintain the concept of lots of playable races), fairly similar material cultures, etc. The rules absolutely support using just a subset of them, but despite the ubiquity of fantasy stories involving humans and no magic you basically never see that with D&D campaigns. Instead all of the very setting specific material crops up in setting after setting.

[2D8HP]

You said "I really hope not," to the question of whether a gunslinger/gun rules were RAW. How does having RAW gun rules affect your particular game?....

....If guns are allowed, but not required (not that they could be, but you know what I mean: pre-published adventures being full of gunslingers and so forth, such that playing the game while wanting no gunslingers is an actual chore), then you can play your gun free game and the op can play their gun-filled game and everyone is happy.

I've had this discussion with some OSR-fan friends who dislike things like warlocks and dragonborn and tiefling and my response is always "their inclusion in the book does not require you to play them. It literally doesn't negatively impact you at all." And that is what I was going for..
Okay, I get you a little better.

I'm still say "I hope not", because D&D is popular without guns, and if guns become more popular than finding tables without guns in the setting will become harder.

But it could be worse.

I left the hobby in '92 because every table I could find (that didn't have Ferrets attacking me, which is a whole other tale) played games with modern or near future settings.

I suppose if D&D remains gun-free then other gun-filled games may supplant it again, which would be worse.


Athos, Porthos, Aramis, and d'Artagnan did.....
That's true, they did (they're called Musketeers after all), but fortunately they keep guns in there proper place:


https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3t5hoNdNH8Q

(Knocked out of the way so that the sword fighting may begin)

[ZorroGames]

You said "I really hope not," to the question of whether a gunslinger/gun rules were RAW. How does having RAW gun rules affect your particular game?

Like I said in the getting off the treadmill thread: "As long as everyone recognizes that we are discussing what we want for our own gaming, there's nothing wrong with complaining about something....," but this makes it sound like you are complaining that other peoples' preferences might be supported.

If guns are allowed, but not required (not that they could be, but you know what I mean: pre-published adventures being full of gunslingers and so forth, such that playing the game while wanting no gunslingers is an actual chore), then you can play your gun free game and the op can play their gun-filled game and everyone is happy.

I've had this discussion with some OSR-fan friends who dislike things like warlocks and dragonborn and tiefling and my response is always "their inclusion in the book does not require you to play them. It literally doesn't negatively impact you at all." And that is what I was going for.

I see where you are going here.

Agreed in general, maybe the disappointment of the “historical” source books in 2e gave me a bad taste for guns in D&D.

These were the biggest letdown for me as a DM and player. They were part of the reason I quit actively DMing/playing AD&D about that time though I had been increasing inactive before that.


Historical Reference series
Title Authors Date Pages Item # ISBN
Vikings Campaign Sourcebook David "Zeb" Cook 1991 96 HR1
Charlemagne's Paladins Campaign Sourcebook HR2
Celts Campaign Sourcebook 1992 HR3
A Mighty Fortress Campaign Sourcebook HR4
The Glory of Rome Campaign Sourcebook HR5
Age of Heroes Campaign Sourcebook HR6
The Crusades Campaign Sourcebook HR7

The list is from Wikipedia.

[Knaight]

That's true, they did (they're called Musketeers after all), but fortunately they keep guns in there proper place:
...
(Knocked out of the way so that the sword fighting may begin)

There were a couple of shots in the video, and several scenes in the book. There are other examples too, often with a similar case. Zorro and Captain Jack Sparrow both use firearms occasionally, both are in settings with riflemen and the like. The Zorro movies and Pirates of the Caribbean also feature no shortage of sword fights.

[Tectorman]

If the UA stuff is being considered, there are two ways.

1. The Artificer - Gunsmith subclass. Gets a portable CANNON that deals a ****-ton of damage. Not a bad choice here.

2. There is a UA Warlock Invocation called Arcane Gunslinger. Allows Bladelocks to spawn any side arm or long arm weapon as well as bladed ones.

That second one is found where again?

[2D8HP]

There were a couple of shots in.....
All true.
(And thanks for the tip about "All for One")

[carrdrivesyou]

That second one is found where again?

It's in the Modern Magic UA along with Cleric of the City and Ghost in the Machine Warlock.

[Tectorman]

It's in the Modern Magic UA along with Cleric of the City and Ghost in the Machine Warlock.

Ah, I remember now. We ended up disregarding it in favor of a homebrewed option because it didn't include a way to generate ammo.

Thanks anyway.